Pin It

On January 7th, 2014, Muslim terrorists armed with AK 47’s stormed  the headquarters of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. Their target? Stephane Charbonnier, the magazine’s editor and one of the top 10 most wanted people on Al Qaeda’s hit list.

The terrorists threatened a staff member and forced their way into the building, after which they…

…went straight to the conference room. They looked round the room and said, ‘Where’s Charb? Where’s Charb?’ They killed him, and then they sprayed the rest of the room with gunfire.

They left 11 people dead on the floor.

As the terrorists exited the building, they found a police cruiser blocking the street. Shouting “Allahu Akbar”, they exchanged fire with the police and blasted the cruiser with their AK’s. They fought their way to their car and started driving away.

But then, they stopped.

Lying there on the sidewalk was a wounded French police officer, also Muslim. They got out of the car, casually walked up to the officer, who had his hands up, and shot him point blank in the head. Then they got back in the car and sped away.

These terrorists murdered 12 people in cold blood. All because they were offended by cartoons.

The Media Response

Across Europe, condemnation of the attacks was swift. Many journalists recognized – correctly – that these terrorists were not just attacking a magazine, but FREEDOM ITSELF.  To fight back, numerous media outlets committed to publishing the magazine covers that the terrorists had sought to suppress.

A few even dedicated their front pages to the cause:

Berlin’s daily newspaper BZ tomorrow: RT @PeterHuth: BZ est Charlie pic.twitter.com/VFj5olQOuh
— Wolfgang Blau (@wblau) January 7, 2015

@colettebrowne @telegraaf frontpage as well inside pic.twitter.com/nf0Pt5EHCF
— RedBullRody (@RedBullRody) January 7, 2015

Titelseite der Berliner Zeitung von morgen pic.twitter.com/uLZEzYxUuY
— Ralph Kotsch (@blz_kotsch) January 7, 2015

On social media, the hashtag #jesuischarlie began trending as individuals joined in the protest.

But, just as some organizations were rising up in defense of freedom, others were running for cover.

The Associated Press was one of the first to take flight.

Under the guise of sensitivity, the AP began removing images that might be deemed offensive to Muslims. To make sure everyone knew that their content was no longer haram, Paul Colford, an AP spokesman, released a statement saying:

None of the images distributed by AP showed cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad…It’s been our policy for years that we refrain from moving deliberately provocative images.

Strangely, that concern did not seem to apply to other religious groups.

The Washington Examiner called out the hypocrisy by pointing out that for years, the AP had provided images of Piss Christ, an image considered highly offensive to Christians. But instead of defending its journalistic rights to supply controversial content, the AP responded by removing those images, as well.

Without ever having been threatened, the Associated Press, one of the largest news gathering organizations in the world, voluntarily censored itself.

The majority of US media organizations followed suit.

Like the AP, US media outlets steadfastly refused to publish any of the Charlie Hebdo covers. They justified their decisions with big words and noble sounding sentiments. But behind all the talk, they were really just scared.

Specifically, they were scared of offending Muslims. They were afraid that if they said the wrong thing or showed the wrong picture, they might get attacked. And in the face of that fear, they beat a pre-emptive retreat.

The American press choose to exercise the right to remain silent instead of their freedom of speech. And their silence spoke volumes. It told the terrorists, “You win.” It said, “Terrorism works.” And it said, “We will do whatever you want, just don’t hurt us.”

Look at the New York Times. The times is supposed to be one of America’s papers of record. And yet, despite the fact that cartoons were the central reason that terrorists attacked Charlie Hebdo, this supposed ‘paper of record’ will not even print them to record them for posterity.

Executive editor Dean Baquet tried to justify the NYT’s cowardice by saying:

We have a standard that is long held and that serves us well: that there is a line between gratuitous insult and satire. Most of these are gratuitous insult… At what point does news value override our standards?

What Baquet fails to understand is that publishing the cartoons is no longer about satirizing Islam. It is about showing the American public what Muslim terrorists are willing to commit mass murder over. The covers absolutely need to be seen in order to understand that context. But Baquet is more worried about hurting people’s feelings.

At least, so he says.

If that was truly the case, then why was the New York Times perfectly comfortable publishing images insulting to jews, asians, and blacks? If racism and antisemitism were okay, why did the Times suddenly draw the line with Islam? Maybe because they were not worried about violent reprisals from jews, asians, or blacks.

NBC, ABC, and CNN were all scared, too. CNN even put out this mealy mouthed memo:

Although we are not at this time showing the Charlie Hebdo cartoons of the Prophet considered offensive by many Muslims, platforms are encouraged to verbally describe the cartoons in detail. [emphasis added]

Notice how CNN takes the viewpoint of possibly offended Muslims but completely ignores the viewpoint of the murder victims?  You can see the same mindset in action at the Washington Post:

Editor’s note: An earlier version of this article included images offensive to various religious groups that did not meet the Post’s standards, and should not have been published. They have been removed.

That is what it looks like when religious sentiment dictates editorial guidelines.

And that is what cowards sound like when they try to defend it.

Remember when Americans believed things like this:

Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. – Abraham Lincoln

And this:

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. – Benjamin Franklin

Those days are gone. Just like the great Americans who said them. And just like the brave people from Charlie Hebdo who died defending those exact ideals.

RIP.

2 Responses

  1. Tom Simpson

    Islamist terrorists in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Chechnya and Paris, all have one thing in common. They come from the spin offs of the Mujahideen who were recruited and trained by Western governments, and the Saudis, to fight the communist Russian invaders of Afghanistan, back in the late 70’s. It is no secret that London has long been the recruitment center for Islamist fighters who are willing to die for Allah. Such were the two brothers who raided the Charley Hebdo offices, killing 12 people before they were later killed themselves. One of the brothers was recruited by the one eyed cleric in London who goes by the name of Abu Hamza. Ironically Abu Hamza’s attorney’s claimed their client was in the employ of MI5, Britain’s equivalent of the FBI. Hamza got life in prison yesterday after being tried in the United States. It has been suggested by many, that had the 28 pages in the joint congressional 911 report been declassified, as Obama twice promised the 911 families of those killed, but so far refuses to do it, this terrorists problem may have already been cleaned up by now. Because it’s main funders and supporters, Saudi Arabia and the UK, would have been forced to cease and desist in it’s terrorists supporting activities. That did not happen and the terrorists attacks continue to this day.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.