Accuracy in Media

Hans Christian Andersen’s “The Emperor’s New Clothes” is the tale of a vain emperor seeking only the finest of clothes. Two tailor “con artists” promise to make him such clothes, visible to all but those “unfit for their positions, stupid or incompetent.”

When fitted, no one dares tell the emperor the clothes are invisible for fear of being labeled unfit. The emperor — to the shock of his subjects — eventually parades before them in the “buff.” Only after a young child shouts out the emperor is naked do the townsfolk join in.

But vanity prevails as the emperor parades on.

The morale of the story is pride goeth before the fall. But certain character flaws, such as vanity, can blind one to reality — a flaw further susceptible to manipulation when a silent majority fears voicing its concerns.

The United States suffers from a character flaw — “political correctness.” PC silences the majority, for fear speaking out will trigger the “-ist” label — as a racist, sexist, supremacist, etc. PC proves so intimidating, it imposes a “chilling effect” upon justified criticism. It can blind one to reality, or induces one not to speak out, sometimes conveying an unintended negative message.

The Koran makes clear Islam’s believers are superior to non-believers. Non-Muslims — due to this inferior status — are, therefore, not entitled to the same human rights attaching to believers. Interestingly, this wasn’t always so.

In 1948, all existing member states of the United Nations, except Saudi Arabia, agreed to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights — proclaiming human rights “universal” to all humanity.

In 1981, led by Iran, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation reneged on the agreement. The OIC took the “universal” out of UDHR by limiting human rights only to those entitled under Shariah law.

Islamic law lays out a clear human rights “pecking order” — i.e., Muslim men and then, to a much lesser degree, Muslim women. But, for non-Muslims, there simply is no entitlement under Shariah.

Islamists use Shariah law and the PC flaw to impose their cultural sensitivity upon others, emphasizing the supremacy of believers and, thus, a foreign culture’s deference to them.

For U.S. agencies, such as the Defense Department, this deference has become policy. It evolves from recommendations of Islamic advisers, hired as U.S. government consultants, who seek to push an Islam-sensitive agenda without addressing the underlying message of submission to Islam such a policy conveys.

In Guantanamo, Korans are provided to prisoners. But, because non-Muslims are “unclean,” prisoners won’t accept a Koran touched by a guard. Therefore, guards have to wear gloves while handling the Islamic holy book. This only reinforces to Muslim observers U.S. acceptance that non-believers, being unclean, are unequal to Muslims and, therefore, entitled to diminished human rights — if any.

Such a negative message is also conveyed by 2009 Fort Hood, Texas, massacre defendant U.S. Army Maj. Nidal Hasan’s treatment. His military trial for 13 deaths has been delayed several times over the issue of wearing a beard in court. He demands the right to do so on the basis of his Muslim faith, which conflicts with Army regulations prohibiting facial hair.

Calling the beard a distraction, military trial judge Col. Gregory Gross found Hasan in contempt six times. He ordered the defendant out of the courtroom and into a trailer to watch the proceedings on a closed-circuit television.

The judge, frustrated by Hasan’s unmilitary appearance, finally ruled he could either appear clean-shaven or be forcibly shaved. On appeal, the court agreed with Gross, but said the command — not the judge — should enforce it. The appeals court didn’t agree the beard caused a distraction and vacated the contempt convictions.

Hasan then filed a motion of bias against Gross. In December, the appeals court agreed the proceedings had become “a duel of wills,” dismissing Gross and appointing Col. Tara Abbey Osborn to replace him.

Along with the dismissal, the appeals court readdressed the beard issue, ruling it wouldn’t decide if and how the Religious Freedom Restoration Act might apply to Hasan’s claim of right to a beard, leaving it to Osborn to decide whether it needed to be addressed as a new matter.

In Hasan’s first appearance before Osborn, noting the beard violated regulations, she commented, “I’m not going to hold that against you but some people on the panel may …”

Interestingly, while arguing his Islamic faith gives him the right to grow a beard, Hasan never felt compelled by his faith to grow one earlier, before the Fort Hood attacks. He entered and served in the U.S. Army as a beardless Muslim; he should stand trial as one. Why allow him to claim otherwise now?

The appeals court, and perhaps Osborn, may be guilty of bias themselves. It is a bias influenced by a commander in chief who prohibits any reference to “Islam” or “jihadist” in national security documents. It is a bias prohibiting any reference to Hasan’s act as one of “radical Islamism,” instead calling it “workplace violence.” It is a bias more appropriately known as PC.

Sadly, a silent majority refuses to question it.

Ironically, Hasan can tell us he acts now in accordance with his Islamic faith but PC prevents us from raising his faith as his motivation for the massacre.

Vladimir Lenin said, “The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.” Similarly, political correctness is the rope we sell Islamists — with which they will hang us — as we naively allow it, through our PC-motivated actions or silent inaction, to subvert the “universal” equality message.

Guest columns do not necessarily reflect the views of Accuracy in Media or its staff.




Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.

Comments

  • Doug Mayfield

    Why those in charge in Washington fail to see the truth that Islam is a mortal threat to this country is mystifying. True, Islam is militarily weak, but fanaticism on behalf of chaos and destruction can make up for such weakness in horrifying ways.

    Thank you for the article.

  • The Major

    This article hits it on the head . How many times does a person have to be called ANY ‘ist’ name before they just throw up their hands & say “I quit” ??? This is how the PRO-Left of ANY group infiltrate a society. Shariah Law is being infiltrated into OUR courts in some places,,slowly,,but surely. We also have another problem ,,in the white House. We have a Marxist muslim POTUS ,,who either bends over backwards ,,or just looks the other way,,when it comes to his muslim buddies,,in the BrotherHood,,or elsewhere. Khadaffi & Mobarek,,altho’ nasty guys,,were NOT killing Coptic Christians ‘willy-nilly’ like the muslim Brotherhood were & still are.How come this ‘so-called’ Christian POTUS of ours says NOTHING about that??
    I had a “Profile” ,,signed by an Army Doctor ,,so I could wear a short beard to cover scars on my face after Vietnam. I carried that slip of paper 24/7 for it’s against the “Regs.” to wear hair WITHOUT IT (unlike DeNiro in the Deer Hunter)& Maj. Hassan knows this,,,he is just doing what ALL muslims do AFTER they are CAUGHT ,,whether in the Army or in Civilian Prisons,,they know they’ll get special treatment ,,or some Civil Rights group will show up for them,saying they are being picked on for Religious reasons,,,etc,etc.

  • SerahJake

    Maybe you should fact check your article before you submit something. The Koran never says that Muslims are superior to non-Muslims and in fact preaches that everyone has the right to practice what they choose to follow. The Koran also states that Islam should never be forcibly imposed upon another Muslim. Furthermore, Islam does preach that men are considered higher beings than Muslim. The original teachings of Islam states an equality between men and women, in fact the first Muslim was a woman. The current injustices to women we see today in Arab countries are due to the disillusioned chauvinistic tendencies of men, not because of the teachings of Islam. Your article is riddled with inaccuracies and it is this type of ignorance that will “hang America,” not the fear of being politically incorrect.

  • dk

    Baloney! Forget what You and they say. Look at what they do. Muslims of different sects have been killing each other for centuries. Their oppression of non-muslims is well known and documented. Male chauvinism is the least of their sins? Baloney. When they say ‘peace’ they mean for members of their sect, not anyone else.