Spanish photographer Samuel Aranda won the 2011 World Press Photo of the Year award Friday for an image of a veiled woman holding a wounded relative in her arms after a demonstration in Yemen. … the image has religious ‘almost Biblical’ overtones and noted its resemblance in composition to Michelangelo’s Pieta — but in a Muslim setting. …”
“Almost Biblical.” Not… even… close… Comparing Michelangelo’s Pietà to some snapshot of a burqa-ed Muslim woman holding some injured Yemeni street protester is an ideal example of Westerners wearing rose-colored glasses. Many Western “intellectuals” are bending over backwards to placate the largely violent and intolerant Muslim World, because they want to believe in an “Arab Spring.” The Pietà “analogy” is not an analogy at all. It is political correctness gone mad.
The burqa-ed woman is wearing latex gloves, for Christ’s sake! Is she afraid of being soiled by or soiling the wounded man she’s holding? Why is the woman covered from head to toe in black, except for an eye-slit? Because Islamists are so repressed a la Freud that they can’t trust themselves to look upon their own women. The burqa is the sure sign of the third-place status of Muslim women — they can’t drive, work, or be seen to varying degrees depending on what dysfunctional Islamic country in which they reside. Yemen ranks worst in the world according to The Global Gender Gap Report.
Jesus was a man of peace. His mother Mary stood by his side through the worst of times — and she didn’t wear a burqa or latex gloves. “Jesus publicly included many women as his disciples” (see here also for Biblical citations). When Jesus rose from the dead, the first person he appeared to was Mary Magdalene.
So to you “jurors” for selecting the 2011 World Press Photo of the Year award: You got it wrong. It’s a photo — and not the best I’ve ever seen. Do you morons remember who Michelangelo was and what he accomplished — like his David? Michelangelo’s work was sublime, not the product of some digital, idiot-proof, one-shot camera.
For the second time in a few months we have seen a crazy global Israel-About-to-Attack-Iran Story. I don’t want to go into all of the details but this tale is an example of how the media has just lost it completely due to a combination of laziness (reporters don’t really do research or check sources); agenda; ignorance; and good old sensationalism. Partly, too, it arises from the difficulty of the mass media in dealing with the Internet media era and the difficulty of the Internet media in achieving decent journalistic standards.
A couple of months ago a level of hysteria was reached on the basis of three stories:
The Washington Post’s editorial writers ought to read their own newspaper. Monday’s lead editorial bemoaned the fact that having illegal aliens go to the “back of the line” is deceptive since there is no “line” for them:
Among the second wave of Arab Spring uprisings that followed Tunisia, Syria was the most spectacular “out of the blue” that suddenly arose in the face of the media and analytic community. Just days before Deraa exploded with protests last March, some analysts were still scrutinizing Syria’s circumstances and declaring the country to be immune from the Arab Spring. Nor did reporters who visited the country spot signs of a brewing storm.
When the Spanish conquered the Aztecs, they promptly demolished the Aztec capital (Tenochtitlan) and built a cathedral on top of the natives’ great and most important twin temples — the city center. Did the desecration/destruction of Tenochtitlan and slaughter of the Aztec people legitimize the Spanish conquest of the great Valley of Mexico? Of course not. The Spanish were greedy, murderous thugs. Similarly, Arabs invaded and destroyed Jerusalem in 691 A.D. and built their al-Aqsa mosque on top of the indigenous Jews’ most holy place. So yippee for the Arabs?
So now we find that Muslim Arabs point their fannies at the “sacred(?)” al-Aqsa Mosque during their daily prayers. That’s a strange way for showing reverence for the “third most important” Muslim shrine. It’s plain silly. Watch for yourself:
I’d like to share with you a secret. Every day I read and hear things by people who claim to be experts on the Middle East. I have read them on the land; I have read them on the sea; I have read them in the air.
And they will never surrender to reality. Here are the two main causes of error:
–They think the Middle East is just like the West so they can extrapolate from their own experience. When someone would say, “If I were Yasir Arafat, I’d….” My response would be: Stop right there. I must run out to the corner store and get a pack of cigarettes. I have never smoked a cigarette. And I kept on running. You are not Arafat or Khomeini or Saddam Hussein or whatever and unless you have some understanding of how they actually think–and not your own Western pragmatic interpretation of what they should think–there’s no sense in discussing it.
In 2005, Saudi prince Alwaleed Bin Talal donated $20 million dollars each to Harvard and Georgetown Universities. In the years since, Georgetown has earned considerably more press for its use of the prince’s largesse, through which it renamed an extant center founded in 1993 as the Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding (ACMCU). This is due in no small part to the efforts of the center’s director, John Louis Esposito, America’s foremost apologist for ultra-fundamentalist Wahhabi Islam. The result of the Saudi-Esposito lash-up has been the emergence of ACMCU as an academic institution that promotes vigorously the “Palestinian narrative” and hostility to Israel.
…If Florida courts accept provisions of Islamic Sharia law or other foreign laws and legal codes which are inconsistent with American laws it will undermine public policies enacted by our representative form of government and change our value system. …
The dangers of Shariah should be self-evident and, thankfully, the good people of the Florida Family Association (FFA) are working against Islamism in their home state. The Obama administration, some other Western governments, and the Western mainstream media are generally soft-peddling the dangers of radical Islam, so people who value freedom and democracy should be ever vigilant. If the FFA can fluster Ahmed Rehab of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the terrorist-apologists and Shariah pushers du jour, the FFA must be doing something right.
What would Shariah mean? It would mean Islamists attempting to “destroy Western civilization from within.” It would mean misogyny and “honor killings” of innocent women. It would mean religiously-sanctioned lying (“taqiyya”) to advance the overriding of our Constitution with Islamic “law.” It would mean non-Muslims (”infidels”) living at best as third-class citizens (“dhimmitude”). It would mean Muslim cab drivers refusing blind customers with “unclean” seeing-eye-dogs. It would mean allowing the creation of autonomous Islamic “no-go zones” right here in the U.S. where American law would have no standing. Should I go on? Would you live under Shariah for fear of “inciting” Muslim anger rather than standing up for democracy? I won’t. Luckily, there are groups like the Florida Family Association fighting Shariah — and succeeding:
Mark Durie is a theologian, human rights activist and pastor of an Anglican church. He has published many articles and books on the language and culture of the Acehnese, Christian-Muslim relations and religious freedom. A graduate of the Australian National University and the Australian College of Theology, he has held visiting appointments at the University of Leiden, MIT, UCLA and Stanford, and was elected a Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities in 1992. On January 18, he spoke to the Middle East Forum in Philadelphia.
Federal departments and agencies tasked with safeguarding the U.S. must first safeguard themselves against Islamistinfiltration. Recent news items about Muslims having security clearances rejected or revoked suggest that at least some government entities are forgoing political correctness and taking this problem seriously. More need to follow suit, but the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is determined to make life difficult for them.
On a single day, the New York Times has been known to publish anywhere from two to six anti-Israel articles, editorials, op-ed pieces, and letters. Today, I see a new danger arising in their pages.
After spending a year proclaiming the triumph of democracy and the miracle of the Arab Spring and, as PM Netanyahu has just noted, refusing to document the existential danger in which Israel finds herself, the Newspaper of Record has now begun the process of normalizing Islam in North America and Europe. Its pro-Muslim “multicultural” agenda is, paradoxically, another form of racism, but I quibble.
The Obama administration supports “democracy” and “self determination” in the Middle East—two euphemisms that, in the real world, refer to “mob-rule” and “Islamic radicalization,” respectively. Yet, as Jimmy Carter recently put it: “I don’t have any problem with that [an "Islamist victory" in Egypt], and the U.S. government doesn’t have any problem with that either. We want the will of the Egyptian people to be expressed.”
Has there ever been a time when one group of people openly exposes its animosity for another group of people—even as this second group not only ignores the animosity, but speaks well, enables, and legitimizes the first group?
Welcome to the 21st century, where Western politicians empower those Muslims who are otherwise constantly and openly denouncing all non-Muslims as enemies to be fought and subjugated.
Google speaks with a forked tongue. The Internet giant is a hypocritical company, censoring valid news because of political correctness while at the same time urging its customers to act to oppose those whom want “the power to pick and choose what you will be able to see and do on the Internet.” Google has shut down the venerable Palestinian Media Watch’s (PMW’s) YouTube account because PMW dares to translate anti-Jewish violent hate-speech produced by Palestinian media from Arabic into English. This is not the first time Google has stifled PMW — the Internet portal has also permitted, “YouTube [to] host… genocidal antisemitic videos.”Important point: There’s a difference between 1) exposing hatred for the purpose of enlightening the public, as PMW does, and 2) groups whom are actually posting videos to promote hatred. Does Google understand this?
Here’s the scoop: “In response to yesterday’s PMW video-bulletin which showed the PA Mufti’s speech that Muslims’ destiny is to kill Jews, YouTube has frozen PMW’s account. All PMW videos are working except this one but the account is frozen and PMW cannot upload new videos for the next two weeks.” WRITE TO GOOGLE AND ASK THEM TO PRACTICE WHAT THEY PREACH.
PMW is pleased to report that YouTube has reopened PMW’s account. Thanks to those of our subscribers and supporters who contacted YouTube on our behalf, the video of the PA Mufti saying Muslim destiny is to kill Jews is once again available for viewing. …
The website of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in Egypt, Ikhwanonline.com, contains articles with antisemitic motifs, including Holocaust denial and descriptions of the “Jewish character” as covetous, exploitative, and a source of evil in human society. While articles of this tenor have been posted on the site in the past, their posting has recently taken on greater importance in light of the group’s increasing strength following the ouster of the Mubarak regime, as reflected by the results of the recent parliamentary elections.
In addition to antisemitic content, articles on the site also include praise for jihad and martyrdom, and condemnation of negotiation as a means of regaining Islamic lands. Among these are articles calling to kill Zionists and praising the September 9, 2011 attack on the Israeli Embassy in Cairo — which one article called a landmark of the Egyptian revolution. Some senior officials in the MB’s Freedom and Justice party published articles on the site expressing reservations regarding the peace agreement with Israel and insisting that Egypt was entitled to amend it. …
Articles/Entries
