Liars Should Have Good Memories
May 26, 2005
A reasonable child might think that the post-Jayson-Blair New York Times would pay some attention to the truth. Even an idiot would expect the post-911 NYT’s to be skeptical of fifth column propaganda. But reason and the Times are evidently mutually exclusive.
After reading the NYT’s latest piece of apologist subversion, Guantánamo Comes to Define U.S. to Muslims, I can only conclude that either: (1) the Times is populated by idiots; (2) the Times is populated by self-loathing America haters; or (3) the Times is a subsidiary of parent corp. Aljazeera. Or...probably all three.
From the NYT’s New Delhi desk, Somini Sengupta writes that “Accounts of abuses at...Guantánamo Bay, including Newsweek magazine's now-retracted article on the desecration of the Koran, ricochet around the world, instilling ideas about American power and justice, and sowing distrust of the United States.” In fact, “For many Muslims, Guantánamo stands as a confirmation of the low regard in which they believe the United States holds them.” Little wonder that even the NYT’s had to “outsource” this kind of crap from New Delhi.
It seems that “the images that flash on television screens throughout the Muslim world: caged men, in orange prison jumpsuits, on their knees” are putting our peace-loving international Muslim brethren in a tizzy. "The cages, the orange suits, the shackles - it's as if they're dealing with something that's like a germ they don't want to touch," laments Daoud Kuttab, director of the Institute of Modern Media at Al Quds University, as he concludes "That's the nastiness of it." And...as a member of the religion that brought us Islamic jihadists, Kuttab knows what “nastiness” is.
Even more sadly, “In Europe, accusations of abuse at Guantánamo...have become a symbol of...America's dangerous drift away from the ideals that made it a moral beacon in the post-World War II era”. Perhaps the next time that George Galloway, the antiwar British Member of Parliament, decides to hide dollars from the UN oil-for-food scam in a child’s leukemia charity, we can ask him about a “moral beacon”.
While still on the topic of “moral beacons”, Jean Arnault, special representative of the U.N. secretary-general in Afghanistan, is now spouting-off that the American abuse of Afghan prisoners reported in the New York Times is “unacceptable and an affront to everything the international community stood for.” Maybe America should follow the UN’s lead as “peacekeepers” in the Congo where ABC reported that “Fifty U.N. peacekeepers and U.N. civilian officers face an estimated 150 allegations of sexual exploitation and rape”.
Our “moral beacon” French critics might wish to cite the case of “Didier Bourguet, a U.N. senior official from France charged with running an Internet pedophile ring in the Congo”. With the funds from his UN job, Bourguet “...had turned his bedroom, plastered with mirrors and rigged with remote-control cameras, into a stealth porn studio. He was caught in a sting operation while allegedly preparing to rape a 12-year-old girl.” Is that a “moral beacon” in your pants or are you just happy to see me?
But back to our offended Muslim kin, the Times reports that “public anger has grown at the reports of sexual abuse and desecration of the Koran”. Even though Muslims “used to admire” America, I guess they never really liked the architecture of the World trade Center or the Pentagon. No, they never really hated us until after they attacked us...which was before they hated us.
Despite the fact that over 1200 mosques and Islamic centers exist in the U.S. and, despite the fact that from 5 to 8 million Muslims enjoy the full rights of citizenship in the U.S., America must hate Muslims. Unlike the welcome mat the world lays out for Christians.
In 1999, the Turkish government arrested 70 Christians just a few weeks after Turkish Christians received praise for spearheading earthquake relief efforts in the Izmit province on charges of...being Christians. In 2002, Zimbabwe dictator, Robert Mugabe, arrested 11 Christians for...being Christians. In 2004, four Christians were arrested in Sharm El-Sheikh in Egypt after police found that they had Bibles and Christian music tapes in their possession (the Egyptian police reported that they would have flushed the bibles down a toilet if Egypt had indoor plumbing).
Sixty evangelical Christians were arrested during a 2005 New Year's celebration in the Eritrean capital of Asmara because they were...Christians. Again, in 2005, 40 Christians were arrested in Saudi Arabia for “For Trying to Spread the Poison and their Beliefs”. More to the point, the Saudi Institute reports that "As a matter of official policy, the government either incinerates or dumps Bibles, crosses and other Christian paraphernalia". But, the NYT’s is concerned about America hating Muslims...911, arrests, bible desecration, playing Fallujian soccer with Christian heads, beheadings, and all other peace loving Muslim sports aside.
Early on in the war against terrorism, the U.S. was lucky enough to get its hands on a copy of the Al Qaeda Training Manual. The Manual instructs any Al Qaeda members taken prisoner to “insist on proving that torture was inflicted on them” and to “complain of mistreatment while in prison”. Not surprisingly, the Washington Post recently reported that “U.S. commanders have documented a number of cases in which detainees tore pages out of a Quran, or ripped off the cover, and then blamed the guards. This was designed, he said, to stir outrage among other detainees and disrupt the order imposed by the guards.” Why Al Qaeda bothered to write a training manual when they had the NYT’s to do their dirty work is beyond me.
When liars start to lie, they better have good memories that enable them to incorporate the past into the present. The current Muslim rage over America’s insensitivity to Allah is a smokescreen. Where was that religious sensitivity the Muslim world is so fond of when two massive Buddha statues in Afghanistan first had their noses, ears, eyes and mouths defaced and then were blown up in their entirety? Taliban leader, Abdul Wahid, said they represented a pre-Islamic Afghanistan which was of no interest, so..."These statues are not Islamic and we should destroy them."
Maybe the Muslim world and their allies at the NYT’s should consider a bit of their sensitive past before they try to snow the world with their umbrage. While the NYT’s, Newsweek and their Muslim allies manufacture “allegations” of American anti-Muslim bias, they continue to ignore their responsibility to the greater globe.
The history of Muslim charity is replete with instances similar to the July 1933 massacre of an entire village of Christian Assyrians by Iraqi troops and armed Kurdish tribesmen. In the name of Allah, hundreds of helpless Assyrian Christians were slaughtered on August 11 of that year. Upon their return to Baghdad, the Muslim murderers were greeted by a cheering Muslim populace that showered the troops with rose water and flowers as a tribute to the slaughter of Christians.
The door is always open for the greater Muslim world to lay down their false sense of jingoism and learn to go along to get along. Any adult with the slightest cognizance knows that there is no anti-Muslim agenda intertwined in U.S. foreign policy. And any adult with an I.Q. equal to room temperature knows that Guantánamo has nothing to do with Muslims and everything to do with primal terrorists. Or, are we really dealing with children who go around arresting Christians, murdering Americans, blowing up Buddhism, beheading civilians and then...point their dirty little fingers and say “He did it”.
RightPage