Parallelogram: Norway to Boston - There's no such thing as news, there's only opinion....

In "mainstream media", you'll see a lot of this ..... (original story link here)

...but not much of this.....

Ahmed Moor is a Palestinian-American graduate student of Public Policy at Harvard University. Norway's attacks reveal world of hatred Initial reactions to the attacks in Norway showed a "clash of civilisations" exists, but not in the way many understood. Last Modified: 24 Jul 2011 14:40 It is a credit to liberalism in Norway that the country's prime minister did not respond to the attack with fear or vicious speculation [EPA] The Norwegian terrorist who murdered more than ninety innocent civilians - many of whom were teenagers - did not act alone. Or rather, he acted within a cultural and political context that legitimises his fearful and hate-infested worldview. It is now clear that Anders Behring Breivik was exposed to large amounts of right-wing propaganda. This tragedy underlines the urgency with which normal people around the world must combat fundamentalist nationalists and chauvinists wherever they may be. But it also demonstrates the extent to which reactionary bigotry has infected mainstream thought. Many reacted to the news from Oslo with wide eyes and a pointed finger. The most animated reactionaries took to the pages of the New York Times comment section to issue sweeping proclamations about the Clash of Civilisations and something called "the cult of death". In many ways, readers were merely reinforcing the paper's woefully editorialised reportage. As Glenn Greenwald helpfully pointed out, the editors of the NYT - America's allegedly liberal newspaper - reserve the word "terrorist" solely for use in conjunction with the word "Muslim". When news emerged that the perpetrator of the murders - the terrorist - was a man whose religion and skin pigmentation closely resembled those of the editors of the NYT, the story changed. The terrorist became a deranged "Christian extremist" whose tactics clearly mirrored "Al Qaeda's brutality and multiple attacks".  In that way, the paper linked the terrorist with Muslims, despite his strong antipathy for them. Blame for the Western media's panting pursuit of a non-existent Muslim triggerman quickly focused on the feckless, credulous, overeager and inept source of the NYT's journalistic failure. Will McCants - proclaimed by one of his acolytes to be at the top of a "list of five terrorism experts you can trust" - was quickly discredited. In his defence, he only sought to affirm the confirmation bias that he and the editors of the NYT suffer from. The meme that underpins their worldview goes something like this: "Muslims are bad. When bad things happen, Muslims are responsible." This is a mainstream view in the US today; it cuts across party lines. blah....blah......blah.....blah..... foaming at the mouth and falling backwards.... The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy. (original story link here)

Ahm Maybeemuslim is a world citizen who identifies with whatever group provides the best credibility and fast track career options. Boston attack reveals world of hatred Initial reactions to the attacks in Boston showed a "clash of civilisations" exists, but not in the way many understood. Last Modified: 24 Jul 2011 14:40 It is a credit to liberalism in the USA, that the country's president did not respond to the attack with fear or vicious speculation The Chechen terrorist who murdered 4 civilians - one of whom was an 8 year old - did not act alone. Or rather, he acted within a cultural and political context that legitimises his fearful and hate-infested worldview. It is now clear that Tamerlan Tsarnaev was exposed to large amounts of muslim propaganda. This tragedy underlines the urgency with which normal people around the world must combat fundamentalist muslims and terrorist sympathisers wherever they may be. But it also demonstrates the extent to which cowering appeasement has infected mainstream thought. Many reacted to the news from Boston with wide eyes and a pointed finger. The most animated progressives took to the media to issue sweeping proclamations about the innocence of Muslims and something called "Islamophobia". In many ways, readers were merely reinforcing the media's woefully editorialised reportage. As Bill Maher helpfully pointed out, to a liberal professor attempting to equate the worldwide incidence of Muslim terror attacks with radicalism in other religions - "that's liberal bullshit, right there"". When news emerged that the perpetrator of the murders - the terrorist - was a man whose religion and skin pigmentation closely resembled those of so many previous Muslim fanatics, the story changed. The terrorist became just another "atypical" Muslim whose radicalism arose from resentment and deprivation caused by others - perhaps in this case "the ruthless displacement of Muslims" by Stalin (Perhaps, the east considers him part of thre general culpability of the west as well !). The common thread in the vast bulk of media coverage will be more desperate arguments attributing the motive of the terrorist to someone or something other than the ideology of islamofascism. Islamofascism hides within the religion of Islam just as other fascists hide within nationalism. But, whereas much of the press hysterically spreads blame for the violence a "right-winger" to every planetary conservative voice, acts of "islamofascists" are rarely linked with the ideology that spawned them.   The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily, but probably, reflect 5thColumn's editorial policy. This way we get to publish it under our banner without taking responsibility.