When terrorism doesn't matter

So, an extremist wing of the IRA is back in action by killing soldiers and policemen, and in a matter of hours, two shooting sprees claim several lives, one in Alabama, one in Germany.

What do these incidents have in common? None of them involved any Muslim terrorists. So imagine my surprise, when these stories passed by unreported on Little Green Footballs, Jihad Watch and Atlas Shrieks. Has it become a dogma that only Muslim nutters count, and that armed assaults on children inside schools are insignificant, or why are these veteran terrorist hunters silent? In terms of statistics, in the US and Europe, your kids are less safer in their own school from random maniacs than they are from any attacks by Muslims. So why -pray- should these professional pundits report on them?

Alas, if these people were pressed into mentioning it, Charles Johnson would quote the news site, along with a snarky prediction that the Euroweenies will clamp down on guns even further, Robert Spencer would feverishly explain that the young German murderer is not of Muslim background, and thus cannot by any standard be called a real terrorist, and Pamela (Shrieking Harpy) Geller.. Well, she would dig up a conspiracy theory on how young Tim Kretschmer came in contact with a Turkish pupil in his school, whose father knew somebody whose cousin back in Turkey listened to a sermon by a radical Imam condemning the West, and thus "proving" how this horrible incident is clear proof of creeping Jihad that will turn all trees gray and cause all our hair to drop out.

God forbid there were one Mahmoud included in these stories, in which case there would've been reports from said deskchair fighters all day long.

No comment

Charles Johnson:

Our Friends the Saudis

Saudi Arabia announced today that they have arrested 520 people for terrorism. Of course, when they use the word “terrorism” it could mean almost anything, from mass murder to publishing cartoons.

"RIYADH (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia has detained 520 people suspected of being involved in terrorism, state television reported on Wednesday."

BBC News on the same story:

Saudi Arabia is holding 520 suspected militants following raids across the kingdom this year, its interior ministry says.

They are accused of links to what it called the "deviant group" - a term used for al-Qaeda by Saudi officials.

They said the accused were of various nationalities and had been plotting attacks in and outside Saudi Arabia.

You decide..

Beware the Paisley Intifada

Pharyngula, the science blogger, gets the whole scarf issue right. He remarks;

But she is wearing a scarf, and as we all know, good Americans wear only traditional American clothes, which do not include scarves.

It's amazing that such a trivial issue gets blown up out of all proportion by the shrieking heads of the right wing blogosphere.

The most alarming fact he comments on however is that the scarf has a paisley design. Now far be it for me to point out the problem there and not being an expert on Palestinian couture, unlike a certain Californian blogger, but I've never seen terrorists draped in paisley.

Another question from Chuckles

Charles asks the following question in the headline to one of his open threads.

Should America Have a President Who Associates with America-Haters?

I don't know Charles, what do you think?

....raises questions about U.S. policy, which has consistently supported the Saudi oil monarchy in spite of its refusal to cooperate with the United States in investigations of terrorist attacks against Americans.

Posted without comment

From McClatchy Newspapers

An exhaustive review of more than 600,000 Iraqi documents that were captured after the 2003 U.S. invasion has found no evidence that Saddam Hussein’s regime had any operational links with Osama bin Laden’s al Qaida terrorist network.

The Pentagon-sponsored study, scheduled for release later this week, did confirm that Saddam’s regime provided some support to other terrorist groups, particularly in the Middle East, U.S. officials told McClatchy. However, his security services were directed primarily against Iraqi exiles, Shiite Muslims, Kurds and others he considered enemies of his regime.

A quick question

When is it ok to promote a Islamo-Stalinist-terrorist cult?

When they're being promoted as an anti-Iranian Islamo-Stalinist-terrorist cult by of course. Of course the main person behind the promotion of this terrorist group is 'too soft on Islam' according to the LGF lizards.

The hypocrisy of the extreme right has never been so obscene.

Charles vindicated! Ehm...

Oh no, the dhimmi BBC has whitewashed Islamic terrorism again!

Charles Johnson, the terrorists' little helper

Clearly Charles Johnson gets more satisfaction out of a successful terrorist attack than a failed one. Why else would he patiently help them solve the technical difficulties they might face.

Bizarre!

Those evil journalists

Once again those dhimmi journalists in Euroland have been kow-towing to Islamofascism and denying the existence of terrorist cells on the continent while a lone voice of reason on the other side of the world (Charles Johnson) and his loony green friends battle valiantly to bring you the truth the lefty MSM won't.

With the help of a mere four videos stolen from 'UKTV', of course...

Terrorism 101 - Down Under

Number crunching

Number of people killed in Virginia Tech massacre: 33

Number of people killed in one Baghdad bomb blast: 120

Number of people killed in 9/11 terrorist attacks: about 3,000

Number of people killed annually with guns in the United States: about 30,000

Terrorism 101

While Charles Johnson accuses the EU of 'funding terrorists' by giving aid to the Palestinian Authority, and Iraqis who paid ransom money to get their loved ones out of the hands of murderers are refused entry into the US, a company which handed $1.7 million to a known terrorist group gets away almost scot-free and doesn't even get a blogospheric slap on the wrist from the terror-watchers-in-chief at LGF.

Ah, what a wonderful world.

Charles Johnson: Too stupid for Google News

Sometimes Charles Johnson makes it too easy for his opponents (in this case us!) to show him up for the ignorant, blinkered, bullshit spouter that he is.

Witness today's assertion by the Lizard King that "The Associated Press never uses the word 'terror' without enclosing it in quotes"

Then do a search for "Associated Press Terror" on Google News. Result? 7,357 hits. And that's just their recent output...

Granted, many instances will have the word appear in quotes. But many won't. There's terrorism in Indonesia, the Philippine terror leader, and the Somali terror suspects.

As for the use of the term 'terrorist', the wingnut-o-sphere really need to get a handle on why journalists are reluctant to use the term without extreme caution. Phil Rees' "Dining with Terrorists" is a good primer on the subjet.

So, the next time Charles accuses the MSM of stupidity or blatant lying, point him to this post.

LGF: Only Muslims can be terrorists

What do you call someone who shoots dead 24 people?

That depends on who the 'someone' is: if he's black, or Muslim, and doesn't wear uniform, then according to Charles Johnson you can call him a terrorist.

If he's American and a soldier, then you can't do that (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=23959). You can't even say he sowed 'terror' as he mowed down two dozen people. Per Johnson, that person has a right to a fair trial first, and even then probably cannot be called a terrorist because that term is reserved for darkies, foreigners, Muslims, people like that.

Just remember that!

P.S.: Is this terrorism, Charles? Or just a plain old-fashioned war crime? Your fans want to know, oh leader!