Steyn on the NYT and WaPo Fear of Muslims

Mark Steyn has a column in the Washington Times [called to my attention when I was watching Leonard Downie of the WaPo grimace when a questioner asked this fraud and imposter about the Muslim problem as described in the WaTimes by Steyn] which nails the two most hypocritical double-think publications in the USA about the Plesiosaurus-in-the-aquarium, namely the Muslim problem in the USA. Bear in mind that most Arabs in the USA are Lebanese Christians, but now we are being inundated with violent riff-raff from Muslim countries. Moussaoui is an example, but even the so-called educated Muslims are seething with violent hatred, as per Steyn's piece:

"This week's Voldemort Award goes to the New York Times for its account of a curious case of road rage in North Carolina:
"The man charged with nine counts of attempted murder for driving a Jeep through a crowd at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill last Friday told the police that he deliberately rented a four-wheel-drive vehicle so he could 'run over things and keep going.' " The driver in question was Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar.
Whoa, don't jump to conclusions, the Times certainly didn't. As the report continued:
"According to statements taken by the police, Mr. Taheri-azar, 22, an Iranian-born graduate of the university, felt that the United States government had been 'killing his people across the sea' and that his actions reflected 'an eye for an eye.' "
"His people"? Who exactly would that be? Mr. Taheri-azar is admirably upfront. As he told police, he wanted to "avenge the deaths or murders of Muslims around the world."
And yet the M-word appears nowhere in the Times report. Intentionally or not, they seem to be channeling the great Sufi theologian and jurist al-Ghazali, who died a millennium ago. But his first rule on the conduct of dhimmis -- non-Muslims in Muslim society -- seem to have been taken on board by the Western media: The dhimmi is obliged not to mention Allah or His Apostle... .
Are they teaching that at Columbia Journalism School yet?
A fellow called Mohammed mows down a bunch of students? Just one of those things -- like a grandma in my neck of the woods a couple of years back who hit the wrong pedal in the parking lot and ploughed through a McDonald's, leaving the place a hideous tangle of crumbled drywall, splattered patties and incendiary hot apple-pie filling.
Yet, according to his own statements, Mr. Taheri-azar committed an act of ideological domestic terrorism, which he planned for two months. He told police he was disappointed more students weren't in his path and that he had rented the biggest vehicle the agency had in order to do as much damage to as many people as possible.
The Persian car pet may have been flooring it, but the media are idling in neutral, if not actively reversing away from the story as fast as they can. Mr. Taheri-azar informed the judge he was "thankful for the opportunity to spread the will of Allah," and it was apparently the will of Allah that he get behind the wheel of Allah.
Meanwhile, a new poll by The Washington Post/ABC finds that, in the words of The Post, "nearly half of Americans -- 46 percent -- have a negative view of Islam, 7 percentage points higher than in the tense months after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, when Muslims were often targeted for violence."
"Often" targeted? Want to put some hard numbers on that? Like to compare the "violence" Americans perpetrated on Muslims after the slaughter of thousands of their fellow citizens in the name of Allah with, say, the death toll perpetrated by Muslims annoyed over some itsy-bitsy cartoons in an obscure Danish newspaper? In September 2001, 99.99999 percent of Americans behaved with remarkable forbearance. If they're less inclined to give the benefit of the doubt these days, perhaps it's because of casual slurs like The Post's or the no-jihad-to-see-here-folks tone of the New York Times.
Ronald Stockton of the University of Michigan doesn't see it that way: "You're getting a constant drumbeat of negative information about Islam," he told The Post.
By "negative information," Professor Stockton presumably means the London bombings, and the Bali bombings, and the Madrid bombings and the Istanbul bombings. But surely it's worth asking why in 2006 The Washington Post needs a man with a name like "Ronald Stockton" to explain Islam to us?
The media diversity bores go out of their way to hire writers of color, gender and orientation. Yet, five years after September 11, where's The New York Times' Muslim columnist? Where's the "Today Show" Islamic weather girl? Why, indeed, are all the Muslim voices in the press broadly on the right -- Amir Taheri in the New York Post, Stephen Schwartz in the Weekly Standard and Fouad Ajami in the Wall Street Journal?
If Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar is not a free-lance terrorist, then what is he? Who is he? What's he thinking? In the absence of any explanatory voices from the Muslim community, all we have are the bare bones of his resume: He's a 22-year-old University of North Carolina psychology major who graduated in December. And what's revealing is the link between Mr. Taheri-azar's grievance and his action.
Take him at his word: He is upset about "the treatment of Muslims around the world" -- presumably at the hands of Israelis on the West Bank, of the Russians in Chechnya, the Indians in Kashmir, the Americans in the Sunni Triangle and the Danes in the funny pages.
So what does he do to avenge Islam? He goes to the rental agency, takes out the biggest car on the lot, drives it to UNC and rams it into the men and women he spent the last few years studying with and socializing with -- the one group of infidels he knows really well.
How many Muslims feel similarly? Not many in America, perhaps -- if only when compared to Europe: for all the multiculti blather, the U.S. still does a better job assimilating immigrants than France or Germany. A recent poll found 40 percent of British Muslims want sharia introduced in the United Kingdom and 20 percent sympathized with the "feelings and motives" of the July 7 London Tube bombers. Or, more accurately, 20 percent were prepared to admit to a pollster they felt sympathy, which suggests the real figure might be higher.
Huge numbers of Muslims -- many of them British subjects born and bred -- see fellow Britons blown apart on trains and buses and are willing to rationalize the acts of mass murderers.
"East is east and west is west/And ne'er the twain shall meet," wrote Rudyard Kipling. Obviously, they meet every moment of the day -- the cabbie driving you to your appointment in Washington, the affable fellow at the corner store.
But proximity isn't the same as understanding: Mr. Taheri-azar and that 20 percent of British Muslims think they know "the West," and they don't like it. By contrast, the New York Times and company insist they like "the east" but go to an awful lot of trouble to avoid finding out anything that would ruffle their illusions. The twain would never meet, said Kipling, "till Earth and Sky meet presently/At God's great judgment seat."
I'd rather find out before then.
Five years after September 11, it's astonishing how little we still know about the West's Muslims.

This ignorance is fostered by multicultural nitwits and one-worlders like Downie and Bill Keller of the NYT. See No, Hear No, Speak No Evil and Maybe, just Maybe they won't come to get us.

Islam was a religion of WORLD DOMINATION until it ran out of gas at the Gates of Vienna in 1687, stopped by the King of Poland's army at the nick of time. Then Islam subsided in decadence and decline until the colonization of the Europeans reawakened nationalism, or rather religious zeal, in the former Ottoman Empire and the sub-continent. Then the oil economies fostered a reawakening of the primitive drive to expand the Umma.

Bear in mind that the vast majority of Muslims do not feel this mission, but the five percent affected by this fundamentalism or Islamist zealotry still number in dozens of millions. Not enough to elect a leader, but enough to suborn democratic movements.

I am against nativism, protectionism, ethnic profiling and exclusion rules, but there is a grave threat to the US and our national media is pretending it does not exist.