Although the various factions of Radical Islam are given to local bloody conflicts, including amongst themselves, they all share the same aspiration: To impose a dark tyranny on the world, to return humanity one thousand years to the past. They trample anyone who does not share their path, first and foremost their Muslim brothers, but their greatest hatred is saved for Western culture, that same culture that respects freedom and equal rights – all the things they so despise.
For this reason it is not a coincidence that Radical Islam has sought to destroy Israel from the very day it declared its independence: Because Israel is the only Western democracy in the Middle East, because Israel is the only place that is truly safe for Christians, women, minorities, that respects all human rights.
Well, here is another truth: Radical Islam does not hate the West because of Israel. It hates Israel because it is an organic part of the West. It rightly views Israel as an island of Western democracy and tolerance in an ocean of fanaticism and violence that it wishes to impose on the Middle East, Europe and the entire world.Israel is not under attack because of this or that detail of its policies, but rather because of its very existence and nature. But we are not the only ones under attack. Look around you: The entire world is under attack, the entire world – the Twin Towers in New York, the subways in London and Madrid, tourists in Bali, students at schools in Russia and Pakistan, a hotel in Mumbai, the mall in Nairobi."
So said Bibi Netanyahu during his stirring speech at the Grand Synagogue, Paris, following the .Charlie Hebdo and Hyper Cacher killing spree.
On "Meet The Press" on Sunday, White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough explains why the phrase "Radical Islam", which of course Bibi uses several times there, is best avoided:
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjP7DQPbFkQ)
Meanwhile, as reported here:
'The head of BBC Arabic has instructed editors not to use the word "terrorist" to describe the Islamist gunmen who murdered 12 people at the Paris offices of the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine.
Tarik Kafala told the UK's Independent newspaper that the term "terrorist" is too "loaded," and said the decision was in-line with the BBC's overall policy on reporting such attacks.
"We try to avoid describing anyone as a terrorist or an act as being terrorist. What we try to do is to say that 'two men killed 12 people in an attack on the office of a satirical magazine'. That’s enough, we know what that means and what it is," said Kafala.
"Terrorism is such a loaded word," he added. "The UN has been struggling for more than a decade to define the word and they can’t. It is very difficult to. We know what political violence is, we know what murder, bombings and shootings are and we describe them. That’s much more revealing, we believe, than using a word like terrorist which people will see as value-laden." ....
Although Kafala's statement came as a surprise to some, the refusal by the BBC to use the word "terrorist" has long been a point of contention, particularly in its coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict....
However, while consistently reticent about referring to individuals as "terrorists," some have noted that while some attacks - including those against Charlie Hebdo - are often referred to as "terror attacks" or "terrorist attacks", equally brutal attacks against Israeli targets are simply referred to using the the more "neutral" term "militant attacks."'See reactions to Kafala's directive here
The latest Pat Condell
ReplyDeleteA special kind of hate