For the past several years I have been considering an article to address the issue which the media is constantly whining and wondering about; namely, the killing of journalists overseas in war zones and elsewhere. I have hesitated until today because I write with some directness, and did not want to seem to be endorsing such activity. But I really think that the question should be asked not as “Why are journalists being killed overseas?” but rather as “Why is it that more journalists are not being killed overseas and domestically?”

The killing of journalists in overseas war zones is easy to understand. Almost all journalists seem go to war zones with no intention of assisting their readership to understand what is going on from the only angle that counts, and that is the military. Instead, they go to war as the enemy of everyone who is fighting in the war. They are embedded in U.S. and NATO forces, for example, and expect to be protected by them as they search high and low for unvetted sources who will claim that “human rights” or the “laws of war” have been infringed by their protectors. They are, for all intents and purposes, a fifth column within the U.S. military.

When they are not trying to harm those upon whom their lives depend, they write endless, weepy stories about irrelevant-to-the-war matters, such as the lack of women’s rights, the occurrences of rape, malnutrition, the absence of schools, the misogyny of local men, and the brutality of the enemy. While most of these things are usually true, they do not help readers understand the war, although they certainly do, and are meant to, assist the Democratic and Republican interventionists who want endless war in the name of using the U.S. military to impose on foreigners — especially Muslims — societal norms to match those of the saintly West.

Overseas

The media’s coverage of the Islamic State (IS) is a good example of the journalists’ deliberate failures. What have we learned from journalists about IS? Well, IS kills its enemies without mercy; it rapes and otherwise degrades women; it tortures and kills prisoners; it steals ancient artifacts and tears down ancient structures and sells the pieces for profit; it recruits fighters via the internet; and, turning from truthful charges to the grandest lie of all, it has nothing to do with the “genuine” Islamic faith.

After reading reams of this tear-stained fluff, which has been media’s norm for many years, readers are, take your pick, appalled, alarmed, sickened, mad as hell, or, most likely, bored silly. After the reading, they are also ignorant about the war, the enemy, the people, and the lands in which U.S. forces are fighting. They will have learned virtually nothing important about IS, only that they are “bad men.” Well, no kidding. But what do we know about important matters pertaining to IS?

Question: What is motivating IS forces to continue fighting a militarily overpowering alliance, and what is allowing them to hold that vastly superior force at bay?

Answer not given by media: The strength of their belief in Salafi and Wahhabi Islam, both of which are legitimate sects within Sunni Islam. Without reporting this obvious fact, the only career-benefiting upside of the journalists’ false reporting is that they do not offend Obama’s Muslim friends, America’s Arab tyrant allies, and their masters in the Democratic party.

Question: Why is it that after the media claims that IS has lost a city — be it Aleppo, Surt, Ramadi, Fallujah, etc. — the Arab media, which always is closest to the battlefield, continue to report that the cities are still being cleared of IS units, that IS units are still strong enough to stage counterattacks, or that IS has retaken sections of the city?

Answer not given by the media: Because the Western media are off covering the ephemera of women’s and human rights and the selling of antiquities. Covering battles, after all, is dangerous work made worse by the fact that Western journalists are hated with equal fury by both IS and its Syrian and Iraqi opponents.

Question: Why is it that IS — again, at war with the strongest military powers on earth — is able to continue to field a large and well-trained fighting force; operate effective logistics lines and other lines of communication in Iraq and Syria; bring in fresh manpower and seemingly unlimited amounts of ordnance from overseas; manage overseas attacks in places like Russia, Malaysia, and Europe; infiltrate fighters into any country of its choosing; and enjoys a steady and obviously sufficient flow of income that allows it to wage war over the breadth of two countries?

Answer not given by the media: The power of faith among IS fighters and their well-honed fighting capabilities; the belief among IS’s many private and governmental Muslim donors that IS fighters are doing Allah’s work on earth; the wide spread international support among Muslim youth, which stems from faith and admiration, not brain-washing; and the transparent lack of a will to win among Western political leaders and generals, men and women who are exceptional only when it comes to believing their own propaganda, the mindless twaddle produced by Western journalists, and the lie that Islam — or any major religion — is a “religion of peace.”

Given that most Western journalists appear to see themselves fighting a war against all who are fighting wars, and feel they have an obligation only to mislead, rather than inform, their readership about the war itself, it is no surprise that they are being killed. Indeed, if I were an IS or al-Qaeda commander, I would designate a hunter-killer detachment and assign to it the task of ridding the battlefield of journalists. Alas, the law will not permit U.S. forces to do likewise.

Domestically

One of the things that has surprised me most since the millennium is that more journalists have not been killed here in the United States. For more than half of America’s citizens, U.S. journalism means a constant and ferocious attack on all they hold dear in terms of faith, nationalism, liberty, peace, unity, children, language, and history. U.S. journalists, in a very real and flamboyant sense, are the lethal enemies of the American republic, notwithstanding Senator McCain’s Soros-like comments about why the media should not be condemned for being the enemies of the republic they manifestly are. Let us review some of the ways in which journalists have proven their opposition to the republic’s survival:

• Through their unending advocacy of multiculturalism, diversity, inclusiveness, and the nobility of sexual deviancy, they deliberately seek to divide Americans against each other, dissolve the cohesiveness of the Union, and establish minority rule.
• They are unflagging supporters of the practice of infanticide-for-profit that will be at some point — if not stopped soon — one of the pivotal issues that prompts civil war. (NB: You may recall, that General Lee’s battle flag was a symbol, not of slavery, but of resistance to perceived oppression by the national government. Thus, it would be a perfect symbol for the resistance of those oppose the national government’s funding and protection for those malignant wretches who murder infants.)
• They support Nazi-like “hate speech laws,” which are meant to remove 1st Amendment protections for Americans who say things which they and their Democratic masters oppose, or which offend the highly educated sensibilities of the poor little darlings.
• They are unflinching supporters of overseas interventionist wars that seek to militarily impose sordid Western “values” on foreigners who do not want them, a process that for seventy-five years has wasted the lives and limbs of U.S. Marines and soldiers, and bankrupted the republic. At the same time, they oppose doing whatever it takes to win wars necessary to the defense of the United States against genuine threats.
• They refuse to call to account, indeed, they apologize for and support, criminals like Obama and Clinton who use the national government’s agencies to persecute political opponents, knowingly break the espionage laws, unconstitutionally change the meaning of legislation passed by the Congress, and attack and destroy foreign countries that do not threaten the United States, doing so without Constitutional declarations of war.
• They fully support any foreigner or U.S. citizen who seeks to undermine the republic; they are owned by the Israel-First fifth column; they support those who burn flags; sympathize with those who attack the supporters of candidates they do not like; apologize for violence by minority groups that kills and wounds law-enforcement officers and destroys the businesses and homes of everyday citizens; and endorse any argument aimed at preventing the control of the republic’s borders.
• They are vicious and unanimous foes of the 2nd Amendment because it is the last remaining tool — if Trump fails — with which Americans can defend their republic against open borders, abortionists, gross violations of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, illegal and unnecessary foreign wars, unlimited immigration, tyrannical national government, financial ruin, religious and political persecution, and, overall, the further transformation of their republic into a Third World rat hole.

Again, far be it from me to wish ill on any of the journalists who do the foregoing intentional damage to the republic, and who Senator McCain seems to believe benefit the republic by trying to destroy it, which is, of course, the kind of logic that demonstrates that McCain left his brain in Hanoi when he, sadly for America, returned home. The journalists’ offenses do, however, put me in mind of the old joke about lawyers.

Question: How would you describe 50,000 dead lawyers, who are buried under 1,000 feet of concrete, at the bottom of the ocean?

Answer: Barely a start.

I had not thought of it before, but it seems to me that that joke probably is applicable to other malodorous professions.