The faux conservatives’ meaningless criticisms of the media’s non-coverage of the Buffalo beheading

Mark Steyn points out how Muzzammil Hassan, the Bridges to Beheading Moderate Muslim of upstate New York, got constant attention from the mainstream press for starting up a Muslim TV station devoted to forming “bridges of understanding” between Muslims and non-Muslims, but now that Hassan has beheaded his wife, Aasiya, the story is almost nowhere to be found.

So, let’s say that Steyn were in charge of the mainstream media and gave the beheading the attention it deserves. What result should follow from such coverage? What would a Steyn-run media tell the public about the nature of Islam and about the mass immigration that has planted three million Muslims in the U.S. and many times more than that in Europe? Steyn of course has never suggested doing a single thing to stop the Islamization of America and the West. He has not only not called for a reduction of Muslim immigration, he never even mentions Muslim immigration in his many writings on the subject, including his book, America Alone. His only “solution” to the Islam threat has been that Westerners need to have more babies, a “solution” that will do nothing, at least for decades, to prevent Muslims from continuing to enter and gain power in our society.

On the same story, Powerline also links Roger Kimball, who writes at Pajamas (“our name announces we’re lightweights who are not serious about anything”) Media:

What is it about Muslims and this penchant for separating people from their heads (and other parts of their anatomy)? I mentioned Hassan’s surgical method of connecting, or rather “disconnecting,” people through understanding to my friend in England when we were talking about Wilders. “The full Muslim,” he called it. Is that disrespectful? Or is it merely an unpalatable truth?

“The full Muslim.” Or, should we spell the word, to make the pun clearer, “The full Moslem.” Not bad. Its meaning is that beheading one’s wife expresses the essence of Islam. So Kimball seems to be saying Islam is dangerous. What, then, does he propose doing about the growth of Islam in the West? Nothing. He has never suggested doing anything about it.

So the difference between the “conservatives” and the liberal media they decry is that the liberal media ignore the beheading, while the “conservatives” write about the beheading and talk about what a terrible thing it is and even perhaps say that it shows that Islam is really, really bad news, and then they continue to remain silent about what we should do to prevent Islam from gaining more numbers and more power in the West.

The liberal media are more honest than the “conservatives.” The media hate the West, enjoy the prospect of Islam taking us over, and make no bones about it. The “conservatives” beat their chests pretending to be defenders of the West from Islam, but they are not. They are performance artists—or, as Rick Darby said about Kimball and his colleagues in a comment at VFR last December, they are “high-class sarcasm artistes.”

Posted by Lawrence Auster at February 15, 2009 04:38 PM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):