Thursday, September 27, 2012

A shocking assumption

 NY Post

Why did The New York Times just defame Muslims?

In a story yesterday, the paper termed a planned subway ad as “another potentially inflammatory rendering of Islam” — even comparing it to the Mohammed-mocking video blamed for the recent outbreak of Muslim violence worldwide.

What was so inflammatory about the ad?


“In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man,” the ad reads.

Hmm. That doesn’t sound inflammatory.
It ends: “Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.”

Also quite reasonable. (Plus a pretty fair summary of US Mideast policy — until relatively recently, anyway.)

So why would Muslims feel slighted by such an ad — unless they actually conflate savagery and jihad with their religion?

Is the Times suggesting Muslims do that?

Surely, many Muslims oppose terror and violence as a political or religious tool.
Many folks, Muslim or not, say Islam is a religion of peace — one that does not abide violence.

In assuming that they might take violent offense, the Times is implying that Muslims consider themselves savages.
Talk about inflammatory. Racist, too.

No comments: