Warner Todd Huston
Wash. Post's Ezra Klein absolves radical Islam, 'young Christians' perpetrate 'school shootings'
By Warner Todd Huston
Journolister and Washington Post writer Ezra Klein is another one of those liberals in the elite Old Media trying to pretend that there is no Islam in terrorism these days. He's also another one of those who, in the face of reality, hyperbolically say that Christians are somehow just as prone to terrorism as Muslims. If only he could find any of that terrorism, he might have some veracity on the issue.
Oh, Klein is desperately trying to find that Christian terrorism no matter how wild a stretch it is, sure enough. Like President Obama and his Deputy National Security Advisor, Denis McDonough, Klein is trying to take criminal acts unconnected to religion perpetrated by Americans and morph them into "Christian terrorism."
On MSNBCs Morning Joe for March 7, Klein tied himself into knots of illogic in order to absolve radical Islam for the thousands of acts of terrorism perpetrated over the last 50 or so years.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
In his conversation with a perplexed Pat Buchannan on the MSNBC morning show, Klein insisted that "young Christians" are just as apt to perpetrate terrorism because they have been involved in "school shootings."
In response to Buchanan's point that the Muslim community in the US is "particularly vulnerable" to radicalization, Klein said, "there's not a ton of evidence, though, that was a radicalization of American community. We've had spree shooters in America, Pat.... We've had school shootings from young Christians."
This is the left-wing apologia du jour, for sure. Every time radical Islamic-based terror is brought up, self-flagellating left-wingers like Obama and Klein try to assert that all religions are equally liable to be turned toward terrorism these days. But this is simply an absurd paean to PCism.
Have we had people that are ostensibly "Christians" involved in school shootings? Of course we have. But their supposed religious affiliation is no more relevant than the fact that they all had hair, or they all wore clothes when they perpetrated their criminal mass shootings. Using Klein's logic, I suppose we could say fashion designers are prone to terrorism because these shooters wore clothes while committing their crimes?
The fact is that not one of these kids that perpetrated shootings in schools did so because of religion. Not even Timothy McVeigh is rightfully called a "Christian terrorist" because he did not invoke Jesus or religion in the commission of his murderous act. He was just another anti-government nut, not a religious zealot.
Timothy McVeigh is another go-to killer for the left, too. His act is equally inappropriate to be compared to radical Islamic terror. After all, McVeigh was one guy (well, two if you include his pal Nichols). He did not identify with some great international conspiracy involving thousands of participants and millions of dollars in countries spread across the globe as radical Islamists do. To say his one act of terror is just like the thousands of acts of terror perpetrated by a worldwide network of radical Islamic terrorists is simply absurd. McVeigh, as evil as he was, is not just like radical Islamists.
The left's assumption that Islam is not responsible for this 50-year-long wave of terror is dangerous, too, because it disarms us by preventing us from understanding just what is going on. Whether these terrorists are proper Muslims or not is not the same argument as whether or not they use Islam as an excuse for their terrorism. They most certainly do use Islam as an excuse, so saying they aren't proper Muslims is not only another discussion, but is irrelevant to the central questions concerning their motivation for their acts of terror.
These radical Muslims consider themselves Muslims, they use Islam as the basis for their reasoning, and they claim up front that Islam justifies their acts of terror. Why should we so easily dismiss their own claims that they are terrorists for Allah? For Obama, McDonough, or Ezra Klein to say otherwise is simply untrue and dangerously so.
Transcript
© Warner Todd Huston
March 10, 2011
Journolister and Washington Post writer Ezra Klein is another one of those liberals in the elite Old Media trying to pretend that there is no Islam in terrorism these days. He's also another one of those who, in the face of reality, hyperbolically say that Christians are somehow just as prone to terrorism as Muslims. If only he could find any of that terrorism, he might have some veracity on the issue.
Oh, Klein is desperately trying to find that Christian terrorism no matter how wild a stretch it is, sure enough. Like President Obama and his Deputy National Security Advisor, Denis McDonough, Klein is trying to take criminal acts unconnected to religion perpetrated by Americans and morph them into "Christian terrorism."
On MSNBCs Morning Joe for March 7, Klein tied himself into knots of illogic in order to absolve radical Islam for the thousands of acts of terrorism perpetrated over the last 50 or so years.
In his conversation with a perplexed Pat Buchannan on the MSNBC morning show, Klein insisted that "young Christians" are just as apt to perpetrate terrorism because they have been involved in "school shootings."
In response to Buchanan's point that the Muslim community in the US is "particularly vulnerable" to radicalization, Klein said, "there's not a ton of evidence, though, that was a radicalization of American community. We've had spree shooters in America, Pat.... We've had school shootings from young Christians."
This is the left-wing apologia du jour, for sure. Every time radical Islamic-based terror is brought up, self-flagellating left-wingers like Obama and Klein try to assert that all religions are equally liable to be turned toward terrorism these days. But this is simply an absurd paean to PCism.
Have we had people that are ostensibly "Christians" involved in school shootings? Of course we have. But their supposed religious affiliation is no more relevant than the fact that they all had hair, or they all wore clothes when they perpetrated their criminal mass shootings. Using Klein's logic, I suppose we could say fashion designers are prone to terrorism because these shooters wore clothes while committing their crimes?
The fact is that not one of these kids that perpetrated shootings in schools did so because of religion. Not even Timothy McVeigh is rightfully called a "Christian terrorist" because he did not invoke Jesus or religion in the commission of his murderous act. He was just another anti-government nut, not a religious zealot.
Timothy McVeigh is another go-to killer for the left, too. His act is equally inappropriate to be compared to radical Islamic terror. After all, McVeigh was one guy (well, two if you include his pal Nichols). He did not identify with some great international conspiracy involving thousands of participants and millions of dollars in countries spread across the globe as radical Islamists do. To say his one act of terror is just like the thousands of acts of terror perpetrated by a worldwide network of radical Islamic terrorists is simply absurd. McVeigh, as evil as he was, is not just like radical Islamists.
The left's assumption that Islam is not responsible for this 50-year-long wave of terror is dangerous, too, because it disarms us by preventing us from understanding just what is going on. Whether these terrorists are proper Muslims or not is not the same argument as whether or not they use Islam as an excuse for their terrorism. They most certainly do use Islam as an excuse, so saying they aren't proper Muslims is not only another discussion, but is irrelevant to the central questions concerning their motivation for their acts of terror.
These radical Muslims consider themselves Muslims, they use Islam as the basis for their reasoning, and they claim up front that Islam justifies their acts of terror. Why should we so easily dismiss their own claims that they are terrorists for Allah? For Obama, McDonough, or Ezra Klein to say otherwise is simply untrue and dangerously so.
Transcript
-
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Obviously there is a threat there, but it seems to me, especially after this summer and the ugliness of New York, Peter King needs to be very careful, very responsible.
EZRA KLEIN: And I think he needs to back off. I think Ellison is right, and I think if Eric Holder was staying up at night, then he can launch an investigation. What King is doing is not launching a serious investigation. What King is doing is launching publicity-hounding hearings. He is trying to make his name bigger, he is doing something big and in public to scare people. That is not the same as a serious law enforcement effort to look at radicalization of the Muslim community.
SCARBOROUGH: Pat Buchanan, what do you think?
PAT BUCHANAN: Look, I think the Muslim community is particularly vulnerable to an approach from abroad to try to radicalize them and make them enemies of America. That's legitimate. Every politician, frankly, raises himself up with hearings like that. I think we ought to wait and see what Peter King does.
SCARBOROUGH: Ezra, do you not think there is a threat of the radicalization of a small group of Muslims here, like for instance England — obviously, it's a much bigger problem in England that it is in the United States.
KLEIN: We have not seen it yet, and there is a good reason — we have not seen it in America in a serious way yet. The Muslim community here is very different —
BUCHANAN: Major Hassan killed 13 major Army guys and wounded 41.
KLEIN: But there's not a ton of evidence, though, that was a radicalization of American community. We've had spree shooters in America, Pat.
BUCHANAN: He's had contact with the guys abroad...
KLEIN: We've had school shootings from young Christians.
BUCHANAN: But these are guys abroad are reaching in to the United States by various modern media, and they're recruiting, and kids are listening to it. I think opening that up — I agree with you. Look, don't demonize Muslims but there's no doubt...
KLEIN: How does he not demonize Muslims by doing this?
BUCHANAN: Because radical Muslims are trying...
KLEIN: You could explain — you have one example here, and we're trying to talk about an investigation into an entire religious community. We bought from the one to the whole very quickly, and people need to be very careful doing that.
BUCHANAN: Who is most susceptible or vulnerable to the kind of recruitment coming out of the radical Islam? It's American Muslims!
KLEIN: Why do we think they're so vulnerable to it?
BUCHANAN: But why do you think....
KLEIN: There are radicals everywhere. There are neo-Nazis who claim they're Christians. Is the Christian community in America so deeply vulnerable than neo-Nazis?
© Warner Todd Huston
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
