Honestreporting.com presented New York Times editorialist Thomas Friedman's response to his own question about the similarities between the terrorists of the Islamofacist world to Israeli "settlers". Friedman wrote as follows: "More than you'd think. Both movements combine religious messianism, and a willingness to sacrifice their followers and others for absolutist visions, along with a certain disdain for man-made laws, as opposed to those from God. The big question in both Iraq and Israel today is also similar: Will the silent majorities in both countries finally turn against these extremist minorities to save their future?"
My responses to Mr. Friedman's diabolical work, and the New York Times' willingness to publish such incitements and rewards for Islamofacist terrorism, are as follows:
1) Daniel Pearl and Nicholas Berg were brutally and savagely decapitated during an obvious bloodfest of satanic cultist proportions, while Mr. Thomas Friedman morally decapitated himself with apparent attempts to prove his arrogant intellectual prowess (the ability to distort reality, compare apples to oranges, fit square pegs into round holes and the like).
2) Thomas Friedman and the New York Times are complicit in offering succor and encouragement to the vilest form of what some may wish to describe as belonging to the human race, since Hitler and his Nazi terrorists. As surely as I am writing this, Friedman and his accomplices at the Times had their virtual "hands" on the knives that severed the heads of Pearl and Berg from their bodies, and these "journalists" and editors had their intellectually depraved literary "fingers" on the trigger of the guns of the Palestinian savages who gleefully pumped numerous AK47 rounds into the pregnant Tali Hautel and her four daughters (an Israeli "settler" family).
3) What motivations allow such a morally, intellectually and ethically confused man like Friedman to hold such a prestigious position with what attempts to be a respectable newspaper? What drives the New York Times and its intellectually and morally challenged staff? Is it money? Is it a blatant example of a severe thought disorder bordering on mental illness? Is it power? Is it cowardice? Is it sensationalism for profit?
It certainly cannot be for the purpose of reporting truth or a balanced view. It certainly cannot be for the purpose of protecting innocent civilian lives, unless those lives are Islamofacist terrorists and their supporters. It certainly cannot be for the purpose of bringing peace and harmony to the world, unless peace means appeasing evil while, wittingly or unwittingly, helping to destroy good, in the hope that evil will spare those who sold their souls to the devil.
4) Could it even be possible that hatred and anti-Israel sentiment is behind the kind of intellectual dribble that Mr. Friedman vomits up for his audience?
5) Joseph Goebbles, the Nazi propaganda minister, could not have done a better job for the Nazi cause than Friedman and the New York Times are doing for the cause of Islamic terrorism.
6) The New York Times newspaper and editorial staff have become, at best, a shameful barometer warning us of just how far so many of us have declined in this country in the pursuit of profit and sensationalism, while displaying arrogance and cowardice (bravely trashing Israel, while carefully trying to protect Islamic terrorism). That is what is truly humiliating and dangerous to the United States and the civilized world.
7) Is it any wonder that more and more people are turning to the conservative media for responsible depictions of the news, and some measure of morality, ethics and sanity?
My responses to Mr. Friedman's diabolical work, and the New York Times' willingness to publish such incitements and rewards for Islamofacist terrorism, are as follows:
1) Daniel Pearl and Nicholas Berg were brutally and savagely decapitated during an obvious bloodfest of satanic cultist proportions, while Mr. Thomas Friedman morally decapitated himself with apparent attempts to prove his arrogant intellectual prowess (the ability to distort reality, compare apples to oranges, fit square pegs into round holes and the like).
2) Thomas Friedman and the New York Times are complicit in offering succor and encouragement to the vilest form of what some may wish to describe as belonging to the human race, since Hitler and his Nazi terrorists. As surely as I am writing this, Friedman and his accomplices at the Times had their virtual "hands" on the knives that severed the heads of Pearl and Berg from their bodies, and these "journalists" and editors had their intellectually depraved literary "fingers" on the trigger of the guns of the Palestinian savages who gleefully pumped numerous AK47 rounds into the pregnant Tali Hautel and her four daughters (an Israeli "settler" family).
3) What motivations allow such a morally, intellectually and ethically confused man like Friedman to hold such a prestigious position with what attempts to be a respectable newspaper? What drives the New York Times and its intellectually and morally challenged staff? Is it money? Is it a blatant example of a severe thought disorder bordering on mental illness? Is it power? Is it cowardice? Is it sensationalism for profit?
It certainly cannot be for the purpose of reporting truth or a balanced view. It certainly cannot be for the purpose of protecting innocent civilian lives, unless those lives are Islamofacist terrorists and their supporters. It certainly cannot be for the purpose of bringing peace and harmony to the world, unless peace means appeasing evil while, wittingly or unwittingly, helping to destroy good, in the hope that evil will spare those who sold their souls to the devil.
4) Could it even be possible that hatred and anti-Israel sentiment is behind the kind of intellectual dribble that Mr. Friedman vomits up for his audience?
5) Joseph Goebbles, the Nazi propaganda minister, could not have done a better job for the Nazi cause than Friedman and the New York Times are doing for the cause of Islamic terrorism.
6) The New York Times newspaper and editorial staff have become, at best, a shameful barometer warning us of just how far so many of us have declined in this country in the pursuit of profit and sensationalism, while displaying arrogance and cowardice (bravely trashing Israel, while carefully trying to protect Islamic terrorism). That is what is truly humiliating and dangerous to the United States and the civilized world.
7) Is it any wonder that more and more people are turning to the conservative media for responsible depictions of the news, and some measure of morality, ethics and sanity?