Examiner/Guardian mind-meld is complete
|Todd Vogt, photo by Mike Koozmin for the Examiner|
Last year the Examiner was sold, and the new owner told the SF Weekly that he would move it to the left: "If anything, it will be progressively more progressive," Vogt assured us. "It's time to update the paper to reflect the community."
In a story in the Examiner, he confirmed that:
[Todd Vogt] has asked the editorial team to write local columns that mirror the intensely liberal readership in San Francisco. "I told them that every day the paper has to reflect the readers," Vogt said.
I didn't like that, since it sounds a lot like the Fox News approach to journalism: pander relentlessly to the politics of your readers. A few months later, the Examiner and the Bay Guardian merged their business operations, and the editorial mind-meld began, as an Examiner editorial downplayed the death of a pedestrian at the hands of a cyclist and scolded C.W. Nevius for complaining about the city's anti-car policies. It could have been written by Brugmann himself.
The Examiner now evidently buys the delusional brand of multiculturalism long peddled by the Guardian with another editorial that could have been written by the PC boys at the Guardian, this time on the anti-jihad ad on Muni buses ("In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad"). The Examiner finds the ad "hateful...bigoted...offensive." It cites a silly MTA statement approvingly: "SFMTA policy prohibits discrimination based on national origin, religion, and other characteristics and condemns statements that describe any group as 'savages.'"
It's not accurate to call a "group" savages---fanatical adherents of Islam, widely known as "terrorists," though the NY Times calls them "insurgents"---that carries out homicidal and suicidal attacks on civilians---including other Moslems---not only against Israel but all around the world? This is close to "progressive" self-parody, the sort of thing you would see in The Onion---advocating tolerance for people who want to kill you!
Like others who dislike the ad, the Examiner inaccurately refers to the Palestinians as its target, but there are jihadists all over the world who would like to kill Israelis and Jews---and Americans, by the way---not to mention destroy Israel itself.
Speaking of the Palestinians, here's a story (Mass Arab attack on Jewish village) from two days ago:
The men were attacked by a large Arab mob armed with clubs and sticks, residents said. The attackers apparently came from the nearby PA town of Kotzra. A security team from Esh Kodesh was called to the scene, as were nearby IDF units. The responders encountered hundreds of PA men armed with rocks and other makeshift weapons, and were unable to stop the assault. “Children in the village are crying,” community spokesman Aharon Katzuf told Tatzpit. “They can’t sleep because of the screams of ‘Yitbach al Yahud’ [Slaughter the Jews--ed.] and ‘Allahu Akbar.’”
Here's how Palestinians in Gaza raise their children. "Savage" seems like the precise term we're looking for to describe this behavior. An Examiner news story the other day follows the editorial line by referring to Palestinians as if they were the only ones practicing violent jihad and/or threatening Israel and Jews.
Attacks like this are being carried out by fanatical jihadists every day all around the world on Jews, Christians, Hindus and every other religion, even different sects of "the religion of peace" itself.
Robert Spencer is keeping score of Islamists in the US who have either carried out violent attacks or were foiled before they could do so:
Naser Abdo, the would-be second Fort Hood jihad mass murderer; Khalid Aldawsari, the would-be jihad mass murderer in Lubbock, Texas; Muhammad Hussain, the would-be jihad bomber in Baltimore; Mohamed Mohamud, the would-be jihad bomber in Portland; Faisal Shahzad, the would-be Times Square jihad mass-murderer; Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, the Arkansas military recruiting station jihad murderer; Naveed Haq, the jihad mass murderer at the Jewish Community Center in Seattle; Mohammed Reza Taheri-Azar, the would-be jihad mass murderer in Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Ahmed Ferhani and Mohamed Mamdouh, who hatched a jihad plot to blow up a Manhattan synagogue; Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the would-be Christmas airplane jihad bomber; and many others like them who have plotted and/or committed mass murder in the name of Islam and are motivated by its texts and teachings, all in the U.S. in the last couple of years...
Is it hateful to point that out?
I see stories of jihadist attacks every day in the NY Times and the Chronicle. They are usually short, wire service stories from Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, India, and Africa. China and Russia also have a violent jihadist problem.
Here's a website that keeps a daily score of such attacks. Is it hateful and bigoted to do that?
People are kidding themselves if they think this is a transitory phenomenon. This will be a problem for a long time, and we should at least cut the fatuous brand of "progressive" tolerance practiced by the Examiner and the Bay Guardian. It will probably take a few more successful terrorist attacks by savages here in the US before even clueless editorial writers and progressives begin to wake up.