Days After Terror Attack By Islamists In Paris, NY Times Uses Occasion To Demonize Right Wingers

I bet you thought this kind of thing only occurred in bat guano insane sites like Salon and Islamist defenders on social media. Negative, though at least the NY Times Editorial Board waited till Monday to post their screed, which is long on complaints against those who stand against the radical Muslims, and short on actually blaming the radical Muslims

What Will Come After Paris

The terrorist attacks in Paris on Friday, along with twin bombings in Beirut on the day before and the downing of a Russian jetliner over the Sinai Peninsula on Oct. 31, show a new phase in the Islamic State’s war against the West, a readiness to strike far beyond areas it controls in Iraq, Syria, and increasingly, Libya.

The challenge for threatened countries is huge. The sort of attacks the Islamic State, or ISIS, has launched are hard to anticipate or prevent, yet in Europe each one intensifies the raucous xenophobia of far-right nationalists ever ready to demonize Muslim citizens, immigrants and refugees, and shut down Europe’s open internal borders. The Islamic State must be crushed, but that requires patience, determination and the coordination of strategies and goals that has been sorely lacking among countries involved in the war on ISIS, especially the United States and Russia.

Got that? Europe has long been a hot-bed of importing radical Muslims, and allowing them to practice their extremist beliefs which include destroying Western society and killing Westerners. And now they are streaming in to European nations in huge numbers, the majority being young men, the exact type of recruit radical Islam likes. At least one of the Paris attackers had a Syrian passport. I think there’s a pretty darned good rationale for wanting to be damned cautious about the potential for Islamists.

President François Hollande of France defiantly declared the attacks in Paris “an act of war” and vowed a “pitiless” response. On Sunday, French warplanes bombarded Raqqa, the Syrian city that is an ISIS stronghold. Mr. Hollande is expected to offer other proposals when he addresses the French Parliament at a special session in Versailles on Monday. France already has some of Europe’s most intensive antiterrorist policing; adopting draconian measures of the sort demanded by far-right nationalists like Marine Le Pen of the National Front can only further alienate France’s Muslim population of five million, without offering any assurance against more attacks.

Only in Liberal World are they concerned with alienating people who have been showing that they do not want to integrate, but want Western nations to conform to their regressive beliefs. For the life of me, I don’t understand the Lefty position, since virtually everything the Islamists stand for is 100% against what Leftists stand for.

The NYTEB ends their missive thusly

The attacks in Paris sent a major shockwave around the world, and the Beirut bombings and the downing of the Russian civilian jetliner were every bit as horrific. ISIS has demonstrated that there is no limit to its reach, and no nation is really safe until they all come together to defeat this scourge.

Well, first off, one must recognize that to the Islamists (you can call them radical Muslims, extreme Muslims, etc) this is a religious war/movement. Here’s the mastermind

He’s holding a Koran and the ISIS flag. The flag itself says “There is no god but Allah. Mohammad is the messenger of Allah” at the top, and the round circle states “Mohammed is the messenger of God”.

Second, one must acknowledge that no one really knows who these people are. Would the NY Times allow someone totally unknown to wander around the newsrooms, or, better yet, the executive suits?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

17 Responses to “Days After Terror Attack By Islamists In Paris, NY Times Uses Occasion To Demonize Right Wingers”

  1. Dana says:

    It’s already being reported that one of the Friday the Thirteenth attackers entered Europe as a Syrian refugee. It’s obvious that the vast majority of the refugees aren’t terrorists, but the situation offers Da’ish many opportunities to sneak a terrorist through. It doesn’t matter how much is spent on trying to vet the refugees — as though we could get accurate and complete dossiers on all of them from war-torn Syria — but such measures are not 100% reliable. Simply excluding the refugees, saying no, you cannot enter, closes off that avenue for the terrorists.

    Is this fair to the legitimate refugees? No, but I don’t care if it’s fair: we need to protect our own people first, we need to protect the citizens band taxpayers of our own countries before we worry about others. With the 10,000 refugees President Obama has pledged to accept, we will be getting far fewer here, but that is still 10,000 too many. A few terrorists might slip through, but even if none of them are terrorists, very few of the 10,000 will know much English or have the education or skills to support themselves in the Unites States; we would be bringing in 10,000 new welfare recipients!

  2. MrToad21 says:

    Didn’t the Times talk to Geraldo Rivera? He has been “enlightened”.

  3. jl says:

    Maybe the editors and families of the NYT can spend New Year’s Eve in Times Square wandering among the crowd. Nothing to be worried about, right?

  4. Jeffery says:

    Weren’t most of the murderers from Belgium and France, and not refugees? Why is the first response to attack the refugees?

  5. Dana says:

    Because they are the ones who can still be kept out; the ones who immigrated years ago are more difficult to weed out, but that doesn’t mean we should just throw up our hands and not try to stop new Arabs from coming in.

  6. drowningpuppies says:

    “But president skinny black guy insisted the reason he said they’re contained, hours before terror teams launched deadly raids across Paris on Friday, is because “they control less territory than they did last year.”


  7. gitarcarver says:

    Weren’t most of the murderers from Belgium and France, and not refugees?

    Nice careful wording there, Jeffery.

    While “most” of the attackers were from France and Belgium, Ahmad Almohammad was a Syrian refugee.

    Shouldn’t we be looking at preventing the influx of terrorists either disguised as refugees?

    Why is the first response to attack the refugees?

    The first response should be to plug the easiest holes to prevent this from happening again. That means looking at the refugees.

  8. david7134 says:

    That is right, good observation, but you didn’t complete the line of logic, they were all Muslims. That is the common denominator in the killing over the last 60 years. How much longer are we going to put up with this cult? Now, you will then say that the guy in Charleston was a right wing, Confederate, which may or may not be true, but his actions were isolated and not the part of a cult that is trying to supplant our belief structures, wealth, security and every other aspect of our lives and has been trying to do so since 600 AD. But, note the response to the crazy guy in Charleston, all people seeking freedom from the US under the banner of the CSA were condemned, yet here we should love all Islam, a cult dedicated to our destruction. Sure you know peaceful Muslims, it any. But I have seen these people in their lair, worked with them, seen their reaction to 9/11 and can attest to the fact that Islam needs to be condemned and challenged as a cult. Even Christopher Hitchens, likely one of your idols, stressed the fact that Islam was a cancer.

  9. drowningpuppies says:

    Some say we cannot destroy Islam….but we can certainly beat the fuck out of it every time it rears its ugly head.

  10. john says:

    but these jihadists ARE from the rightwing, correct ?
    I mean they aren’t leftists or centrists.
    They are right wing religious fundamentalists

  11. gitarcarver says:

    but these jihadists ARE from the rightwing, correct ?


  12. Conservative Beaner says:

    No John.

    Jihadists are intolerant assholes. Leftist are intolerant assholes. So jihadists are leftwing assholes.

    I hope I made that clear for you.

  13. Jeffery says:

    The jihadists are from the Wahhabist sect of Sunnis. A minority within a minority. The Wahhabists originated in Saudi Arabia and when the Saudis made trillions from oil the Wahhabists were empowered. Al Qaeda and Da’ish sprang from the violent, ultra-conservative, fundamentalist anti-Shia Wahhabists. They consider all non-Sunni, indeed, any non-Wahhabist, as an apostate.

  14. gitarcarver says:

    They consider all non-Sunni, indeed, any non-Wahhabist, as an apostate.

    Just like liberals think that anyone who doesn’t believe like they do is an apostate.

  15. Dana says:

    The man who carves guitars wrote:

    Just like liberals think that anyone who doesn’t believe like they do is an apostate.

    Unless of course the conservative is black; then he’s just an Uncle Tom.

  16. Jeffery says:

    Just like liberals think that anyone who doesn’t believe like they do is an apostate.


    It’s always projection.

    Liberals criticize conservative’s bizarre ideas and policies, but do not blow up planes, shoot innocents or behead others.

    But nice try equating liberals with terrorists.

    Most terrorist attacks in the US are conducted by conservatives.

    See? It’s always projection.

Pirate's Cove