THE NO-LONGER-RELIABLE WALL STREET JOURNAL (I.)
Islam in grisly, cannibalistic action...And not a kaffir in sight.
I've been reading the Wall Street Journal for many years, and their editorial page is usually brilliant. But a few years ago I started noticing sentences...paragraphs...even whole articles in the news sections that could just as easily have been published by, you should excuse the expression, the New York Times. Strangely, a lot of them seem to involve a perspective on the world that is, if not actively pro-jihadi, certainly internalizes a lot of the pathological "grievances" and sick mythologies of the "Muslim world."
Take this story from today's WSJ frontpage. A nasty jihadi bomb went off in a graduation ceremony in Mogadishu, Somalia, where a number of graduating medical students (a rare commodity in that thoroughly Islamicized hell-hole) were murdered, along with government ministers. The story recounts a little of the history of Somalia, including US involvement there:
A blundered U.S. invasion in 1993 left 18 Americans and as many as 500 Somali civilians dead. The image of the bodies of American soldiers being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu -- later revisited in the movie "Black Hawk Down" -- became a cautionary tale in U.S. foreign policy. After that, the country descended into chaos.
Uhhhh, that's one way to look at it. Did I walk through a parallel universe where the The Nation calls itself the Wall Street Journal? Huuhhhh?
Does Journal owner Rupert Murdoch even read his own news pages anymore?
4 comments:
I don't get it
What do yuou disagree with?
"Invasion"? "500 civilians"?
And you tell me when "chaos descended" upon Somalia. It sure as hell wasn't AFTER the "US invasion of 1993."
Understandably your article helped me very much in my college assignment. Hats incorrect to you send, choice look forward for more interdependent articles in a jiffy as its anecdote of my pick question to read.
Post a Comment