The media spin on the latest terror attack in the name of ISIS is beyond simple bias, into the territory of delusion.
An orgy of evidence
The group’s intricate involvement in each attack differs. It is currently unclear to what extent, if any, ISIS was involved in planning or inspiring the attack in New York. It’s also rare for ISIS to claim responsibility for an attack if the perpetrator is in custody, New York Times’ ISIS correspondent Rukmini Callimachi noted.
The Twitter thread HuffPo linked from Rukmini Callimachi actually refutes the argument they put forth. Callimachi makes it very clear that the attacker, Sayfullo Saipov, was directly following ISIS calls to commit acts of terror on October 31 (Halloween), using trucks, in places where there are likely a lot of pedestrians, in major western cities. How much evidence do we need here?
16. Typically the threats are more amorphous – "Attack London! Attack Paris!" I rarely see a date on ISIS threats (though it's not 1st time)
— Rukmini Callimachi (@rcallimachi) October 31, 2017
On Wednesday, Callimachi tweeted that Saipov “followed ISIS’ instructions to the letter.” Is that enough evidence?
1. I just finished reading the criminal complaint filed against Sayfullo Saipov. He followed ISIS' instructions to the letter. Follow here: pic.twitter.com/H7kbTY3Va0
— Rukmini Callimachi (@rcallimachi) November 2, 2017
ISIS doesn’t operate with W-2s and payroll, where we can track who “works” for them. If a more cut-and-dried case of ISIS-inspired (and therefore ISIS-linked) terror exists in the U.S., I think we’d be hard pressed to find it.
Back to NBC:
ISIS has made dubious claims of responsibility in the past, including claiming that Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock was a “soldier” of the terror organization, also without providing evidence.
As for Las Vegas, that investigation is still proceeding, with few answers made public, but lots of questions as to if Paddock operated alone (Las Vegas Sheriff Lombardo thinks he had help), and the role his girlfriend played. Nobody has definitively established a motive, and therefore, though there’s no evidence, the ISIS link has to remain a possibility until it’s disproven.
In Saipov’s case, there is an orgy of evidence linking his terror to ISIS.
Within hours of the attack, NBC reported that “Muslim Americans again brace for backlash.” Thursday, the Washington Post reported “a familiar anxiety and a fear of backlash in Paterson, N.J.”
On Tuesday, even as the bodies in New York City were being sorted out, NBC ran this story: Muslim Americans Again Brace for Backlash After New York Attack.
American Muslim leaders and civil rights advocates say the past two years have seen a spike in anti-Muslim rhetoric, hate crimes and harassment across the United States, fueled in part by terrorist attacks such as those in San Bernardino, Calif., and Orlando, carried out by Muslims who claimed allegiance to the Islamic State, and in part by the broad condemnations of Islam and immigrants by President Trump and his allies — responses that many American Muslims consider racist.
They fear rhetoric. They fear that non-Muslim Americans might be afraid of Muslim Americans. They are concerned that the sight of a burqa-wearing woman at Walmart, or a man dressed in traditional Middle Eastern garb might generate some kind of “backlash.”
It’s not the backlash that I worry about. What about the lash? I don’t see non-Muslims planning terror attacks, bombings, beheadings, shootings, and mass vehicular homicide against the Muslim community in Paterson, N.J., or Dearborn, Michigan, or anywhere for that matter. Yes, if this trend of Muslims committing terrorist acts in the U.S. continues, eventually there will be a backlash. There’s been a backlash in England, but it’s very limited, and based on anger that the government has done very little to address the threat of radical Islam.
Why don’t Muslims stand up to terror?
Instead of screaming to the press about backlash, why don’t Muslims stand up to terror? They are afraid.
— Steve Berman (@stevengberman) November 1, 2017
Fear of reprisals? Many Muslims are quick to distance themselves from radicalized terrorists, but they are nearly incapable of working with authorities to stop the terror. The biggest target of ISIS in areas where they’re more free to operate has always been more moderate Muslims, whom they consider to be infidels and collaborators. Look at Israel, where Hamas’ brutality toward anyone even marginally opposed to terror is well-known.
In the U.S., as in England, being Muslim means accepting some who take jihad literally, and plan to kill infidels. While they might try to “steer” people away from “the path of extremism,” that path is the path of Mohammed, as NOQ Report writer Ben Wilhelm observed. In other words, they might claim it’s not “real Islam” to reporters, but to each other, they are scared to oppose it.
There’s more fear of reprisals, Fatwahs, and threats from radicalized Muslims among the Muslim population than any fear of backlash from non-Muslims. They know that Americans, and Westerners in general, are not going to start a crusade to eradicate Muslims. Under President Bush 43 and President Obama, the word “crusade” was even banned to appease Muslim fears.
The media is far too concerned with exactly the wrong things here. ISIS is publishing instructional books, issuing calls to terror, and fully justifying their theology with the very same books non-violent Muslims use. The non-violent Muslims are far more scared of radical Muslims than they are of backlash in America. Sure, it’s uncomfortable being stared at, or snickered at, in malls and movie theaters. It’s difficult to live in a culture where you are completely unassimilated. But remember, these terrorists appear to all outsiders to be assimilated Americans.
The Muslim community knows who they are. And by failing to completely (some do help I believe) thwart terrorists, they are standing aside and allowing it to happen.
If the media wants to protect the Muslim community from backlash, they need to stop denying evidence of ISIS involvement, and stop harping on the backlash.
The lash is far more dangerous, and it’s getting worse every day.