17 Years of Media Denial of Muslim Terror

Since the first WTC attack in 1993, the media has seemingly gone out of its way to cover for extremest Muslims committing acts of terror. For whatever reason, they follow this pattern of speculation that doesn't involve Muslims, then making excuses when they find out it is Muslims and then finally blaming America when they can no longer deny it was motivated by Islam.

This new compilation video does a brilliant job of showing this. This really shows that the media is seemingly in denial. My only question, is why?



newsbusters.org...
yesbuthowever.com...
dronetek.net...



[edit on 23-7-2010 by Hudson]

you can take that back another 2 years.

The war in Bosnia is a prime example of muslim terror versus Christians (both Serb and Croat)

There is no real difference between Religion and Politics in an Islamic Theocracy. That's probably why there is so much confusion in the Western media when acts of terror occur; we get caught up in the Religion vs Politics debate, when in truth those carrying out the attacks see them as one.

[edit on 23/7/2010 by Dark Ghost]

Ever body of power, in history, has realized the need for a boogyman.

Today it is the terrorist.

In the mid-20th century it was the communist.

There is demon that lives inyour closet.

There is the devil himself.

Terror is a tool.

All these pinheads need to do is pick up some military history books. The entire 1,400 year-long, blood-soaked, rise of Islamic Imperialism has been chronicled by those who witnessed it. Back when pointing out that Islam was a civilizational enemy of the West was acceptable.

Originally posted by zroth


Ever body of power, in history, has realized the need for a boogyman.

Today it is the terrorist.

Yet, the media reporting goes against that theory. Like the video shows, they go out of their way to deflect the possibility of Islamic terror. when they can no longer do that, they make excuses to dismiss it.

The bogyman seems to be the American people these days. Especially those who oppose big government.

I know what the video is saying but here in the UK it seems that every other day they have a picture of a Muslim on the front of a paper with some sort of terrorist headline. The British media is creating a great deal of hatred towards Muslims not terrorists.

I'd like a bit of whatever you're smoking, please.

For the past decade, my perception of the media has been a sort of pseudo-Government reporting agency on the dangers of 'terrorism'.

It's been non-stop, a total farce most of the time, whenever they try to link "possible terrorism" to something. Frankly, I have no idea what you're talking about.

Maybe you're seeing a shift that I'm not seeing, because I haven't paid attention to the media for the past few years (see above), but you're referencing old material. How do you think the Patriot Act was brought into law? Through fear-mongering of Islamic terrorism.

Originally posted by and14263
The British media is creating a great deal of hatred towards Muslims not terrorists.

Ok, lets think this through.


Say the KKK come to the UK and start launching terror attacks on black people. So then, the media starts reporting on all the violence against black people, being committed by these white KKK terrorists.

Now would you then complain that the UK media was creating hatred for white people?


reply to post by SyphonX



Did you watch the video?

[edit on 23-7-2010 by Hudson]

Originally posted by Hudson
Yet, the media reporting goes against that theory. Like the video shows, they go out of their way to deflect the possibility of Islamic terror. when they can no longer do that, they make excuses to dismiss it.

The bogyman seems to be the American people these days. Especially those who oppose big government.

It is the government of the American people that drive the lack of media reporting of the extent of Islamic terrorism in the world today. All governments seek to pacify the people, keep them ignorant and therefore easier to control. People who fear invasion or attack of whatever sort are more dangerous and unpredicatable than those who's only real worries are small time everyday or personal in nature.

It was not until 911 that America was forced to take note because until that point, Islamic terrorism on American soil was either non existent or was not overt.

In the UK in the 1980's, our media was 'free-er'. Journalists were respected for seeking and exposing the truth. We had a lot of Islamic 'bogey man' creation in our media. We were shown images of hate filled Iranians burning effigies of Amercan presidents and flag, telling us all about how Gaddafi funded Islamic uprisings in Africa, took hostages on our soil and tried cosying up to the Ruskies who were at war on Afghan soil. We also heard about how the (afghan) Mujahideen warlords condemned the west and how Khomeni called America the 'great whore' and how the House of Saude and Sultan of Brunii were the ubber-rich. (Was any of this widely reported in the American media?)

In the mid to late 80's, much of our venerated Daily News papers were bought by foreign interests with personal agenda's and the news became dumbed down. Then in 1990 the news blackout and outright misreporting of a large public demonstration in London raised my aware ness of the extent of government control of the independent media, (the BBC are entirely taxpayer/government funded)

Nowadays, UK media is dumbed down, obsessed with celebrity (I include the broadsheets in this; they tend to focus on more accomplished individuals but they court media tarts just like the tabloids) and is happy to report outright lies as news.

Khomeni called for a global Islamic state and declared Jihad on the west. But we did not see what we understood as war. We saw random acts of terrorism, globally, long before 911, we saw mass immigration and the growth of mosques on western soil and we saw moslems seeking positions of power within our established institutions.

Were I a journalist, I do not know how I would convey the evidence of the silent invasion of the West and expose the nature of soft terrorism and I applaud those journalists who try. That the editors and their handlers may not publish must be quite disheartening for some.

reply to post by Hudson

You're now comparing Islamic religion, which indeed like all religions is highly flawed, to the KKK? Some things you should be aware of:

KKK is/was a group which promotes hate and violence towards black people.

Islam is a religion. Muslims do not promote hate and violence. A very small percentage of Muslims are terrorists. Just like a very small percent of Catholics are peadophiles.

Muslim does not equal terrorist. I think you have had your perception swayed by the modern media, easily done. With respect you are probably a little naive on the ways of the media and the human mind, also Islam.

reply to post by and14263


I could have sworn we were talking about Islamic extremists. You know, the guys waging war all over the world? The guys who video tape their brutal murders and upload them to youtube nearly every single day for the last decade or so?



[edit on 23-7-2010 by Hudson]

reply to post by and14263

Islam is a religion. Muslims do not promote hate and violence. A very small percentage of Muslims are terrorists. Just like a very small percent of Catholics are peadophiles.

Typical Islamic deception.

Islamic culture has a much higher propensity for violence and abuse of children than any other culture. Indeed, abuse of boys in madrassas is practically institutionalized.

Motivated by Islam or motivated by a relative very few extremists who happen to be followers of Islam?

Someone could probably post a whole slew of videos that could lead someone to believe that there just might be media denial of Christian Terror.

Maybe it's not denial as much as not representing this in a disproportionate manner?

reply to post by Hudson


Anyone keeping a list of all these atrocities and the related property destruction and death counts?

Also, again, wouldn't separating the members of Islam who also happen to be truly radical extremists from the citizens of a nation fighting for various causes locally or at the behest of interventionists portray the argument in a more effective and realistic manner?

Perhaps the Islamist are sick and tired of being invaded, from the Crusades to the present day; With an Iran invasion on the horizon.

Is that what this thread is about; To prepare us for the inevitable? Or just a religious ax to grind?

Wasn't it the media that stoked the fires for our current two wars? And if you listen real close, you can hear the war drums beating as we speak. 17yrs??

Get real........"Game over man"







[edit on 23-7-2010 by whaaa]

Originally posted by Hudson
reply to post by and14263

 

I could have sworn we were talking about Islamic extremists. You know, the guys waging war all over the world? The guys who video tape their brutal murders and upload them to youtube nearly every single day for the last decade or so?
[edit on 23-7-2010 by Hudson]

You're completely right.

I missed the 'extremist' word.

cover for extremest Muslims

This does change my reply. In fact I probably wouldn't have even replied. I understand this is not another Muslim=terrorist thread.

Forgive my reply which was written with condescending nonchalance.

Originally posted by whaaa
Perhaps the Islamist are sick and tired of being invaded, from the Crusades

You know NOTHING. Christian pilgrims and lands suffered 500 years of attack and bloodshed before the first crusade even began.