In the April edition of the Blaze Magazine, the question was asked of the media, why have American journalists “chosen to embrace Islam and defend it to the hilt against any perceived form of defamation”?

The fact that we haven’t answered that question twelve years after the murder of thousands of innocents on September 11th, shows that we have failed to deter the American media’s anti-American agenda.  And by extension, we have failed the people of Boston.

And for that, we owe the victims of the Boston Marathon bombing a sincere apology.

Nowhere has our failure to hold the American media accountable for providing cover to our enemies been more prevalent than this terrible week.

Completely devoid of facts, liberal journalists set out to respond to the terrorist attacks as being perpetrated by right-wingers, conservatives, or Second Amendment supporters.

We were told it was right-wingers marking the anniversary of Columbine, or the birthday of Hitler.

We were told it was anti-government groups upset about Tax Day.

And we were told it had to be a “right-wing nutjob”, marking the location of the original Tea Party.

What the media failed to do however, was to identify radical Islam as a possible suspect.

As details of the suspects are slowly revealed even as we speak, the willful attempt to cover up the role that radical Islam plays in this and many other attacks on our country border on the criminal.

We are learning that one suspect was a “very religious” Muslim.

The other suspect, according to his social media page, held a world view in the eyes of Islam.

They posted videos sympathetic to al-Qaeda on YouTube, an account which included a subscription to a channel titled “Allah is the one”.

All of this had to be a massive shock to the media, who despite their willingness to point fingers at the right, were unable to bring themselves to explore the possibility that radical Islam could have played a role.

But the media corruption doesn’t stop with politically correct coverage of these radicals. The masking of even the most minor of negative coverage toward radical Islam in today’s media complex is astounding.

As Andrew Breitbart once said, media bias isn’t just about “the things that they report inaccurately”, it’s also about “the things they fail to report”.

Earlier this month, the Associated Press set about erasing the term ‘Islamist’ from the minds of their readers for fear that the term was becoming “a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals.”

Last September, Newsweek had the audacity to use a cover photo which showed an obviously enraged group of Muslims, accompanied by the title ‘Muslim Rage’.

‘This should not be!’ the media puppets announced, as this was an act of grouping all Muslims under the umbrella of rage, and was therefore Islamophobic.

Nevermind the fact that the image was of Islamic protests being caused by a faux excuse for the Benghazi attacks. Nevermind that enraged radical Islamists had just murdered four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, in Libya.

Rather than focusing on the real issues here, the liberal media has done everything in its power to avoid pointing the finger at radical Islamists. They seek explanation and understanding for why a particular group of people are prone to terrorist attacks, without ever naming that group.

And in the end, none of these false justifications for violence throughout the Middle East, and most recently on the streets of Boston, are acceptable.

The rage and the terror are predominantly perpetrated through the prism of radical Islam. The rage has been consistent and perpetual, and it has long been evident prior to Monday’s attack.

While we continue to fight over words and labels, pointing fingers at innocent groups of people, extremists continue to point their RPG’s at our foreign diplomats, storm our embassy walls, burn American flags, call for beheadings and public hangings, and on and on.  Now they bomb our very own streets.  All the while, the media criminally continues to whistle through the graveyard.

Anyone that points that out is immediately labeled Islamophobic.

That said, I would like to propose a change in how the media labels things of this nature. I’d like to redefine the term Islamophobia. The phrase, much like the race card, has been overused by the media and has been played out. It has outlived its usefulness. It no longer sticks as a term of bigotry or intolerance toward radical Muslims.

Instead, the meaning should revert to a more literal translation – Islam-phobia.

The phobia involves those in the media continually capitulating to the radicals and terrorists killing in the name of their religion. The phobia involves Democrats who continually bow down to the unreasonable demands of terror-linked domestic organizations such as CAIR, or the ICNA, and are willing to release known terrorists in a foolish attempt to establish peace.

The phobia equates to fear. That is why liberals refuse to stand up to radical Islam, and it is why the media refuses to accurately portray the level of rage being executed in the name of the tenets of radical Islam. They are afraid.

No more.

Journalism is a profession. Stop acting like amateurs. Stop being Islamophobes.

At some point, you will have to grow a spine when it comes to the threat of radical Muslim rage.  At some point, you will have to stop pussyfooting and tiptoeing your way around the subject matter.  In the end, at some point you will have to address reality, and not continue to long for some fantasy world that exists only in your minds.

Until we hold the media’s feet to the fire on this, we will have failed the victims of the Boston bombing.  We will have failed the victims of the Iran hostage crisis in 1979.  Those killed in the World Trade Center bombing in 1993.  At the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.  With the USS Cole bombing in 2000.  At the Fort Hood massacre in 2009.  And of course, September 11th.

We will have failed them all.  And for that, we owe them a sincere and humbling apology.