Paris riots and the courage of the Washington Times

Reporters David Sands and Sharon Behn, and the editors of the Washington Times show rare courage today in publishing an article which says what everyone knows, but the MSM has been afraid to say: "Rioters are Muslims, but don't say it".

In this age of "tolerance" and "diversity" and "multiculturalism", we often find a twisted portrayal of reality in the mainstream media. Many newspapers, like the Red Star, take great pains to suppress reference to race (in the event of bad news only) and national origin (if it will reflect poorly on the subject). This is called social engineering, which has nothing to do with the truth.

So the courage of the Washington Times is evident:

The rioters who have burned out neighborhoods in cities across France for a fortnight are overwhelmingly of North African and Arab ancestry, overwhelmingly young, overwhelmingly male, overwhelmingly cut off culturally and economically from the larger French society -- and overwhelmingly Muslim.

But saying they're Muslim is a subject of angry dispute. French officials downplay the religious connections, and some newspapers, particularly in the United States, avoid identifying the rioters as Muslim.

By downplaying the fact that most of the rioters in France are Muslim, it ignores the possibility that the impetus for the unrest may be Jihad/Islamic fundamentalist terror. This hasn't yet been shown to be the case, and the subject is in dispute, and the possibility is on the table. Islamic fundamentalist terror is obviously an active movement, and it would be irresponsible to hide that fact.

We salute the courage of the Washington Times. The fact that the rioters are Muslim may or may not be relevant, but what's wrong with letting the reader decide?