The BBC, dominated as ever by the “politically
correct” attitudes of the liberal-left, continues to shy away from calling a
spade a spade. Take its reporting of the
recent Kenyan shopping mall siege. In spineless deference to people sympathetic
to the jihadists’ cause, BBC news reports consistently refrained from referring
to those responsible for the gunning down of over 60 people as “terrorists”. The furthest they would go was to use the
term “militants.”
A row immediately blew up in the
British press, parliament and beyond. It was summed up effectively by Douglas Murray, associate director of the Henry Jackson Society think-tank: ‘By not
calling these jihadists what they actually are, the BBC is effectively covering
for them. No-one wants to say they are jihadis, which they are. No-one wants to
say they are Islamic extremists, which they are. Most people know what these
people are, and it’s only certain sections of government and the media which
refuses to point the finger.’
Or as one Member of Parliament said: ‘Most members of the British public would see
the planned and systematic murder of dozens of innocent people in Kenya
BBC guidelines, which govern
journalistic practice within the corporation, suggest avoiding the use of the
word 'terrorism” because it is a “difficult and emotive subject with
significant political overtones.” So in a misconceived pursuit of maintaining
their reputation for objectivity and accuracy, the BBC avoids using “terrorist”
– except when they are quoting someone else. In other words, they prefer
sheltering behind some other source bold enough to condemn people who commit
monstrous outrages in pursuit of their distasteful agendas. For the BBC to do so itself is too strong
meat for its delicate appetite nowadays.
Objectivity and accuracy. BBC executives might reflect that the
corporation’s enviable reputation for accuracy was established during the
second world war, when BBC news broadcasts were renowned for telling the truth,
however unpalatable at times, and people across Europe literally risked their
lives to listen to London. “Objectivity”
did not feature as a suitable aspiration when the nation was fighting a war to
the death against a ruthless enemy. The BBC did not bend over backwards in
those days to present Hitler’s point of view.
Everyone knew what he and his Nazi régime were up to, and the BBC, along
with everyone else, condemned it outright.
What the BBC, in common with other sections
of the western media, a range of non-governmental organizations worldwide, some
United Nations agencies, and even some governments, will not acknowledge is
that the civilized world is today fighting for its continued existence against
enemies just as ruthless as the Nazis – namely, Islamist terrorists, intent on undermining
the West and all it stands for.
Many refrain from outright condemnation of Islamist extremism for fear of being
dubbed “Islamophobic” – a fear that may well be justified. However,
understanding the reasons for faint-heartedness does not justify it, nor does burying
one’s head in the sand remove the danger.
Seth Frantzman, writing in the Jerusalem Post recently, suggested that “terrorism” was not adequate to describe the
atrocities being committed continually by Islamist extremists. Citing recent
incidents like the killing of 81 people in Pakistan Nigeria Kenya
In an entirely understandable effort to
avoid suggesting that there is a battle of ideologies in progress between the
Muslim and the non-Muslim worlds – for this is certainly not the case – left-wing opinion is throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The baby,
in this case, is Islamist extremism, which is indeed at war with the West, with
our democratic values, our standards of justice, tolerance and free speech, and
the importance we assign to individual liberty and human life. In short, by obfuscating or deliberately
ignoring the nature and objectives of Islamist terrorism, the civilized world is
allowing it to flourish, and is in effect sleep-walking towards its own
destruction.
A
main protagonist of Islamist extremism of the Sunni persuasion – by
far the major part of Islam – is the Muslim Brotherhood and its al-Qaeda-backed adherents
like Somalia
That is the agenda of these Islamist extremists. That is why their
expansion of influence and activity should concern the Western world far more
than it has done up till now. For the Brotherhood not only spans the Middle
East but, as political author Lorenzo Vidino has demonstrated, since the early
1960s its members and sympathisers have “moved to Europe
and slowly but steadily established a wide and well-organised network of
mosques, charities and Islamic organisations”. Islamism has active branches in
the United States , the United Kingdom , Germany ,
France
The civilized world, which includes the vast bulk of Muslim believers, has
yet to declare a clear distinction between Islam and Islamist extremists, to characterize
the jihadists for what they are – dedicated enemies of everything the West holds
dear – and to oppose them tooth and nail, using every means
at its disposal.
This should include – and why not? – charging in an appropriate judicial setting any who are apprehended, with crimes against humanity.
Published in the Jerusalem Post on-line, 29 September 2013:
http://www.jpost.com/Experts/Islamist-terror-and-the-civilized-world-327383?prmusr=ANbuRH5su4MaohJ5nk3yjmtxOqwHdkG%2fU%2byadoSleo6yroVSAKzJttGaMAzTOnKQ
This should include – and why not? – charging in an appropriate judicial setting any who are apprehended, with crimes against humanity.
Published in the Jerusalem Post on-line, 29 September 2013:
http://www.jpost.com/Experts/Islamist-terror-and-the-civilized-world-327383?prmusr=ANbuRH5su4MaohJ5nk3yjmtxOqwHdkG%2fU%2byadoSleo6yroVSAKzJttGaMAzTOnKQ
Published in the Eurasia Review, 29 September 2013:
http://www.eurasiareview.com/29092013-islamist-terror-civilized-world-oped/
http://www.eurasiareview.com/29092013-islamist-terror-civilized-world-oped/
No comments:
Post a Comment