Friday, April 20, 2007

Must Read Essay

Folks, you simply must give this piece a read. It is a scathing indictment on the MSM, written by a non-Islamist Muslim that has served in the the U.S. Military and actively works to draw a marked distinction between radical elements and moderates. His name is M. Zuhdi Jasser and here are a couple of the more pointed remarks, he makes in this essay:

The PBS/CPB censorship of Islam vs. Islamists exemplifies the dire need to begin to educate many in the MSM of the ideological realities of the Islamists. They may protect Islamists blindly out of ignorance, fear, infiltration, or minority politics. But, at the end of the day, if the MSM editors understood the type of society the protected Islamists would create if they became a majority, their support would vanish. Feminists, social liberals, and those that would separate religion from government would be entirely ignored under Islamist control. Just ask the feminists what type of equality they have in many Islamist controlled mosques around the country.


Borrowing on the old cliché of a tree falling in a forest, if Muslims speak out against Islamists but remain unheard (in the PBS forest), did they speak out at all? Without regular opportunities in the media and government for anti-Islamist Muslims to speak out, America will never know that they ever did. Without being heard the moderate voices will be as if they never existed. Without hearing the moderate voice, it is so much the easier for Islamists to continue toward their goal of political domination and demagoguery of the Muslim community and, ultimately, of America itself.

Pretty poignant, if you ask me. I recommend reading the entire piece.


Greg said...

LAS, I am so happy that you mention Dr. Jasser. I have been receiving his newsletter for a couple of years now - I highly recommend signing up for it.

The most disturbing aspect I have seen from the MSM in covering the real war on terror - the struggle b/w the racist totalitarian islamists and the tolerant mainstream muslims - is the complete ignoring of the latter and the whitewashing of the former. Islamonazis are routinely interviewed by the MSM and presented as "moderate". The prime example is CAIR, an organization with ties to several terrorist groups and even some 9/11 conspirators. CAIR is held up as the national representative of American Muslims. It is sickening.

Another example is here. Regular LGF readers will recognize this one.

As you watch this wonderful NYT piece, keep in mind that this mosque was connected to a 1994 islamic terrorist attack on a SCHOOLBUS in NYC, which attack resulted in the death of a 16 year old boy. The piece was released on the anniversary of his death. You would think that would have been something the "journalist" would have wanted to address in her piece. Instead we get the usual "grievance theater". Sometimes it's hard to distunguish b/w our mortal enemy and the NYT.

Anonim said...

Interesting. I just caught a good part of a documentary in this America at a Crossroads series yesterday. It was about Indonesia, and the mainstream/moderate Indonesian muslims were given a chance to express themselves vis-a-vis the Islamists wrestling for increased political dominance in that country. And they spoke very well indeed. In the overall, the documentary exposed the Islamists' ridiculous beliefs and ways pretty well, I thought. So, there may be more to this particular documentary's suppression and Jasser's criticism.

LASunsett said...


In their words, they say one thing. But in their deeds they do another. They demand respect, but they give none. It's not just confined to Muslims though, look at other groups in our country that constantly harp about the lack of respect, while spitting in our faces.

I have to say this speech is pretty mild compared to others I have seen. Just peruse Gandalf's Up Pompeii sometime, if you want to see what real hate speech is like in Britain.

LASunsett said...

Hi Anonim,

//So, there may be more to this particular documentary's suppression and Jasser's criticism.//

I think that Jasser's criticism needs to be heard. If we are going to allow one side a voice (no matter how offensive it may be), we must provide the opposing view (of reason).

Anonim said...

LA, I didn't say Jasser shouldn't be heard. What I am saying is, the documentary PBS aired yesterday gave a strong voice to moderate/mainstream Muslims denouncing and struggling with the Islamists of Indonesia. On the other hand, Jasser says, PBS censored another documentary simply for it did the same thing. There is a discrepancy or contradiction. That's all. (It may be because of the struggle within the American Muslim communities under different organizations, and different political dynamics here in the US. Indonesian story may be less contentious for American Muslim groups which can exert pressure on the media in this or that form when they are direct subjects of scrutiny. I don't know.)

LASunsett said...


Sorry, but I didn't mean to imply that you thought that. I was just adding, to the mix. I agree with you on this.

LASunsett said...


Back to what you said here (sorry was pressed for time earlier):

//It may be because of the struggle within the American Muslim communities under different organizations, and different political dynamics here in the US.//

I think this is correct, but it's a very deep and complex issue. Suffice it to say that I believe the radical groups desperately want to intimidate the media, into being nervous about putting out things that directly contradict the radical voices. As more moderate Muslims come forward and refute the ideologies of the ones that teach hate and violence, the more pressure will be exerted on the media.

I think that the only way to defeat the radicals is for the moderates (like yourself and Dr. Jasser) to win the battle of ideas, is to have an arena in which you can compete for the young minds that must be taught to love, rather than hate. As you said, Indonesia can do it and they do. The question for me then becomes, why can't we? I think we can, and we should.

I also think that as so goes the 6 Imam case, so will go the trend. Once the radical elements (that are bent on testing the system and trying find the weaknesses by using it against itself) can win court victories, the apprehension of giving moderates a platform in which to sell their ideas, will increase.

Anonim said...

LA, I think I agree with you. I say I think because the "radical" in your "radical groups [that] desperately want to intimidate the media" needs to be qualified. You know, a very specific image comes to mind when the terms radical and Muslim (or Islam) are juxtaposed. You don't mean that such radicalism is being practiced in the US (to exert pressure on the media or else), do you? I'd agree if you had in mind some Sharpton-Jackson type of 'radicalism', some misguided political correctness, etc.

Anonim said...

Here is another article on the fate of the documentary that sheds more light on the goings-on behind the suppression of the said documentary:

The PBS Controversy and Charles Le Gai Eaton
Author: Stephen Schwartz
Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
Date: April 16, 2007

When PBS refused to air a documentary about the rift between Islamic moderates and their radical, murderous counterparts, PBS based its decision on the judgment of an employee whose sources on this topic are themselves aligned with self-confessed radical Islamists. FSM Contributing Editor Stephen Schwartz’s shocking exposé will have you demanding answers!

LASunsett said...


//You don't mean that such radicalism is being practiced in the US (to exert pressure on the media or else), do you?//

Yes, I do. The 6 Imams case is the beginning of this. That's why I say that however this case turns out will determine a lot about how these elements proceed in the future.