Quote someone inaccurately, you're a journalist. Quote someone accurately, you're a hatemonger

by Infidelesto on September 12, 2008 · 1 comment

Do you like this story?

I have to re-post Robert Spencer today since I’m short on time and heavy on thoughts.  

 

From ABC’s Charlie Gibson’s interview with Sarah Palin last night:

GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, “Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God.” Are we fighting a holy war?PALIN: You know, I don’t know if that was my exact quote.

GIBSON: Exact words.

What Palin actually said:

“Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God,” she exhorted the congregants. “That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan.”

For this, Charlie Gibson ought to be run out of town on the Dan Rather Express, and no one should mistake him any longer for a credible and even-handed journalist. But the incident put me in mind of the fact that whenever I or other anti-jihadists quote from Islamic texts, we’re accused of being “hatemongers,” “Islamophobic,” “bigots,” etc. This happens even when our quotes are accurate. See, for example, herehere and here.

So when someone accurately quotes Muslims calling their war a Holy War, that is Islamophobia. When someone misquotes Sarah Palin calling a war against jihad terrorists a Holy War, that’s journalism.

Charlie Gibson! Yes, you, Charlie! I’m talkin’ to you! If you want to find out which side — Palin-style conservatives or Osama-style jihadists – really thinks this is a Holy War, call me. I’ll be in the office all day. 

More journalism here.

You might be saying…”Oh Well, Charlie’s just a tough interviewer”

Then there’s this:

Here’s Gibson’s recent interview with The Messiah. You be the judge.

No questions about Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, Michael Phleger, William Ayers or foreign policy. No questions about his myriad changes of positions on issues like national defense and wire-tapping. The only prodding Gibson gave was on The Messiah’s complete abandonment of principle for expediency in abandoning public financing–and even that was light as a feather.

A few examples of Gibson’s questions:

GIBSON: Do you worry that [the 2008 race] could turn on race, age and class?… 

GIBSON: Is the hardest part of all this behind you or ahead of you?…

GIBSON: The picture of you in the paper, this morning, with your wife, watching the Clinton speech. What did you think of the Clinton speech?…

GIBSON: And finally your daughters. What did they say to you? Did they take it as a matter of course that Daddy could be nominated to be president? They never knew what older people know in terms of discrimination, although they may still feel some. What did they say about that?…

GIBSON: I watched closely your countenance last night, your mien, as you stood in that hall. You didn’t smile much. Has the joyfulness of this hit home yet? Do you take joy from it?…

These guys aren’t even TRYING to look neutral anymore…

 

Related posts:

  1. Journalist faces death penalty for insulting religion of 'peace'
  2. Gaza journalist alleges mistreatment by Israeli security forces
  3. Quote of the Day: Joe Leiberman
  4. Will Jimmy Carter get "Worst Person" award from Olbermann?
  5. Quote(s) Of The Day *updated*
  • http://infidelsarecool.com Philip Saenz

    Actually we are at war with two enemies, Islamists and liberals. That Charlie Gibson sure is a condescending jerk, isn’t he? But then what liberal isn’t condescending. They always “know” more than anyone else. So they think.