There seems to be a relationship emerging between the Muslim cartoons, the cowering western media, as it bows before the Islamic ginned up violence, and the willingness of Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft to yield to the censorship demands of the Chinese government.

And frankly, it is downright dangerous.

The world’s free press is bowing before tyranny. It is reminiscent of the press in controlled societies, such as the former Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. It is characteristic of all repressive regimes. Control of the flow of information is essential to maintaining power and hiding corruption and brutality. We see it in places like Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea, Syria, and to a slightly lesser degree in China. You could probably make your own list.

A free press is essential to freedom from tyranny. It is essential to keeping any government from oppressing and brutalizing its people. It is essential to realizing the yearning of people to be free. It has a critical and indispensable roll to play in honestly informing the public. A free press cannot allow itself to be controlled by the attacks of a barbarian culture. In the case of the cartoons self-censorship is a ruse; the by-product of intimidation. It is as bad as if it was dictated by a repressive regime.

Sure there are serious considerations to weigh particularly in times of war. Exposing secret projects or programs, for example, harms the U.S. and its safety while aiding the enemy. These are legitimate items for self-censorship or even government restrictions. But we are not talking about that kind of revelation.

Indeed, certain media, like the N.Y. Times, has no compunction when it comes to revealing secrets which harm the war effort of the U.S. and, in effect, aiding the enemy. Yet when it comes to characterizing the Islamic jihad for what it is, the Times runs away. Are they scared? Or is there a pattern of sympathy for the enemy? Is there a pattern that points to treason; pushing every edge far enough, but just short of garnering the charge?

Is the N.Y. Times, along with a host of other “free” media outlets, in fact trying to control the flow of information to achieve a particular objective or agenda? Why have these western media outlets ignored the made up cartoons that the Danish Islamic Imam, Abu Laban, fabricated and then hawked to the Arab leadership network? Is there a pattern here?

Let’s take the case of Yahoo and Google. Google has agreed to suppress information in China. But it is worse. If you go to the Chinese Google search engine they substitute fraudulent information. So not only are they just blocking access, they are disseminating propaganda to the public.

Yahoo is even more egregious. It is actually turning over information so that a man in China gets 8 years in prison for speaking out on the internet about Chinese corruption. And Yahoo is doing this voluntarily.

What does all this say about the future? It says we are about to face a world, with the aid of the “free” press, in which if you say things that the power structure or hierarchy disagrees with or does not like, you will be harassed, smeared, censored, punished, jailed, and even killed. And the scary thing is that one aspect of this hierarchy is religious in nature.

It is really ironic that the central thrust of so much of liberalism is to eradicate religion from the public arena. Yet here come the Islamic imams and this same liberal establishment rolls over and bows before the Islamic throne. Can we be forced to conclude that it is Christianity they seek to remove from the public square? Is it Israel they seek to chide? Are their objectives the same as Islam? Is that why we see such acquiescence? Surely this liberalism isn’t opposed to religion, just certain religions.

We dare not expose the hypocrisy, lying, and double standard of the Islamic movement, so the drumbeat goes. Such an exposure is said to constitute blasphemy. And blasphemy in the eyes of these Islamic fanatics is punishable by death. Yet blasphemy is selective. Their imams can make up horrendous cartoons showing Muhammed as a pig or a sodomite, but as long as that is associated with some twisted idea of jihad it suddenly becomes okay. These Islamists can send their young children to blow themselves up with some bizarre promise of sex with virgins in the afterlife as a reward and all is just fine. It seems okay to keep a populace trapped in poverty while cutting off the limbs and heads of those who may object to instill fear in a desperate people.

As for the press, we are given the appearance of a no win situation. The bottom line solution is to say nothing and let these barbarians rule the day. Unless, of course you agree with their agenda; then you remain silent or become their apologists to advance their cause.

It has been said that the pen is mightier than the sword. That is perhaps the reason these Islamist fanatics fear the truth. It may be why other oppressors also fear the truth. And in the eyes of these money hungry companies, like Google and Yahoo, truth is relative anyway so they’ll sell their souls to the devil in order to boast on Wall Street. Islam cannot defend its barbarity. So the solution for the Islamists is to prevent the revelation of their nakedness through any technique that works. And with the cowering liberal world, manacled in its selective chains of sensitivity and feelings, locked into its gluttony, the oppressors are ruling the day. To make themselves feel good, the cowardly, wallowing in their phony liberal sensitivities, go after the few who would stand up to such tyranny and oppression, patting themselves on the back of self-delusion; applauding themselves for their phantom courage and glowing in the lights of attention.

Jesus, the central focus of history, said, “You shall know the truth and the truth will set you free.” As the Chinese citizenry will attest, no truer words have ever been spoken.