Go Ad Free

Riddle us this: if commercial airplanes are hijacked and then deliberately flown into buildings with the stated goal of destroying those aforementioned buildings and killing as many innocent people as possible, can you refer to such an occurrence as an act of “terrorism”?

The answer is obvious to anyone with a functioning brain.

Alas, the brainiacs at the woefully woke Canadian Broadcasting Corporation are struggling mightily with the “T-word” these days – for reasons that remain baffling.

In just two days, we will be marking the grim 25th anniversary of 9/11. Anyone older than 30 no doubt remembers exactly where they were on Tuesday, September 11th, 2001. That’s when four commercial jets were hijacked. Two flew into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York, one targeted the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., and the fourth nose-dived into a field in Pennsylvania after passengers rose up and tried to regain control of United Airlines flight 93.

Almost 3,000 innocent people died that day. It was disturbing, gross, infuriating, and yes, a disgusting act of terrorism perpetrated by the terrorist group, al-Qaeda.

Oops, did we say “terrorism” and “terrorist”? Certain CBCers don’t like that sort of language.

Via the foggy lens of revisionist history, the CBC would rather that you don’t jump to any conclusions regarding what happened on September 11, 2001. Which is to say, the CBC thinks there’s some, oh, we don’t know, nuance regarding what happened on that tragic Tuesday.

The crux of the matter: a CBC memo was recently uncovered from the broadcaster’s so-called “journalistic standards and practices office.” The memo channels the broadcaster’s “longstanding language guidance.” And it’s nothing short of shocking. Here’s the most offensive paragraph verbatim: “Do not refer to the Sept. 11 attacks as terrorist attacks. The hijackings led to passenger jet crashes in Washington, D.C., Pennsylvania and Manhattan. The World Trade Center was destroyed.”

Oh, those were “crashes”? Yet, if you purposely pilot a vehicle into a building, is that really a “crash”? Doesn’t the word crash imply that an accident had occurred? 9/11 was no accident. It was a deliberate bloodbath.

So, who is the author of this rubbish? That would be Basem Boshra. He’s the senior director of journalistic standards and public trust at CBC News. We swear, we’re not making this up: “journalistic standards and public trust.” Does it get more Orwellian than that given that Boshra appears to be on a jihad to suppress the truth?

Predictably – and thankfully – there was been an avalanche of outrage regarding Boshra’s whitewashing of 9/11. And the CBC only backtracked once its puppet masters, the Carney Liberals, also expressed outrage.

But a mea culpa is not enough. Boshra has to go. He’s clearly inept.

Recently we brought our big, beautiful billboard truck to CBC HQ in Toronto to deliver that message. As for now, the question arises: will the CBC do the right thing in the days ahead and give Boshra a pink slip?

One more thing: the CBC forever justifies its taxpayer-funded corporate welfare because it sees itself as a watchdog against misinformation and disinformation.

And yet this entity can’t call terrorism “terrorism” and can’t label a terrorist a “terrorist.” If that’s the case, the very definition of misinformation and disinformation is portraying the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, as mere “crashes”…