Left Media Denies Reality of Muslim Violence in North Carolina

Here's an exerpt from the PDF of the handwritten letter that Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, the accused attacker of students at the University of North Carolina sent to WDTV-11 in Raliegh Durham:

I live with the holy Koran as my constitution for right and wrong and definition of justice. The Koran, also spelled, Quron, is a scientific and mathematic miracle so there can be no doubt that it is from a supernatural source, i.e. Allah, the creator and controller of all things.
...
Allah gives permission in the Koran for the followers of Allah to attack those who have raged war against them, with the expectation of eternal paradise in case of martyrdom and/or living one's life in obedience of all of Allah's commandments found throughout the Koran's 114 chapters.

I've read all 114 chapters approximately 15 times since June of 2003 when I started reading the Koran.

The U.S. government is responsible for the deaths of and the torture of countless followers of Allah, my brothers and sisters. My attack on Americans at UNC-CH on March 3rd was in retaliation for similar attacks orchestrated by the U.S. government on my fellow followers of Allah in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, and other Islamic territories. I did not act out of hatred for Americans, but out of love for Allah instead. I live only to serve Allah, by obeying all of Allah's commandments of which I am aware by reading and learning the contents of the Koran.

I would be glad to have an on-camera interview.

Sincerly yours,
Mohammed Taheri-azar

So, the holy Koran is Mo's constitution for right and wrong and definition of justice? And that motivated him to rent the largest SUV he could and plow into a crowd of students in obedience of Allah's commandments.

Isn't Islam wonderful?

Lamestream Media Refuses to Call This a Terrorist Attack, or Mo a Muslim

Mark Steyn, in yet another brilliant column describes how the New York Al Queda Times in it's report on the story never mentioned the fact that Mo was a Muslim. The entire motivation for Mo's attack was based on his religion and the NY Al Queda Times didn't consider that "All the news that's fit to print."

More from Steyn:

And yet the M-word appears nowhere in the Times report. Whether intentionally or not, they seem to be channeling the great Sufi theologian and jurist al-Ghazali, who died a millennium ago but whose first rule on the conduct of dhimmis -- non-Muslims in Muslim society -- seem to have been taken on board by the Western media:

The dhimmi is obliged not to mention Allah or His Apostle. . . .
Are they teaching that at Columbia Journalism School yet?

A fellow called Mohammed mows down a bunch of students? Just one of those things -- like a gran'ma in my neck of the woods a couple of years back who hit the wrong pedal in the parking lot and ploughed through a McDonald's, leaving the place a hideous tangle of crumbled drywall, splattered patties and incendiary hot apple-pie filling. Yet, according to his own statements, Taheri-azar committed an act of ideological domestic terrorism, which he'd planned for two months. He told police he was more disappointed more students in his path weren't struck and that he'd rented the biggest vehicle the agency had in order to do as much damage to as many people as possible. The Persian car pet may have been flooring it, but the media are idling in neutral, if not actively reversing away from the story as fast as they can.

Taheri-azar informed the judge he was "thankful for the opportunity to spread the will of Allah," and it was apparently the will of Allah that he get behind the wheel of Allah.

Meanwhile, a new Washington Post/ABC poll finds that, in the words of the Post, "nearly half of Americans -- 46 percent -- have a negative view of Islam, seven percentage points higher than in the tense months after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, when Muslims were often targeted for violence."

"Often" targeted? Want to put some hard numbers on that? Like to compare the "violence" Americans perpetrated on Muslims after the slaughter of thousands of their fellow citizens in the name of Allah with, say, the death toll perpetrated by Muslims annoyed over some itsy-bitsy cartoons in an obscure Danish newspaper? In September 2001, 99.99999 percent of Americans behaved with remarkable forbearance. If they're less inclined to give the benefit of the doubt these days, perhaps it's because of casual slurs like the Post's or the no-jihad-to-see-here-folks tone of the Times.