Re: ISIS needs to hire a PR flack
Oh, I read what you wrote. I just can't believe that you're not trolling, you really believe this drivel.
First, to your "analysis" (and may I say, seldom have I seen the first four letters of that word so richly earned, so kudos there). You are aware, I presume, that "radical Islam", together with its close relative "pan-Arab nationalism", was deliberately cultivated as a tool of foreign policy, first by the British during World War One, and later by the Americans in the pursuit of cheap oil? That during the 1980s, the CIA was arming the Taliban and the Reagan administration was helping to develop the Iranian arms industry? That George H W Bush and Bill Clinton both fostered the growth of radical Sunni factions in Iraq, with the aim of weakening Saddam and to counter the regional influence of Iran? To characterise these same people as "agents of... Soviet foreign policy" is pure deflection.
Second, exactly how much "leftist media" are you watching? Because the sources I see spend quite a bit of time talking about how horrible ISIS is. The idea that somehow the libruls are turning a blind eye to Islamist atrocities is purely a product of whatever meth-addled hallucinations you've been watching on whatever deranged media channel you do subscribe to - it's simply not borne out by anything in objective reality.
Yes, I daresay the BBC would get itself quite in a tizzy if, say, some deranged right-winger massacred several dozen schoolchildren at a camp in Norway. (I'm not sure what you're trying to convey with "utter shite to pay in the media", but there were certainly some strongly worded opinions on the subject. Are you trying to imply that there shouldn't be, that we should all be like, "meh, whatever" to these things?) But to imply that they don't talk about atrocities committed by muslims because they're somehow "in bed with" the latter - is quite simply, not something that could be said, with a straight face, by anyone who's been paying the slightest attention.
As to "the actual fact of Islam": yes, there are muslims who do terrible things, and we see them on the news. There are also non-muslims who do things just as terrible, and we see them on the news too, but for some reason less attention gets paid to their religion. (You know that, between 1980 and 2005, there were more terrorist attacks on US soil perpetrated by Jewish extremists than by Muslims, right? And both of these put together are hugely outweighed by the contributions of Catholic (mostly Latino - Puerto Rican, Cuban) factional groups.)
And there are the muslims I work with every day, who are generally above-average in terms of courtesy and conscientiousness, if not necessarily in intelligence. So which group should I judge? The ones I'm happy to have working beside me, or the ones the media, in its ever-more-frantic attempt to capture and hold my eyeballs, thinks I'm more likely to watch?
Not everyone who disagrees with you is motivated by political correctness (whatever that even means) or "leftist ideology". Some of us just resent being played for suckers by the military-intelligence-policing-industrial complex.