Skip to content

Why Is It That Even Accurate Commentary About Islam Seems To Involve A Disclaimer?

November 14, 2009

o'reilly1220541851

What happens when Islam comes up in the "No-Spin Zone"?

In what appears to be the latest socially acceptable way to condemn Islamo-Fascism while still appearing to be reasonable and inclusive, many commentators have taken to excoriating Terrorists while still reminding the rest of us that Muslims are “good people” who, when it comes right down to it, are “just like us,” with the same wants, goals, likes and dislikes.

Bill O’Reilly has been doing it a lot lately: In his November 11th Talking Points Memo he makes a reasonable case for why Nidal Malik Hasan should be called a “…Muslim terrorist, period. He killed out of blind hatred. He is a villain and there is no excuse for his rampage.”

All well and good.

But then Mr. O’Reilly takes great pains to make sure we comprehend what his central belief is:

“We do, however, continue to believe that most Muslims are good people, and I understand they must be protected, but not to a ridiculous degree”.

May I ask whom they need to be protected from?

He does the same thing later in the program in his Back Of The Book segment with Fox News Anchor Jane Skinner:

O’Reilly and Skinner are in total agreement that they disavow Reverend Pat Robertson’s thesis that “Islam is a violent political system bent on the overthrow of the governments of the world.”

O’Reilly poses the following inquiry to Ms. Skinner:

“So Jane: Does that do any good for America, or for anybody, slamming Islam like that?”

“Certainly not”, she replies.

Even Rich Lowry, in an otherwise excellent post in the National Review Online (The PTSD Evasion) makes the argument that

“Obviously, Hasan isn’t a representative American Muslim, nor is his act an indictment of Muslims in the military. We can acknowledge both those things without laboring to obscure the nature of his crime in childish evasions.”

Far be it from me to dispute the efficacy of those types of statements: It’s not like I know a lot of guys down at the local Mosque and hang out with them when their prayers are done for the day.

But it is awful tough to believe a religion whose stated goal is to destroy or enslave anyone who is a non-believer is capable of putting out a lot of devout followers who want to co-exist peacefully with the rest of us.

There might be a couple, or even 10 or 20, or for that matter, more than 2,000. I wish them well and salute their bravery.

But to think that “most” Muslims don’t subscribe to the deadly theology that its Imams and seers and Mullahs advocate is to be, well… a tad naive.

Don’t you think?

Advertisements
20 Comments
  1. Lisa Urbani permalink
    November 14, 2009 3:18 pm

    You took the words right out of my mouth. I also notice that those who provide the disclaimer regaring Islam and “most Muslims” don’t afford the same to Christians. When a pro-lifer guns down an abortionist, they don’t say that most Christians and/or pro-lifers are good people and don’t advocate murder. They make sure to point out that he was a Christian pro-lifer.

    Most people in America who are non-Muslim have no idea what that religion teaches. Just because the Muslims you run into in your daily life seem like very nice people, doesn’t mean they are not like Hasan. Even his neighbor said that he seemed like a nice man.

    Political Correctness is a blight on society and will be our undoing.

  2. John Davidson permalink
    November 14, 2009 4:04 pm

    Recently, I have notice a definite change in O’Reilly’s approach to the problems beset Obama’s political team. In fact, soon after he moved center left, he proposed openly that he would be willing to join the team in the White House as a quarterback. Since that time, he has brought more Democrats on his show including a rather docile Hill whom was banished earlier. Either he was thumbing his nose at Rupert or he was showing off his power to Obama.
    I will let you ponder that assessment.

    I think his ego has balloned, not uncommon historically and usually it is self-distructive.

  3. Mary permalink
    November 14, 2009 4:17 pm

    Hell yes.

    I am sick of people glossing over Islamic theology.

    Pat Robertson is right, and I know why he is so forceful, it is becuase he studies Theology, and is familiar with his own, and Islam’s.

    And so do I.

    Once you know the truth, there is no going back.

    People really need to turn off the tv and start educating themselves on Islamic theology…….

    My 2 cents

  4. William James Ward permalink
    November 14, 2009 7:09 pm

    George Bush called Islam a religion of peace, now maybe Bill O has
    siped some of that coolaid. You can’t have it both ways with Islam,
    telling people that believe you are dead meat if not one of them, that
    they are against members of their own religion that are killing you,Well! How about them making that statement and profusely denouncing
    the murderers. That is not happening and who in their right mind would
    believe anything they say when they are silently complicit. Muslims
    do not share anything with any culture but their own. I remember
    the left media going berserk with reports American soldiers desecrated
    a copy of the koran. How dastardly we must be to do so, what type of
    low life scum could do such a thing yet Muslims are blowing up Mosques
    with Muslims they disagree with who are holding the koran in their
    exploding hands. Islamophobia may exist but for me and my friends we
    know who we will share life with and who wants us dead is not on the
    party list. In Europe the Muslims do not assimilate but make more and
    more demands that the European conform to their way of life. When the
    day comes that the Muslims are in great enough numbers, guess what.
    The conclusion is already written in the Koran. If the infidel does not
    convert or become subservant they will become headless.

    Bill O needs to rethink the whole nice guy immage he wants to project,
    he comes off well on most issues most of the time but drops the
    ball on Muslim complicity. I must say this and will continue to do so,
    “There are no Muslim immigrants, only colonists”.

    Remember that there are people that could care less about Muslims and
    see no one as a threat but are anti-semetic and by default are not
    taking action by thought, word or deed to act against Muslim
    atrocities. There are those who are blocking their minds deliberately
    due to fear and cowardness and see no evil, hear no evil and speak no
    evil. None of which lessens the danger to everyone by a life group that
    is moving towards global domination and playing everyone like the proverbial fiddle. In the overall play of good versus evil, it is
    somehow obvious that the left and Islam are on the same wrong side and
    use each other toward their sinister ends. Reverand Pat Robinson is
    not deluded and sees clearly what Islam teaches and knows exactly
    what is transpiring on the world stage. Those that are anti-Israeli and
    more than ready to be anti-Christian are endemic in the media, it is
    a taint that they efuse and that ever so faintly sticks even to
    some quasi conservative journalists causing disclaimers where nothing
    needs be disclaimed. On the other hand there are enough phony baloney
    self serving people in the world to create any format for the old
    slip and slide around issues dance floor, on this issue I would pass
    on ameloriating my words to Islam in asking for condemnation of their
    more zelot fellows. In so doing I fully expect to never hear any unified
    Muslim voice decrying violence and killing in the subjugation of the
    world’s people. Pat Robinson would probably say “pray for the convesion
    of Islam”, Pat believes in miracles and that is just what it would
    take to change the course of the world as we know it. To say Pat is not
    saying anything that does no good is in itself surfeit and does not
    address the central issue of Islamist activism, violence and disdain
    of other beliefs. John Nampion makes a very loud point.

    • Quentin Daniels permalink
      November 15, 2009 2:50 pm

      I have taken your quote ““There are no Muslim immigrants, only colonists” and used it – with attribution, on my Facebook page. Excellent point, sir.

  5. gobnait permalink
    November 14, 2009 7:43 pm

    O’Reilly is deliberately attempting to distance himself from anyone with strong opinions against the current administration suck as Beck and Hannity. He is spineless in the trenches and an opportunist who sees his ‘moderate’ affect as a means to attract new viewers. I don’t think he has any real opinions about any topic.

  6. November 14, 2009 8:08 pm

    I have heard all the stories about Robertson’s “prophecies”, and of course have witnessed the disdain “intellectuals” have for his belief that certain events were God’s “punishment” for our “sins”….

    Whatever – say what you want – he seems to be one of the few out there right now that doesn’t have blinders on relative to Islam’s wish to destroy us all.

    When is the last time you witnessed a Christian or a Jew behead a Muslim because he was “defiling” our “holy land” with his presence?

    Individual Christians can certainly be evil, but show me where we have been instructed by a prophet to annhilate all competition.

    The message is one of love and forgiveness and life versus one of total destruction.

    Please forgive me for not feeling very loving right now.

    • PRCS permalink
      November 15, 2009 8:14 pm

      If you’d like to witness a grotesquely ignorant analysis of Muslims and Islam and Muslims in the Military, by truly ignorant people (Rivera, Rivera’s brother, and Sharpton) try to catch the rerun of ‘Geraldo at Large’ this evening.

      The blind leading the blind.

  7. dajjal permalink
    November 14, 2009 9:32 pm

    In my opinion, the professionals who earn their living by presiding over television & radio broadcasts, selling books and lecture fees include their disclaimers for two primary reasons.
    1. Disclaimers promote an image of open minded moderation.
    2. Disclaimers are expected to ward off lawfare attacks by C.A.I.R. & co.

    A correct comprehension of Islam requires reading its canon of scripture, tradition, exegeses & jurisprudence. It is estimated that only 17% of Muslims have read the Qur’an.

    Those who have the time and patience to wade through the drek can find most of it in the Expanded Library at Crusader’s Armory. Others can find a relevant sampling of the most important parts in EgregiousAyat.chm

  8. Steve permalink
    November 15, 2009 4:53 am

    Here’s my take on “radical” Muslims and “moderate” Muslims. Radical Muslims know their Quran, live by its teachings, and follow Muhammad in his violence; Moderate Muslims do not know their Quran, do not live by its principles (although they think they do), and do not follow Muhammad in every violent detail. Having said that, however, far too many moderate and peaceful Muslims sympathize with the Radicals, although they do not go to the extreme of killing others. They let others (Radicals) do it for them. This way they have their cake and eat it, too! — while basking in the sunshine of freedom provided by the Kafirs.

    • peachey permalink
      November 15, 2009 12:19 pm

      Steve, your take is accurate. Having many ex-Muslims as friends (now Christian) they frequently speak of the folly of ignoring Islam’s true core philosophy of colonization,then to conquer, enslavement and the institution of Sharia law. The difficlty with attempting to understand Islam comes from the Wests inability to understand a death culture and it’s violent forward thinking agenda. It may take Islam 50 years to overwhelm Europe in numbers but they are content to quietly and persistently persue this goal. America is the king of targets. Through organizations such as CAIR and other Muslim apologists, they are gaining not only a political and population foothold, but are suceeding in changing the public face of Islam through dis-information and effectively glossing over the true content of the Koran. The need to expose Islam for what it really is paramount unless you desire to have you or your family blown up or your head cut off for being an infidel.The danger is real and on our doorsteps.

    • PRCS permalink
      November 15, 2009 8:04 pm

      Steve,

      I must disagree.

      True Muslims, those Slaves of Allah, those literalists, are not ‘radical’ Muslims.

      I’m sure you mean well, but the phrases ‘radical Muslim’, ‘radical Islam’, and ‘Muslim extremists’–as examples–perpetuate the false impression that Muslim literalists are operating outside the teachings and tenets of Islam; a myth that clueless ‘journalists’ like Jane Skinner–a nice woman who has probably never read even a single passage from Qur’an, Hadith or Sira’h–has obviously bought into.

      I’m sure she has no idea that Robertson’s “dismissal of an entire religion” is exactly what the West needs to do; for the entire ‘religion’, the Ummah, from Usama bin Laden (wherever he is) to Grandma Fatima in Detroit know what Islam really does teach.

      Take care.

  9. richard permalink
    November 15, 2009 7:42 am

    o’reilly began softening his rhetoric on obama when he saw the writing on the wall. he wants to be included. i think he sees it as a survival technique. however obama will never warm up to fox unless it subscribes, & bows to the exact philosophy as msnbc, etc. there is nothing about fairness to this administration.
    in terms of islam fox is not balanced, and fair.

  10. cdn4freedom permalink
    November 15, 2009 10:25 am

    It’s a distraction to avoid what they really should be discussing which is specifically how Islam is inspiring “radicals” at home and worldwide. This can’t be done as long as Islamic doctrine as spelled out in the Quran and Hadith are defined as a “NO GO” zone for critique.

  11. mar permalink
    November 15, 2009 1:09 pm

    In Feb/March 2007 i read on the FOx Web site that a ‘Saudi investor’ had contacted R.Murdoch, the owner of newscorp/FoxNews and told him to STOP
    using the words ‘muslim terrorists’ or ‘muslim riots’ (in Paris). The effect was that very night and forward those terms were never used again. If you go onto the Daniel Pipes website you will find another story of the same ‘Saudi’ and the newspapers in the UK.
    When this murder came up at Ft. Hood i sent an e-mail to Fos and made the statement that this man is a Muslim Terrorist. Period. And that i was aware that Fox Hosts were not to speak the words against muslims.
    I was shocked that Bill O that very night spoke the words. !! WOW.
    SO ‘maybe’ that is part of why the sudden change. I choose to get my
    news from this site or Jihad Watch, ACT and those sites as i get the
    truth!! Not babble about teens in the slums of where ever, etc etc.
    So the change has been pleasant for me. Maybe r.Murdoch bought back
    his stock from the ‘saudi’.

  12. November 16, 2009 7:56 am

    Are we headed for the same fate europe is facing now… Their culture has been completly dominated by muslims… Now its our tern … Wake up america !

  13. Will Marshall permalink
    November 16, 2009 4:57 pm

    Speaking first of Europe…If the time comes, when the time comes, for Muslims to choose between supporting radical Islam or standing by and with the countries that have extended a welcome to them, with whom do you believe they will ally themselves?

    Then comes America.

Trackbacks

  1. Keeping the Cable Guys Honest « Ramparts 360
  2. Islamofascism: Islam is as Islam does « Get d'Clu
  3. Steynian 398 « Free Canuckistan!

Comments are closed.