Tag Archives: moral equivalence

Is Brian Williams Crazy?

In the immediate aftermath of the ISIS terrorist attack in Munich, Germany, MSNBC anchor Brian Williams mused, “And why does it feel so strange to kind of root for it not being ISIS?”

Is Brian Williams Crazy

Let me respond to his question. It should feel strange to root for such a thing. Why root for the enemy? Would Christian terrorists or crazy right-wingers be preferable culprits?

Can you imagine anyone during World War II saying, “It feels so strange to kind of root for that bombing of London not being the work of the Nazis?” How many different enemies does Williams want?

Williams explained his irrational rationale – his deep desire – “to break the cycle [of ISIS] even though every death is an absolute tragedy and this just means we have deranged people without the affiliation?

He would prefer this attack had been committed by “deranged people” not affiliated with ISIS. Is Williams a “useful idiot” for a global terrorist network, a “fellow traveler” with those who seek to destroy Western Civilization?

Is Williams serious? In addition to being at war with a vast army of cruel barbarians intent upon destroying us to achieve their religious/ideological utopia based upon the Koran, Williams also wants more “deranged people” not affiliated with ISIS for us to combat.

Why? So he can feel good about being inclusive and dismiss the reality of Islamic jihad?

Williams’ sense of right and wrong requires believing that all religions are equal and all religions are capable of the barbarism on display almost daily in the news. No! They are not.

The Left’s constant moral equivalence during the Cold War between the West and the Evil Empire has shifted to an equally insane and suicidal moral equivalence between Muslim jihadists and Christian conservatives peacefully engaged in the political process.

Ever on the alert for mythical Christian terrorists to condemn, the Left is willfully blind to the Islamist threat we face every day.

But Williams merely follows in the footsteps of his ideological predecessors and comrades and who have been redefining terrorism for years.

In the immediate aftermath of the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, many commentators and members of the mainstream media jumped to the conclusion that that terrorist attack was committed by the “extreme right,” anti-government groups, or the Tea Party.

Few considered the most obvious culprit: a radicalized Islamic jihadist. An astonishing banner headline appeared on the Salon website: “Let’s Hope the Boston Marathon Bomber Is a White American.” Williams’ musing mirror Salon’s perspective.

The time has come to end the identity politics and political correctness which have plagued our nation for so many decades. Identity politics and political correctness have weakened America in every area of life and placed our nation and our people in jeopardy.

Let’s stop this nonsense!

Let’s recognize the enemy, name him, and defeat him!

While we still can!

“Right-Wing Terrorists” or Islamic Jihadists

The Left, again, confuses Islamic jihadists with so-called “right-wing terrorists.” These liberal attempts to demonize conservative views resurges whenever violence in America takes center stage in the national media.


A diatribe against conservatives, which recently appeared on The Daily Beast, is representative of these attacks. The writer, Dean Obeidallah, used a deeply-flawed partisan study (to be addressed in a future column) and deeply-flawed reasoning to suggest that non-existent “right-wing terrorism” is a greater threat than Islamic jihadists.

Defends Jihadists

As noted by acclaimed terrorism expert Robert Spencer,

“This is the same Dean Obeidallah who recently wrote this about the jihadists of Boko Haram, the Congregation of the People of the Sunnah for Dawah and Jihad: ‘The Nigerian terrorist group that kidnapped hundreds of schoolgirls has nothing to do with Islam, and it’s grotesquely irresponsible of the media to suggest it does.’”

Spencer continued:

“So an avowedly Islamic group that has repeatedly proclaimed that it is fighting in order to establish an Islamic state is not Islamic, and it’s ‘grotesquely irresponsible’ to suggest otherwise. The leader of Boko Haram, Abubakar Shekau, must have been ‘grotesquely irresponsible’ when he declared: ‘The reason why I will kill you is you are infidels … The Koran must be supreme, we must establish Islam in this country.’”

The Real Terrorist Threat

As I have noted in previous columns, the Left’s boogeymen – the NRA, the Tea Party, the Republican Party, pro-lifers, etc. – all condemn violence. These organizations and groups all denounce violence perpetrated by people who are demonstrably insane. None of these organizations is extremist, nor are they violent. Indeed, they eschew violence.

There is no “right-wing terrorism.” The so-called “right-wing terrorists” identified by the Left were not part of conservative organizations and their violent behavior proves they did not believe in conservative principles and values. Moreover, these individual extremists and killers were isolated, not part of a group.

In contrast, jihadists are part of a global terrorist network which seeks to subjugate or annihilate all non-Muslims, starting with the “Great Satan” (United States) and “Little Satan” (Israel).

Jihadists – by definition – are willing to use terrorism to achieve their goals.

Jihadists – in word and in deed – have demonstrated their commitment to destroy the enemy (us) and to establish a worldwide caliphate.

Simply put, conservatives proscribe violence; jihadists prescribe it.

Finding a moral equivalence between conservatives (who do not engage in terrorism) and jihadists (who thrive on terrorism) is disingenuous, impedes our efforts to combat the real enemy, and gives political aid and comfort to those who would harm America – jihadists.

Related: “Terrorism Redefined” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-S

“Left Politicizes Las Vegas Shootings” at http://t.co/dPKxyOnxsH.

“Let’s Stop the Insanity Over Gun Violence” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-1o