Using mosque massacre to malign Right

   By Ravi Shanker Kapoor ,  25-Mar-2019
Using mosque massacre to malign Right

Liberals have created a new bogeyman to scare away the truth

Once upon a time in India, there was a bogeyman called ‘foreign hand.’ Anything bad or wrong was attributed to the foreign hand. It even led to a joke: Why is there poverty? Foreign hand. Why unemployment? Foreign hand. Why unrest? Foreign hand. Why the population problem? Foreign hand. The new bogeyman the world today is the Rightwing. Anything goes wrong? It’s some Rightist doing something wrong, be it climate change or the New Zealand mosque massacre.

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison described Brenton Harrison Tarrant, the alleged killer, as “an extremist, Rightwing, violent terrorist.” Now, Morrison is no bleeding-heart liberal; he is a conservative. Let’s see how the mainstream media presented Tarrant. The 28-year-old alleged shooter in the New Zealand mosque massacre is, The Washington Post (March 15) informs us, “a globe-trotting young Australian and avowed racist who immersed himself in an Internet subculture of extreme anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, white supremacist ideology.” But it was only in the eighth paragraph of the story that the newspaper says that Tarrant “said Communist China was the nation with ‘political and social values’ closest to his.”

This is how the mainstream media underplays the depravities and depredations of the Left. All of us know that Nazism and fascism were Rightwing ideologies that triggered the Second World War, that the Nazis slaughtered millions of Jews, Poles, gypsies, etc. But how many of us know that communists and socialist regimes were responsible for the death of over 100 million people?

What did Tarrant stand for? Among other things, he favored “the minimum wage; furthering the unionization of workers… increasing the rights of workers…” What kind of Rightist in a Western country has such an agenda?

By downplaying such facts, the mainstream media misleads people. This is also how it demonizes the Right: clubbing all anti-immigration groups, militants and scholars under the rubric of racism and white supremacism. Any nationalist, conservative voice is bracketed along with that of the loony fringe; and when all of them become indistinguishable, they say that the fringe has been mainstreamed!

Worse, in the wake of the horrific massacre, liberals all over the world are hurling allegations left, right, and centre. Instead of recognizing the fact that the New Zealand outrage is the result of a backlash against Muslims, the media and intellectuals are finding new targets to attack. Some of them found one in Chelsea Clinton. The manner in which the former first daughter, who is pregnant with third child, has been savaged speaks volumes about the irrationality and cruelty of liberals and activists.

At an event mourning the victims of the New Zealand mosque massacre, New York University students Leen Dweik, a Muslim Palestinian, and Rose Asaf, a Jewish Israeli American, confronted Chelsea for having tweeted a remark that was critical of Rep. Ilhan Omar (Democrat, Minnesota). Omar, a Muslim of Somali origin who is close to the Muslim Brotherhood, had made some anti-Semitic statements. Omar had even to apologize for them. But anti-Semitism is acceptable; its criticism isn’t. Never before was racism so brazen.

Not only the criticism of anti-Semitism is unacceptable; such critics also deserve no mercy, as Chelsea discovered at her own chagrin. The two insolent, uncouth, and loathsome students not only blamed her for the massacre but also made a video of the harangue. “This [the massacre], right here, is a result of a massacre stoked by people like you and the words that you put out into the world,” Dweik told Clinton. “And I want you to know that, and I want you to feel that deep down inside. Forty-nine people died because of the rhetoric you put out there.”

“I’m so sorry that you feel that way,” Clinton said. “Certainly, it was never my intention. I do believe words matter. I believe we have to show solidarity.” Sorry for slamming an odious remark by an odious lawmaker? How guilt-ridden could one get!

It was US President Donald Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., who came to Chelsea’s defense. He tweeted, “It’s sickening to see people blame @ChelseaClinton for the NZ attacks because she spoke out against anti-Semitism. We should all be condemning anti-Semitism & all forms of hate. Chelsea should be praised for speaking up. Anyone who doesn’t understand this is part of the problem.”

It’s not difficult to see how he could empathize with Chelsea. Since liberals always for excuses to downplay the viciousness of jihad and are keen to look for causes in everything other than radical Islam, they always find scapegoats; the US President is a favorite one. So CNN’s John Berman pontificated: “The person giving a sign of allegiance to President Trump is the killer here. He called him a symbol of white identity. The language he uses in this manifesto is all about invaders. It is all about invaders, similar to the killer at the synagogue in Pittsburgh and language President Trump used in a campaign ad before the midterm election. The word invader means something to people around the world.”

Tarrant agreed with Trump on one issue, so Trump is guilty; Tarrant also agrees with the Left on China and minimum wages, but that doesn’t make the Left guilty. How hypocritical can the liberal establishment get?