COMPARE: Media Reaction To Fusion Nightclub Terror Attack Vs Christchurch Terror Attack
Guest post by Bright Start News
Watching the media and establishment reaction to the Christchurch New Zealand has been a sight to behold.
When a Muslim called 911 to publicly pledge allegiance to ISIS moments before slaughtering 49 gay people in the Pulse Nightclub massacre, the media reaction was one of caution. We mustn’t jump to any conclusions about the motives. We mustn’t blame a whole community for the actions of an individual. We mustn’t draw any conclusions about the object of the shooters religious obsessions.
In the case of Omar Mateen, his motive wasn’t radical Islam even though he pledged allegiance to ISIS. No, his motive was big bad evil America killing too many civilians. Just ask Huffington Post:
The gunman who slaughtered 49 people in an Orlando, Florida, nightclub told a police negotiator the attack was a protest against U.S. bombings of Islamic State targets in Iraq and Syria.
”You have to tell the U.S. government to stop bombing. They are killing too many children. They are killing too many women, okay,” gunman Omar Mateen told a police negotiator by phone during the June attack, hours before the killer died in a shootout with police.
In his conversations with the police negotiator, Mateen repeatedly complained about civilians killed by U.S. airstrikes in Syria and Iraq. “What am I to do when my people are getting killed over there,” he said.
When the negotiator asked him to identify himself, Mateen answered, “My name is Islamic soldier,” and, “Call me Mujahideen. Call me the solider of God.” He said he’d pledged allegiance to the Islamic State and expressed admiration for one of the brothers who carried out the deadly Boston Marathon bombing in 2013.
Investigators concluded later that there was no direct link between ISIS and the assault on Pulse, a gay nightclub.
“Investigators concluded later that there was no direct link between ISIS and the assault on Pulse, a gay nightclub.”
The jihadi literally spells it out for them:
The attack occurred during the holy month of Ramadan. Mateen told the negotiator that he was adhering to religious tradition.
So…despite the fact that he openly declared his motives and allegiance, that’s not what it was at all. There was no connection to ISIS. Nothing to see here. Move along.
But when a white man walks into a mosque in Christchurch New Zealand and slaughters 50 muslims, his motives are immediately known, interpreted, and extrapolated onto a larger community.
Huffpo has thrown all caution out the window for the Christchurch, NZ terror attack.
That’s pretty rich considering the intolerance coming from Congress has all been radical Muslims attacking Jews. But apparently it’s Republican rhetoric that’s in need of examination according to HuffPo.
Omar Mateen didn’t take Jihad’s hate-filled, angry ideology and make it viral?
This is just Huffington Post. You can do this comparison and receive similar results at almost any news organization in the country.
And when a Muslim slaughters innocent people, the community is immediately warned not to incite a backlash.
In the case of the Christchurch terror attack, there are no warnings of caution against a backlash. On the contrary, the media and institutional left seem hell bent on fostering one.
Also, after a muslim commits an act of terror on American soil, like the one on 9/11, Americans are immediately warned that to sacrifice any freedom for security is a betrayal of the American dream.
Here’s the ACLU on not sacrificing freedom when a Muslim slaughters innocent people:
America faces a crucial test. That test is whether we – the political descendents of Jefferson and Madison, and citizens of the world’s oldest democracy – have the confidence, ingenuity and commitment to secure our safety without sacrificing our liberty.
Today, the left is demanding the shuttering of any chat board the Christchurch terrorist might’ve hung out. They don’t even want to debate freedom vs security. They just want to punish everyone who might identify with a community this terrorist identified with.
If anyone demanded the closing of a mosque frequented by the Boston Marathon bombers, or Omar Mateen, there’d be hell to pay from the ACLU.
Why are atrocities committed by a Muslim given the narrowest, velvet glove treatment while terrorism committed by a white guy is instantly interpreted against a wider community?