JonQuixoteWorld has documented how, on numerous occasions, the New York Times has acted to subvert America, most notably by whitewashing, burying or ignoring stories concerning radical Islamism, and the threat it poses to our people and culture (here, here) --- also known as journalistic dhimmitude. And JQWorld isn't alone in documenting this phenomena.
Most recently, the NYTimes buried the jihadist plot to blow up JFK airport and a good portion of Queens, as exposed by:
James Taranto at the Wall Street Journal, here
Former NYC Mayor Ed Koch: "NY Times, I Weep For You" here.
Ben Johnson at FrontPageMagazine, here
TheBigPicture chronicles this incident, along with a brief history of the NYT's jihad-whitewashing biases, here
The NY Times' lame excuse for this outrage is located here.
In its Sunday, June 10, 2007 edition, however, the Times has exhibited what I contend can only be described as schizophrenic quasi-dhimmitude.
Were it not for a momentary lapse in judgment --- in its excerpting of a journal kept by the murdered victim of Jew-hatred (see Issue 2) --- today's NY Times would have earned the JonQuixoteWorld "Dhimmi Of The Month" Award.
ISSUE 1: CLINICAL ANALYSIS OF JIHADIST "ETHICS," AND REFERRING TO THEM AS "MILITANTS," INSTEAD OF MURDERERS
On page 1 of the editorial section (Week In Review), the Times featured an above-the-fold, two-page cover story entitled "The Guidebook For Taking A Life," which explains the basic rules that jihadists refer to when considering who they may murder and how. This is a MUST-READ article.
Although it is quite interesting and insightful, the Times obscures the reality of this phenomena by employing phrases such as "Islamic militants" (see definition of "militant"here), and in an oblique way, serves to simultaneously enlighten infidels like us --- and embolden, if not justify jihadists like those they interviewed.
The article's authors, Mochael Moos and Souad Mekhennet, apply a dispassionate, antiseptic approach to describing the bloodthirsty jihadist code (as it were), rather than explicitly identifying these Islamist murderers as being just that: "militants" who happen to deliberately murder civilians, often in theatrically-gruesome ways, wage war against free societies, and appy 1,400-year-old "revelations" in order to justify their barbaric actions --- including against children.
See Robert Spencer's detailed dismemberment of this NY Times feature, at JihadWatch, here.here.
See LGF take here --- turns out the "expert" the NY Times turned to for analysis of this piece is actually a Saudi-funded professor at Georgetown who, in this article attempts to equivocate between jihadist murder and U.S. military actions (surprise!)
See TigerHawk's insightful angle on it,
ISSUE 2: A WRENCHING EXCERPT OF A NAZI CHILD-VICTIM'S DIARY
Then, on page 7 of the same section, something rational, contextual and relevant to the reality of murder somehow snuck through the NT Times' editorial board: "As the Nazis and Adolescence Took Hold," containing wrenching excerpts of a diary kept by Rutka Laskier, a 14-year-old Jewish girl in 1943, before she was taken to Auschwitz and murdered by the Nazis. This is a must-read. Excerpts:
(Feb. 5, 1943) Well, Rutka, you’ve probably gone completely crazy. You are calling upon God as if He exists. The little faith I used to have has been completely shattered. If God existed, He would have certainly not permitted that human beings be thrown alive into furnaces, and the heads of little toddlers be smashed with butt of guns or be shoved into sacks and gassed to death. ... It sounds like a fairy tale. Those who haven’t seen this would never believe it. But it’s not a legend; it’s the truth. Or the time when they beat an old man until he became unconscious, because he didn’t cross the street properly.
(Feb. 6, 1943) I saw how a soldier tore a baby, who was only a few months old, out of mother’s hands and bashed his head against an electric pylon. The baby’s brain splashed on the wood. The mother went crazy. I am writing this as if nothing has happened. As if I were in an army experienced in cruelty. But I’m young, I’m 14, and I haven’t seen much in my life, and I’m already so indifferent. Now I am terrified when I see “uniforms.” I’m turning into an animal waiting to die.
Let's see --- I forgot: were the Nazis who committed these barbaric atrocities called "militants," or murderers?
Apparently, it's not only the NY Times that has difficulty discerning between these two words; see HERE (h/t LGF) for an example of how the Associated Press is now referring to reporters who are pushing for Hamas to release their kidnapped BBC colleague, Paul Johnson, as "militants."
To help put this issue into focus, let's revisit this JonQuixoteWorld post from last summer, profiling Samir al-Quantar, one of the Palestinian "militants" whose bretheren (and the international left) have been trying to get released from an Israeli prison, as part of a "prisoner-exchange program" (in which kidnapped Israeli soldiers are exchanged for murderers like this guy):
Bassam al-Qantar has allowed himself to hope. After years trying to get his brother Samir out of an Israeli prison, he said, now may finally be the time."
Samir al-Qantar, 44, was sentenced to over 500 years in jail after leading a four-man Palestinian raid at the age of 16 on Nahariya in northern Israel that killed two policemen, a civilian man and his 4-year-old daughter."Witnesses said Qantar smashed her skull with his rifle butt... (B)y Israeli accounts, his brother took the girl and her father hostage, then shot the father and killed the girl with his rifle butt as police closed in."
Ah yes, another Islamist "militant," I presume.
From what I've read, however, such "militants" actually prefer to be called "martyrs" or "holy warriors," but the NY Times has not gone quite so far --- yet. (USA Today, however, has opted to begin describing these murderers as "holy warriors," though; see this article regarding the "Fort Dix Six.")
ISSUE 3: RUNNING AN AD IN THE SAME SECTION FOR THE JEW-HATING SPONSORS OF TODAY'S DC PROTEST
Then, one comes to page 12 in the same section --- opposite the beginning of the editorial section --- and sees an incendiary, full-page ad for something called the "Council for the National Interest Foundation."
Wow, now that's a name, eh? Hm, could it be standing up against the illegal immigrant tidal wave rushing over our borders? Perhaps a group that is studying how to avoid the impending financial collapse of our welfare-state schemes? Or maybe...?
Nope. It's an ad depicting for a 501(c)(3) foundation (translation: tax-exempt charity), which starts with a cartoon depicting all of the top candidates for president rushing over each other to speak before AIPAC, the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee. Yes, the very same AIPAC that radical Islamist front groups in America (CAIR*, MPAC, ICNA, MSA) routinely decry as owning and controlling the U.S. Congress, etc. (*CAIR being now named an unindicted co-conspirator in a jihadist terrorist funding scheme; but hey, let's not be too unpleasant by pointing out such discomforting facts)
See it for yourself. Then, if you're really feeling brave, see this video on the history of how Islamist murderers have infiltrated and sought to dominate/have achieved dominance over other cultures, for 1,400 years. Also, see AIPAC's explanation of how Israel happened to "occupy" these territories --- which it took from Arabs when three of their military forces were lined up on Israel's borders, ready to pulverize and conquer the Jewish state.
But alas, thanks to propaganda like that which has been enabled by the NY Times, and Jew-hating allies who now rank among the most vicious, anti-American, anti-Israeli leftist organizations (also see JQWorld story, "The Hidden Truth Behind The 'Peace' Marchers"), the lies and misrepresentations against Israel just percolate along, without any real substantive opposition. Well, except this group of counter-protesters, who will be meeting the CNI forces on the DC Mall, today.
After the New York Times' recent bouts of unmistakable dhimmitude, burying and whitewashing stories concerning radical Islamism at home and abroad, well, I guess this shouldn't be much of a surprise.
But I'm an optimist. Call me surprised. Especially when one considers that this outrageous, full-page advertisement (which the NYT charges a fortune for) was positioned only 5 PAGES after the article about Rutka Laskier. Then again, given the fact that the NY Times' profits are falling* faster than Bill Clinton's zipper at a drunken sorority party, I guess they really do need the money --- no matter who it comes from. (*down 26% in 1st quarter 2007 alone)
UPDATE: AtlasShrugs2000 has video of the CNI protesters --- and the counter-protesters --- HERE. Wow, when was the last time you heard of Jews/Israelis being referred to as Nazis? Oh, right --- the last time the rabid jihadist-appeasing American leftists got together for one of their many "peace" marches. See Zombie's site, here, for the gruesome details.
UPDATE 2: AgeOfHooper has video and more pictures here; also, seems that the international ideological convergence between radical (America-hating) Islamists and radical (America-hating) leftists is proceeding apace; details at GatewayPundit, here.
ISSUE 4: MORE NY TIMES WORD-GAMES TO CONCEAL AND OBFUSCATE JIHADIST BARBARITY
Moving along now to page 16 of the main section of today's paper, we come to this headline: "Palestinians Attempt to Capture Israeli Soldier."
I see. This couldn't be those "Palestinians" that we are told day after day are seeking peace, that our tax dollars are going to support and arm, right? Well, of course not. And "capture" --- hm, interesting choice of words.
The NY Times wouldn't happen to mean, "kidnap," then "hold for ransom, to compel Israel to release butchering jihadists who've been captured and prosecuted (see Issue 2, above), and if they don't get their way, to murder the 'captured' Israeli soldier," now would they? Let's look at the article copy, shall we?
At least four Palestinian gunmen using an armored vehicle and grenade launchers broke through Israel’s border fence from Gaza on Saturday and fought a gun battle with Israeli soldiers, while Israeli troops entered Gaza near the southern town of Rafah to search for weapons and tunnels used to smuggle arms and explosives from Egypt.
One of the Palestinian gunmen was shot dead after the armored vehicle, labeled “TV,” crashed through the border fence at the old Kissufim crossing, near Deir el Balah, according to the Israeli Army. A spokesman for Islamic Jihad, Abu Ahmed, said three of the four gunmen had returned to Gaza, and the intention had been to try to capture an Israeli soldier.
Wow, well, that phrasing --- "capture" --- comes directly from the mouth of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, one of the most vicious, bloodthirsty, diabolical radical gangs of Islamist murderers in the world. And the NY Times just runs with his description; after all, it certainly comes from a real authority-figure, a credible source, right? (FYI, look up the definition of "dhimmitude" sometime). Moving on...
The attack evoked the Hamas raid into Israel a year ago, in which several Israeli soldiers were killed and another, Cpl. Gilad Shalit, was captured. He is still being held somewhere in Gaza. Negotiations for a prisoner exchange have been intermittent but have faltered over Hamas demands for prisoners Israel does not want to release.
Ah yes, more word-games. Now, we are supposed to believe that bloodthirsty, sadistic convicted murderers (like Samir al-Quantar, in Issue 2, above) should be referred to as "prisoners," and being in the same category as Israeli soldiers that are kidnapped by these same murderers. Equivocation on a UN-multiculturalist-worshipping scale, I do believe. And those mean Israelis don't want to release scum like al-Quantar, so they can resume crushing the skulls of 4-year-old Israeli children in front of their parents (who they then murder, too). Now there's a shocker. Moving on...
He (Abu Ahmed) said the raid had been carried out with the help of members of the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades, affiliated with Fatah.
The intention, he (Ahmed) said afterward, was to kidnap an Israeli soldier but the mission failed.
Waaaaiiiittttt a second. I thought just a few paragraphs ago, Ahmed said that the mission was to "capture" an Israeli soldier --- as confirmed by the NY Times, "the newspaper of record?" (Note to NY Times' Dhimmi Standards & Practices Division: Better get your act together and not let any more of these accurate terms slip through, or no more bloodthirsty jihadist interviews for you!!!)
And wait... did that passage say that the raid had been assisted by a group affiliated with Fatah? Wait... I thought Fatah was the "peace-seeking," "moderate" wing of the Palestinian government --- which your tax dollars and mine are going to support and arm against... uhmm... right... the "radical Muslim" side of the equation, headed by (Iran-supported) Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad??? Now I'm confused. Are U.S. dollars and weaponry ($86.4 million, to be precise - but hey, who's counting?) being used in part to help attack/capture/kidnap/murder Israelis? Back to the story...
Islamic Jihad, a small radical military group supported largely by Iran, has always rejected any sort of cease-fire with Israel and carried out all four successful suicide bombing attacks in Israel in 2006.
"A small radical military group," eh? Wow, sounds just like the Continental Army led by George Washington in our Revolutionary War, eh? Very patriotic and noble-sounding, eh? Gooooooooddddddd dhimmi, good dhimmi.
NT Times, you could have labeled Islamic Jihad as "a bloodthirsty gang of murderers who seek nothing short of the destruction of Israel and the wholesale slaughter of Jews..." (or at least something approximating that definition), but thank goodness you didn't. Your pipeline to quotes from the blood-drenched hands of jihadist butchers is still intact.
ISSUE 5: A SCHIZOPHRENIC, LOVING, BENEFIT-OF-THE-DOUBT DEPICTION OF A LOW-KEY JIHADIST, SUSPECTED OF BEING INVOLVED IN THE JFK PLOT --- WITHOUT MENTIONING TAQUIYYA
Now, moving to page 3 of the International section, we come to this jewel: "Trinidad Group Denies Link To New York Bomb Plot." Well, this must be the first time in history that a gang of murderers (or murder facilitators) has denied involvement in the crime for which they are being investigated. The article begins:
One senior member of this island’s most hard-line Islamic group said he loves American television and hopes to send his son off to university in the States. Another said that when he is not praying or preaching, he plays in a steel drum band.
Cool!!! How often do you get a radical Islamist (Muslim supremacist) who also violates one of the strictest rules in Islamism --- playing music? And gosh, he even wants to send his son off to study at one of America's institutions of higher learning? Give him an American flag --- or perhaps, a chemistry set? Maybe some firearms training? How about a job as a JFK baggage handler, you know, to earn some pocket money during his studies? Continuing...
Denying that their group, Jamaat al Muslimeen, was tied to any plot to bomb a New York City airport, members this week portrayed themselves as both Islamists and islanders, devoted to God but also part of the multicultural mix that defines the Caribbean nation of Trinidad and Tobago.
Even as they did, the fiery imam who has long been the Jamaat’s public face ducked out the back of the mosque. That man, Yasin Abu Bakr, who once led a violent coup attempt here in 1990, faces trial next week for sedition and extortion and oversees a group with a reputation for thuggishness.
"Thuggishness," eh? Hm, somehow I wouldn't associate that word with the description that follows later:
Jamaat officials said two of the suspects had visited their mosque, but they dismissed the notion that a real terrorist operation was in progress and that their group was part of it.
“We don’t subscribe to that — this randomly blowing up of people,” said Kala Akii-Bua, Jamaat’s social welfare officer and the leader of a steel drum orchestra, adding, “I have a lot of respect for the security forces of America.”
Jamaat al Muslimeen, which has about 1,000 members in Trinidad, has long been the region’s most controversial Islamic organization.
Well now THAT'S a relief!!! Jamaat al Muslimeen apparently supports blowing people up on a deliberate, targeted basis... but ("Rain Man" voice here) certainly, definitely not "randomly" blowing people up. That would be veeeerrryyy uncouth, and might even lead to a weakly-worded rebuke from a UN committee. And thank goodness, he respects our security forces.
We can all sleep much more soundly knowing all this, eh? And heck, when was the last time you heard of the leader of a steel-drum "orchestra"* blowing up people at random??? Yeah, me neither. (*see definition of "orchestra," here)
At what was perhaps the height of its radicalism nearly two decades ago, Jamaat established ties with Libya when it was considered by Washington to be a terrorist state and dispatched armed fighters to take over Trinidad and Tobago’s Parliament.
Since that raid, which left two dozen people dead, the prime minister with a bullet wound to the leg and the police headquarters in ashes after a car bombing, Jamaat claims to have transformed itself.
Transformed itself... into WHAT?
After seizing power for about a week, Mr. Abu Bakr and his 100 or so followers were charged with murder, treason and other charges stemming from the coup. But a court dropped the charges after ruling that the men had been pardoned by the then-president.
...(B)ut even since his pardon, Mr. Abu Bakr, who was born Lennox Phillips and converted to Islam while studying in Canada in the 1970s, has repeatedly run afoul of the authorities here.
Next week Mr. Abu Bakr faces trial on charges of sedition and extortion, stemming from an explosive sermon he delivered in 2005, threatening war against fellow Muslims who did not follow the Islamic law of handing over part of their income.
Wow. Just a peaceful, peace-seeking (radical) imam. Wonder how many of those peaceful, peace-seeking imams are now preaching in mosques in America? Continuing...
Shortly after the 2005 fiery sermon, the authorities raided the Jamaat compound in search of what they suspected was a large cache of weapons hidden underground. Using a jackhammer to bash in Mr. Abu Bakr’s office and dig through his concrete floor, police officers found a rifle, a grenade and hundreds of rounds of ammunition.
In another case, a member of Jamaat was found guilty in Miami in 2005 of trying to smuggle 70 submachine guns and 10 silencers to Trinidad from the United States.
Wow, again. When was the last time you heard of a priest, rabbi or other spiritual leader in America or elsewhere being part of a heavily-armed murder gang, which "declared war" against followers who wouldn't follow its orders to surrender part of their incomes? Hm.
And whatever could those weapons being illegally imported from the US be for? Last time I heard, you don't need a silencer-equipped submachine gun to hunt rabbits... or anything other than, well, humans. Continuing...
Jamaat said it is focused on domestic matters, assisting the many people who are left out of the economic boom here and shielding its faithful from Trinidad’s famed Carnival.
Gosh. A socially-conscious, murderous sect of religious "thugs." Kind of sounds like how Hezbollah won such loyalty among the poor and socially-conscious politicians in Lebanon, eh? (as described at JQWorld, here). Handing out welfare aid (provided by Iran) with hands still dripping with the blood of innocent civilians. Almost poetic (in a hellish sense).
Lastly, given that the NY Times boasts of its top-tier level of objective, socially-conscious "journalists," do you think it would have been worthwhile for the writer or the Times' editors to inject the definition of taquiyya into this article? For those unaware of that word, permit me to provide the definition:
Short definition of taquiyya: The Koranic-sanctioned use of denial and deception in order to clandestinely advance the imposition of shari'a, the repressive Islamist code that dictates all aspects of personal conduct and social policy, upon an unsuspecting culture
You don't suppose that a fine, upstanding,socially-conscious, steel-drum-playing imam like Mr. Abu Bakr would engage in taquiyya, would you?
Nah, me neither.
The NY Times certainly paints him as a downright lovable fellow --- you know, a misunderstood rascal --- who has seen the error of his previously-brutal jihadist ways. And heck, his colleagues are even ready to send their kids to study in America (which they claim to admire --- well, at least our television and security, anyway).
Well, not quite. Like previous JonQuixoteWorld threads examining the NY Times, I'll be forwarding this one to its ombudsman for review.
Like it or not, the NY Times still wields great influence in our culture and beyond --- for good or ill --- and as an optimist, I remain hopeful that perhaps one day, its editors and writers will begin to present stories on issues concerning Islamism and jihad in a responsible, complete and (dare I say) balanced manner.
Hey, one can hope, right?
Have a nice day.
Here is the email I sent to the NY Times' obmudsman (email@example.com)
Note: I am not expecting a (real) reply, but the auto-reply I received stated the following:
(Subject line): Complaint re NYT coverage of jihadist/radical Islamist issues
To the executives and editors at the New York Times:
I believe you would do yourselves, your readers, America and the global struggle against radical Islamism a service by reading and really considering this blogthread:
The NY Times’ Schizophrenic Quasi-Dhimmitude
Your paper pulls no punches when it goes after anything it dislikes and disagrees with. I hope you'll respect my pull-no-punches criticism of how you play these stories. The NY Times is certainly not the lone target of my criticism re how jihadist and radical Islamist issues are being dealt with in America - see below:
Jihadist-Enabling MSM, Part 1,247 - The Washington Post
Roundup Of Western Government-Enforced Dhimmitude
I sincerely hope that you'll consider the data and viewpoints in these threads.
Thank you for contacting the Public Editor. An associate or I read every message. Because of the volume of e-mail, we cannot respond personally to every message, but we forward many messages to appropriate newsroom staffers and follow up to be sure concerns raised in those messages are treated with serious consideration. If a further reply is warranted, you will be hearing from us shortly.
Hey, at least now the NY Times can't say it wasn't provided with a detailed chronicle of what it's doing, right?
Now, the question is: What will they do with
Original content is © Copyright 2007 by Jon Quixote. Email to firstname.lastname@example.org