Better ISIS than Trump? WaPo, Hollywood, Nats fans show self-defeating toxicity of US politics

American media, celebrities and coastal elites are so far gone in their obsession with President Donald Trump, they are willing to praise Islamic State terrorists so long as they don’t have to side with their president.

Much of America greeted Trump’s announcement that US forces had tracked down and killed Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) “caliph” Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi with joy and pride. What country would not rejoice in the demise of a leader of terrorists, head-choppers, rapists and murderers? Apparently, not the America of the mainstream media, Hollywood celebrities, and even many Washington, DC residents – all of whom simply could not resist to bash Trump instead.

WaPo blasted with #WaPoDeathNotices memes for dubbing ISIS leader ‘austere religious scholar’ in head-scratching headline

BAGDADI

The Washington Post been rightly mocked for describing Baghdadi as an “austere religious scholar” in a headline, but their other stories spinning his death as anything but a win for Trump flew largely under the radar. That doesn’t mean other mainstream outlets covered themselves with glory. Apparently hating the very idea of giving Trump credit, they looked far and wide to find something, anything, they could hold against him.

One such thing was that he did not keep senior congressional Democrats in the loop about the operation. How dare he! They’re only trampling law and precedent in trying to impeach him on fabricated charges, no big deal.

Then there was this gem from National Public Radio, which chose to lead with Trump getting impeached and focused on “dramatic and incendiary language.” Oh, and by the way, Baghdadi died.

CAP

Objecting to Trump’s mannerisms over the substance of his actions has long been a thing with the mainstream media, but this time it led to some truly bizarre reactions. Just like the time when Democrats and the media sided with the notorious MS-13 gang, just because Trump called them “animals,” they now objected to Trump’s description of Baghdadi’s death because they read it as somehow offensive to dogs.

‘Halloween’ star Jamie Lee Curtis, for example, tweeted that “ALL living things suffer when they are blown up,” and that dogs are “brave, bold, loyal, loving and healing, not that Trump would understand.

Trump’s “he died like a dog” may have gone right over the heads of American liberals, but it was perfectly clear in the Muslim world, for which it was intended. Islam considers dogs unclean, and describing Al-Baghdadi that way diminished any claim to religious legitimacy he made as an “austere scholar.”

Which brings us back around to the Post. Attempting to somehow excuse the headline, editor Kristine Kelly tweeted it “should have never read that way” – getting an epic ratio in the process from a public that just wasn’t buying it.

CAP

That’s because the Post reportedly got it right the first time – calling Al-Baghdadi the “Islamic State’s terrorist-in-chief” – and then inexplicably changed that headline to the controversial one, for reasons unknown.

Confused celebrities, Resistance activists and political reporters all work and live in areas that overwhelmingly voted against Trump in 2016. A great example is the crowd at the Nationals Stadium in Washington, DC – which that booed Trump when he made an appearance at Sunday’s World Series game.

The rest of America – the heartland Trump voters – saw a stadium filled with coastal liberals booing their president as he was doing the victory lap after killing Al-Baghdadi, and getting their karmic comeuppance when the Nats lost to the Houston Astros.

Sure, that had more to do with their star pitcher’s injury than with Trump, but this is America, where narrative trumps facts, every time. One would think the Trump-haters would have got that message by now. Appears not.

Nebojsa Malic,

COMPILATION: MEDIA, DEMOCRATS BASH TRUMP OVER KILLING OF ISIS LEADER

Compilation: Media, Democrats Bash Trump Over Killing of ISIS Leader

Establishment hates Trump so much they can’t even acknowledge obvious win for America

10/28/2019

The mainstream media and even some Democrats couldn’t bring themselves to praise President Trump over his decision to raid and kill the infamous ISIS founder Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

Instead, they deployed every form of spin and criticism they could muster in attempt to make Trump look bad for vanquishing the world’s most wanted man.

Here are a few examples:

Some pundits lamented that killing ISIS members only reinforces their murderous ideology.

CBS News Senior National Security contributor Mike Morell said he was “bothered” by Trump detailing Baghdadi’s death because it “inspires extremists.”
Vox editor Aaron Rupar lambasted Trump for saying that witnessing the raid against Baghdadi was like “watching a movie.”
A CNN correspondent compared Trump’s language about Baghdadi to ISIS’s hateful rhetoric.
Obama officials like his Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff criticized Trump for “piling on” the humiliation of ISIS’s defeat.
Obama’s former National Security Adviser Susan Rice said the successful raid was not “mission accomplished.”

A CNN panel condemned Trump’s “irresponsible” remarks about Baghdadi “dying like a dog.”

Fox News’ Chris Wallace harped on Vice President Mike Pence for not briefing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on the special operations raid.

CAP

2020 Democrat presidential candidate Bernie Sanders refused to congratulate Trump or the U.S. forces who conducted the raid, instead giving credit to the Kurds in Syria.

“Saturday Night Live” couldn’t even help digging into Trump over his dovish Syria policy, saying he’s “Making ISIS Great Aagain”…the same night al-Baghdadi was killed.

CAP

Fortunately, some journalists, like Glenn Greenwald, recognized the media’s shameful behavior and called them out on it.

CAP

ISIS Brides Are Enforcing Caliphate Rules in Refugee Camp — Beating Women Who Remove Their Niqabs

 

ISIS brides are reportedly enforcing strict caliphate rules in the al-Hawl refugee camp in northern Syria.

According to the Guardian the ISIS brides are beating women who remove their niqabs.

Screen Shot 2019-03-04 at 10.24.54 AM

The ISIS women are known for their savage treatment of their peers.

Female ISIS militants published a manifesto recently hoping to draw more girls and women to the Caliphate. The manifesto says it’s acceptable for girls to marry at nine years-old but that 15 and 16 was preferable – when they are “still young and active.”

Women in the World reported, via Religion of Peace.

As ISIS makes its last stand in the Syrian village of Baghouz, thousands of women and children have been pouring into the al-Hawl refugee camp in the northern part of the country. Among the refugees are wives of ISIS fighters who, according to the Guardian, have taken it upon themselves to enforce strict caliphate rules.

“In recent days, many woman said they only left because the group’s leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, ordered them to do so to make it easier for the men to fight,” the Guardian reports, adding that “senior-ranked wives” have been stealing from and beating other women who take off their niqabs. When a leaking gas canister sparked a fire, rumors began to spread that an ISIS sleeper cell had deliberately set the fire in order to free the refugees.

Though some women in the camp continue to express allegiance to the militant group, others are eager to leave that world behind. Shamima Begum, a British teenager who infamously ran away to marry Islamic State fighter and has since expressed a desire to return home, was among the ISIS wives in al-Hawl. She was recently forced to move with her newborn after being threatened, reportedly because she had not been properly veiled and had been showing her face in TV interviews.

Swedish media blasted for playing down horrific details of hikers’ IS-inspired murders in Morocco

Screen Shot 2018-12-28 at 3.31.15 PM

People from Maren Ueland’s hometown walk in a torch-lit march to honor Maren Ueland from Norway and Louisa Vesterager Jespersen from Denmark © Jan Kare Ness / NTB Scanpix / via Reuters

Swedish state broadcaster SVT has come under fire for what some viewers are calling an effort to downplay the horrendous details of the murders of two Scandinavian backpackers in Morocco last week.

Louisa Vesterager Jespersen, 24, from Denmark, and Maren Ueland, 28, from Norway were killed while backpacking in Morocco’s High Atlas mountains. While both girls were stabbed multiple times, one of them was also beheaded on camera, shown in a video that has spread like wildfire around social media.

Previously recorded footage, which was authenticated by investigators, also shows the suspects in the brutal double murder pledging allegiance to the Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, further confirming that the murders were an act of terrorism.

Screen Shot 2018-12-28 at 3.33.17 PM

Memorial to the slain backpackers at Danish embassy © Reuters / Youssef Boudlal

On Christmas Eve, the national public broadcaster in Sweden aired a report about the barbaric killings, but chose not to focus on the actual details of the crime or the now-established links to Islamic terrorism. The SVT report made no mention of the fact that one of the young women was beheaded, said nothing about the ISIS link and simply referred to “knife damage” on the woman’s neck.

Bizarrely, the report focused almost entirely on how it is a punishable offence to share the disturbing video. Written reports on SVT’s website did mention the fact that the murders have been linked to Islamic terrorism, but that fact was nowhere to be found in its strange Christmas Eve report.

The odd angle taken by SVT prompted suggestions from viewers that the broadcaster seemed to be more worried about the possibility of the video spreading further than the actual murders themselves – and annoyed viewers quickly took to social media to denounce what they said was a case of the media being overly concerned with political correctness.

One person noted that there was a significant difference between how SVT covered the 2015 Trollhättan school attack, in which the Swedish perpetrator had been motivated by racism and chose a school in an area with a high immigrant population to commit his murders. While in that case, SVT recounted “minute by minute” what the killer did, publishing graphics and detailed information, in the case of the Scandinavian girls, the coverage was far more vague.

One Twitter user wrote that at first he thought the use of the phrase “knife damage” instead of ‘beheaded’ or ‘decapitated’ was just some kind of unfortunate formulation of words until he realized the channel had repeated the phrase more than once.

“I myself would never watch such a film, let alone share it. But now we are more upset about the crime of proliferation than the crime of beheading,” another user wrote, denouncing overly “PC” people.

Screen Shot 2018-12-28 at 3.35.21 PM

“Have these IS killers already been given jobs at SVT?” asked another angry tweeter, while another asked had the SVT reporters seen the footage of the woman dying and in pain as her neck is cut. “Knife damage is indeed a euphemism,” they wrote.

“225 years ago Marie Antoinette suffered ‘knife damage to her neck’ during the French Revolution,” another user sarcastically wrote.

Screen Shot 2018-12-28 at 3.39.03 PM

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑