Shabana Syed: Why the ‘rise in crimes against Muslims’ becoming a dangerous fact?
IN America the terrorist threat posed by radical Islam has been exaggerated, according to a study by researchers at Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
In Europe, less than 300 acts of terrorism were registered in 2009, only one was an attack from an Islamist group, according to figures released by the EU’s police agency Europol.
Yet western countries continue to live in terror of Muslims, a fear propagated and perpetuated by the media. Nearly all mainstream news networks seem to follow the same ethos: “Not all Muslims are terrorists, but nearly all terrorists are Muslims.”
However reality points to a different direction which no one is really interested to see.
On the FBI’s official website, there exists a list of all terrorist attacks committed on US soil from the year 1980 all the way to 2005. According to this data, there were more Jewish acts of terrorism within the United States than Islamic.
Yet the situation in the West is becoming critical to the extent that Amnesty International (AI) USA has recently issued a warning of “fear discrimination and persecution against Muslims amidst a rising tide of crimes committed against them.”
A recent example of how the media perpetuates “Muslims are terrorists myth” was when the Daily Express newspaper in the UK on its front page falsely labeled six men as “Al-Qaeda-linked terrorists plotting to kill the pope,” but only mentioned they had been released without any charge two days later in a small sentence on page 9.
Other papers wrote similar statements but according to Media Watch the Express went so far as to fabricate “facts” stating: “It is feared plotters with links to Al-Qaeda planned “a double blow to the infidel” by assassinating the head of the Roman Catholic church and slaughtering hundreds of pilgrims and well-wishers.”
Need we stress again and again, had this paper made up this story involving other ethnic or religious groups, there would have been an outcry of racism, or anti-Semitism, and the paper would be threatened with closure for incitement to hatred.
The question arises who are the decision-makers, who are promoting anti-Islam bigotry which is clearly evident in mainstream newspapers and TV channels. The question needs to be addressed urgently to pinpoint why there is an alarming rise in attacks and discrimination on Muslims?
For example the BBC is not so “objective” as it claims to be, its reputation lies in tatters over its continual pro-Israel and anti-Muslim bias, which has become increasingly evident.
Many television license fee payers want to know why when Mark Thompson took over as head of the BBC in 2004, he compromised the rules of independent journalism and visited Israel to meet the notorious Ariel Sharon to “build bridges” between Israel and the BBC?
According to a report in The Independent in 2005 a source at the BBC explained, “Not many people know this, but Mark is actually a deeply religious man. He’s a Catholic, but his wife is Jewish and he has a far greater regard for the Israeli cause than some of his predecessors.”
The BBC was criticized during Israel’s operation Cast Lead in Gaza, many complained that its journalists used the Israeli government’s narrative in its reporting, and the final insult to the thousands of injured and maimed Palestinian men, women and children was when the station did not broadcast the charity appeal.
When Israeli commandos boarded the aid flotilla and killed nine Turkish peace activists, the BBC’s Panorama program was accused of bias for using Israeli fabricated video footage to support the story. Anthony Lawson an independent documentary maker argues: Panorama’s biased and often untruthful treatment of Israel’s worst atrocity since Operation Cast Lead should trigger a public inquiry about who is really in charge of one of the most influential broadcaster’s on the planet.”
The BBC’s support for Israel may have always been there but was less obvious. A news piece highlighted by the 9/11 Truth Movement makes one wonder to what extent is there media collusion with governments? The 9/11 Truth Movement have highlighted the fact that on Sept. 11 the BBC did a live report announcing that the Salomon building (World Trade Center 7) had collapsed, a half hour before it actually did, the footage shows clearly the building is still up and not damaged!
The claim that most of the media is owed by Zionists may not be so farfetched, in America alone Jews own CBS, NBC, ABC, Time, Newsweek, and these are just a few of them. They also own powerful publications like the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post which sets the trends on what is news and this may explain the similar narratives used in all news reports.
The facts that Jews probably own most of the mainstream media should be a positive fact, because they have suffered centuries of oppression and will therefore have empathy with those being persecuted.
So what is baffling is, instead of showing empathy why are these media outlets propagating anti-Muslim sentiments?
The answer is quite simple, being Jewish is a good thing, but being a Zionist is a problem, and it appears that the mainstream media is blatantly following the Zionist expansionist agenda at the expense of Muslims.
Israel has been attempting to make the term Jews synonymous with Zionism, but it can’t, because Judaism is a peaceful religion that follows the teachings of the Torah, while Zionism is a political fascist movement that follows the teaching of the Talmud which propagates segregation and argues that compassion should only be reserved for the Jews and not the rest of humanity.
There are many Jews who disagree with Zionism, the Neturei Karta is one such group they are against the “Heretic regime” and actively support the Palestinian cause.
Another example is the many Jewish peace activists from all over Europe who are at present on their way to Gaza to break Israel’s blockade and deliver aid.
Also some of the most influential and critical works written against Zionism is by Jews like Ilan Pappe, Norman Finklestein and Gilad Atzmon.
Atzmon a famous musician and an ex Israeli soldier writes: “Many of us, the critical voices of Zionism and Israel, have already realized something: it is advisable to avoid using the ‘J’ word. Once you use the ‘J’ word you had better expect some serious trouble. He explains… ‘You will have to face an orchestrated smear campaign, you will be then called an ‘anti Semite’, a ‘new historian’ and even a ‘holocaust denier.’”
The attempt to control the flow of information and opinion is a constant battle for Zionists, Israel has its supporters based all over and many have been given the task to watch news and views. One can see how active they become attacking Muslims as “terrorists” and undermining articles and authors who don’t portray Israel in a good light.
At present we can still bypass the mainstream media’s narrative by using the Internet. Many writers and intellectuals who have difficulty in publishing their views have found an outlet on the net.
However there is already a threat that this outlet will also be monitored with a “kill switch” to prevent free flow of information. Sen. Joe Lieberman has introduced a bill in Congress which aims to shut down the Internet in an instance. According to the bill the entire global Internet is to be claimed as a “national asset” of the United States and the “kill switch” will be used in the event of a national emergency.
This is the same senator who has done more than anyone to curb civil liberties and according to Mark Vogel, Chairman of pro-Israel Political Action Committee, USA: “Joe Lieberman… is the No.1 pro-Israel advocate and leader in Congress?… There is nobody who does more on behalf of Israel than Joe Lieberman.”