Yesterday, I wrote about the three American servicemen who stopped a terror attack aboard a high speed train in France. In view of recent history, I joked that president Obama would probably put the guys up on charges for what they did. That engendered some nasty emails from people who took offense at the idea that the heroes would be punished. Well, listen to this:
The three men are Americans Spencer Stone, Alek Skarlatos and Anthony Sadler. Stone, who was unarmed, ran up to the gunman and jumped him, knocking the rifle to the ground. The gunman then took a box cutter and cut Stone more than once. All three Americans pummeled the gunman until he lost consciousness. Stone was seriously hurt, but is expected to make a full recovery. The men received medals from the French and were interviewed by the media.
So what does the citadel of liberalism, the New York Times, report in the papers on the news stands this morning? It says two Americans stopped a possible terror attack and mentions deep in the report that some other media are saying that the two are members of the marines. Why is it so important to the Times to bury the fact that these guys are members of the armed forces? Why is it also so important to the Times to call it a "possible" terror attack. (They certainly don't call it Islamic terror, even though the attacker is a Moslem from Morocco who was on the radar of French police as a possible terrorist.) This liberal narrative nonsense is doing us all great harm.
Oh, and for those of you who are considering repeat emails, don't waste the effort. I am proud of what these three American men did and nothing you say will change that. Likewise, I know Islamic terrorism when I see it, and this was it.
The three men are Americans Spencer Stone, Alek Skarlatos and Anthony Sadler. Stone, who was unarmed, ran up to the gunman and jumped him, knocking the rifle to the ground. The gunman then took a box cutter and cut Stone more than once. All three Americans pummeled the gunman until he lost consciousness. Stone was seriously hurt, but is expected to make a full recovery. The men received medals from the French and were interviewed by the media.
So what does the citadel of liberalism, the New York Times, report in the papers on the news stands this morning? It says two Americans stopped a possible terror attack and mentions deep in the report that some other media are saying that the two are members of the marines. Why is it so important to the Times to bury the fact that these guys are members of the armed forces? Why is it also so important to the Times to call it a "possible" terror attack. (They certainly don't call it Islamic terror, even though the attacker is a Moslem from Morocco who was on the radar of French police as a possible terrorist.) This liberal narrative nonsense is doing us all great harm.
Oh, and for those of you who are considering repeat emails, don't waste the effort. I am proud of what these three American men did and nothing you say will change that. Likewise, I know Islamic terrorism when I see it, and this was it.
No comments:
Post a Comment