Clash Of Worldviews

As of this writing, a group of US commandos secretly went into Pakistan and executed terrorist leader Osama Bin Laden. This was a man who set out to kill as many Americans as possible, having officially declared war on the US in the 1980’s. He murdered thousands of innocent, unsuspecting civilians in New York on September 11, 2001, plus other surprise attacks against US soldiers and against citizens in other countries. As radical of a regime as that in Saudi Arabia disowned Bin Laden, leaving him to the former government in Afghanistan, one that abused the populace even worse than the Saudis do. By any stretch of the imagination, Osama Bin Laden was a brutal war enemy who deserved death. If he had been captured he would have made a circus out of any trial, garnering support for more terrorist criminals who would have caused more death of innocent men, women, and children.

To show how much of a contrast there is with the American liberal press, today’s news quoted journalism professor Robert Jensen, an apparently very left-wing journalism professor at the generally liberal University of Texas at Austin. Today’s news mentioned the leader of the US Joint Special Operations Command, the leader of the heroes who risked their lives to protect us by killing Bin Laden. The commander had been a journalism major at UT before pursuing a career in the military. Jensen’s comments give us a clear view of how radically left-wing the American media is:

“There are a whole bunch of people who go through journalism school and end up being things antithetical to the spirit of journalism,” Jensen said. “I think the heart and soul of journalism is independent, critical evaluation of concentrated power, and one of the centers of that power in the United States today is the military,” he said. Jensen said it’s important to question the role of the military in American society. “Obviously, a lot of people believe it’s a force for good in the world,” he said, “but I think the evidence is against that interpretation.” (see the article here)

Now please do not miss the perspective here. According to this journalism professor, the “heart and soul” of journalism is to question concentrated power, and feels that the American military is not a force for good in the world. Being a commander in the military is said to be against the spirit of journalism. Somehow journalism has changed from trying to report facts to somehow deciding that concentrated power is something that should be criticized. Somewhere along the way our media has abandoned the idea of reporting what is happening so the rest of us can make up our minds, and now view themselves as a force that is supposed to take sides. I wonder whether Jensen’s journalism students were taught to question the concentrated power over the last two years when the liberal Democrats had both houses of congress and the executive branch. If anything was concentrated power, it was then. Were Jensen’s students taught that the liberal politicians were not a force for good in the world? It does not take much to guess the answer.

But even worse, if that is possible, is that upon the execution of a truly evil man, we have professors working in taxpayer-funded universities teaching future journalists that our military are the bad guys. When evil men like Ben Laden declare war and come to our cities and murder thousands of innocent people, and we bring justice to the enemy, our own people call us the bad guys. Insanity.

About humblesmith

Christian Apologist & Philosopher
This entry was posted in Culture, Government. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Clash Of Worldviews

  1. Ryan says:

    I think you make an interesting point regarding the role of media. I personally did not know anyone who was killed on September 11th. I completely agree that this was a horrible act of murder. I understand that the news of Osama’s death is very personal to those who were directly affected. No doubt this man supported terrible acts of murder (that is evident through his own testimonies). However, is vengeance and closure the same thing?

    What Osama supported was truly horrible (I intend to emphasize the brutality of what he supported, I want to make sure I acknowledge that) , but it is also true that throughout many centuries the West (or what is represented as the West) has in many different ways oppressed certain people and governments in the Middle East

    This (I know), does not just involve the U.S. Colonial powers at times asserted themselves on Arab countries, and I assume there were certain terrible acts of terror carried out from time to time (and still are) in the name of closure.

    Does revenge justify human collateral? Osama committed a terrible crime against so many families, besides closure, what did his death actually achieve, besides a change in leadership. You can kill a man, but his ideas and threats echo on through his followers. News of Osama’s death by Western hands may be received by many as closure, that the current U.S government carried out what the certain members of the past government said they would do: bring Osama to justice (whatever that means). Of course to state as a government, “we are going to shoot Osama to death” just isn’t quite as poetic as “bringing him to justice”. Bringing a man to justice can potentially bring fourth powerful imagery: that this man is going to be judged.

    I hope Osama in death doesn’t become another symbol, another rationale to wage war. I hope that the news of his death doesn’t add further fuel for more “justice” by Osama’s followers.

    So back to the question, is (in this case) vengeance and closure the same thing?

  2. Ryan says:

    And what does this mean from a Biblical perspective?

  3. Ryan says:

    I apologise if my first post didn’t make quite as much sense as I intended it to.

    I should have read through it again before I posted it 🙂

    I also should have put in some more full stops and question marks to clarify what I meant.

    I think (despite my ramblings) what I mean to put forward is the question: Can the killing of a man who promoted murder be justified in the name of closure?

    I also realise that under different circumstances the operation in Pakistan may have resulted in the capture of Osama and others, rather than their deaths. Recently, certain people seem to have been openly celebrating Osama’s death as an “achievement”.

    It would be interesting to explore this notion through a Biblical perspective.

    Just a thought.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s