San Bernardino media coverage capitulates to the headline

Do we honestly believe there are two Islam; one that is “radical” and one that is not? Why does the media continue the narrative

Modern warfare. (Composite graphic)

CHARLOTTE, N.C., Dec. 10, 2015 – Following the San Bernardino attack last week the conspiracy theories abounded. The media continue to dissect the facts and evidence that the police and FBI should be focusing upon rather than emphasizing the broader picture of dealing with Islamic jihad and what works for America and Americans.

It’s more fun to capitulate to Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton for the bombastic headline than bring the real issues that Americans should be talking about to the headlines.  More fun to scream about how Trump is racist (which he isn’t) than to analyze why his message resonates.

They are more interested in catching the politicians in a “gotcha” than in asking what their ideas are.

It’s ironic in this season where Christmas music dominates the airwaves with “peace on Earth, good will toward men” and “Silent night, holy night,” that a religion rooted in peace takes a back seat to a debate about a so-called “religion of peace” that has its foundations based in hate.

If ever there was an oxymoron, that’s it.

Now that some time has elapsed since the terror in California, there is much about the media coverage of the incident that just does not pass the smell test.

The Islamic Civil War is America’s war now

From the moment the story broke, cable news operations, be they liberal or conservative, were exercising caution to the extreme not to speculate about the story until further details were available.

Granted the national media has made some horrible judgments in the past about terrorism, elections and other fast breaking stories that required more than initial eyewitness accounts. That said, this time it appeared broadcasters went out of their way to caution viewers not to get ahead of the story.

It was as though a directive had been issued from some high-ranking source that media had an obligation not to go beyond what was being released by on-site resources in San Bernardino.

Bill O’Reilly of Fox News was one of the early commentators covering the story as details gradually seeped out. Not only was his coverage disappointing, thanks to his inflated ego and phony wisdom, it was also maddening because he clearly was not saying what should have been obvious to a journalist of his experience.

Pretending to act as the “calm” veteran newsman, O’Reilly continuously reminded us of his journalistic credentials while making every effort to avoid asking the pertinent questions that needed to be asked.

By the afternoon of the following day, the press still would not admit the attack was terrorism despite FBI involvement, the Muslim names of the instigators, evidence of IEDs, a massive supply of weapons and a host of other incriminating evidence that pointed to only one conclusion.

Islam 101: Islamic growth and the origins of moderate Muslims

Apparently Rush Limbaugh never got the message, or he ignored it, because he was the only person in the media willing to say the attack was terrorism.

The question then, in true conspiratorial fashion, is whether there was some sort of directive from on high that warned broadcasters NOT to mention terrorism until it was absolutely confirmed by law enforcement on the scene?

If so, then why?

What are we so afraid of?

One ridiculous argument we always hear is that we have to be careful not to offend “peaceful, moderate Muslims.” We must not blame the Muslim majority for what a small minority is doing to distort a great religion. We must walk on eggshells to be fair.

Ask yourself, if the situation were reversed, would ISIS even consider being “fair”? Do we honestly believe that al-Qaeda gives a rat’s behind about being “liked” by the West?

Let’s stop using terms like “radicalized” and “radical Islam.”

What does “radicalized” even mean anyway? One day someone was a peace-loving mainstream Muslim and the next he was a suicide bomb-toting killer because he was “radicalized” in his sleep?

Do we honestly believe there are two Islams, one that is “radical” and one that is not?

If the media would allow law enforcement to do its job of discovering minute details, and focus upon its own area of relevance by reporting true information and background about the seriousness of global jihad we as a nation would be better informed about how to cope with this problem.

Forget Barack Obama. He is in a cocoon somewhere trying to emerge as a butterfly.

This is a situation that must be confronted without presidential leadership because there IS no presidential leadership.

The truth Obama calls a lie: We are at war with Islam

What is truly frightening is that something halted the media from doing its job of covering the initial news of San Bernardino. It took several days before the actual story was revealed, and today we are still seeking answers while trying to decide who to blame.

We already have the answers. Not to all the questions but to enough of them that there can be no doubt about the primary source of the attack.

Furthermore we also know whom to blame, and, politically incorrect as it may seem, it is Islam. Not “radical” Islam, but Islam.

There is no joy in saying that, but reality is reality. Until we accept that Islam is by design “radical” and stop ignoring what is staring us in the face, blood will continue to flow through the streets.

Bob Taylor has been traveling the world for more than 30 years as a writer and award-winning television producer focusing on international events, people and cultures around the globe.

Taylor is founder of the Magellan Travel Club (

Read more of What in the World and Bob Taylor at Communities Digital News

Follow Bob on Twitter @MrPeabod

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 Communities Digital News

• The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or management of Communities Digital News.

This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities Digital News, LLC. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

Correspondingly, Communities Digital News, LLC uses its best efforts to operate in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine under US Copyright Law and always tries to provide proper attribution. If you have reason to believe that any written material or image has been innocently infringed, please bring it to the immediate attention of CDN via the e-mail address or phone number listed on the Contact page so that it can be resolved expeditiously.