Denmark cartoon row…

Anyone watching it? Michelle Markin has a good rundown.

Here too is a reminder of what 9/11 was like.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail
Related Posts:

108 thoughts on “Denmark cartoon row…”

  1. Jim Holman, Communism, remember that?

    Jim, all you have to do is go to the archives in your local library and read the editorials of The Nation during the 1940’s, 1950’s and 1960’s. There you will see article after article claiming that the United States had nothing to fear from Russia and the Communist world. You will also see article after article apologizing for Soviet Russia. For decades, there could not be found a single protest of the repressive Russian government, which at the time was running Gulags, from The Nation.

    As pointed out by Malcolm Muggeridge, western intellectuals visited Russia and swallowed whole every propaganda line dished out by the Soviets. They completely failed to exercise any independent and critical jusgment regarding Soviet Russia. Today, we have the testimony of many immigrants from Russia, who are still alive to tell the tale to their American neighbors. We know that the repression in Russia was daily, intense and pervasive. The fact that Western intellectuals could have missed this, is a sad commentary on the intelligentsia of the West and their proper function as “inquiring minds.”

    As Mona Charon points out in her wonderful book “Useful Idiots”, despite the monumental evidence now available about the true nature of the Russian Soviet state, there have been NO appreciable recognition by organs of the Left: the Nation, Mother Jones and others, that they supported a tyranny. As I said, being a Leftist means that you never have to say you are sorry.

    By the way, the fact that you may be able to locate one isolated person who considers themselves liberal or Left who criticized the Soviet Union is irrelevant. This discussion pertains to the semi-official organs of Leftist thought, including the NYT, which ACTIVELY COLLUDED to cover up Stalin’s atrocities and to protect Stalin from exposure in the West.

    The lack of recognition or shame for this activity on the part of the Left is the final and conclusive proof of their moral failure and corruption.

  2. Today we both christians and moslems and all people have to think what Allah wants? We both believe Allah creats humanbeings as create everything. Moslims or Christians are believing wrong. Whoever think he believe in right way please remember Allah will never allow you killing or degrading what Allah created. If you think you believe right please be calm and tell the right way to Allah. Not just words…Be a good sample how a perfect believer is. Help people in need, share half of your bread with a hungry humanbeing…like and protect nature …animals….birds…repect your neighbour…do not cheat on your wives or husbands…not steal…dont kill…dont sleep till you are sure no one of your neighbour is not hungry…tell peace to fighting nations…protect and love children in need…etc…first look deep inside yourself later look arround…I love you all…BUt I am so sorry hearing that exessive reactions of you to each other…Take care and dont forget we all will return to Allah…The life is here so short when we think of unlimitted life after death….

  3. Last Friday the CT Blog revealed how a delegation of Danish Muslims, led by Copenhagen imam Abu Laban, toured the Middle East in December and showed fabricated cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed in a very offensive fashion, even though the pictures had never appeared on Jyllands Posten.
    The controversy has now exploded in Denmark. Friday night Danish public television, DR, ran two interesting stories about Abu Laban, the man who organized the delegation’s trip to the Middle East. While the first profiled him, showing his extensive links to the Egyptian group Gamaa Islamiya, the second showed his double-talk. Abu Laban, in fact, was first shown speaking on Danish television condemning the boycott of Danish goods (in English), then shown interviewed on al Jazeera, cheerfully commenting on the effectiveness of the boycott (in Arabic).

    http://www.wakf.com this is abu laban homepage in Denmark please write to him and tell he is wrong

  4. Good journalism

    It is very hard to find any journalists in America that will take the time to dig into the background and activities of Muslim groups. CAIR is still treated as a legitimate public interest group by many ignorant MSM journalists even though it has been thoroughly exposed as a front for Islamism. Somehow this doesn’t get mentioned and people would think that CAIR is the leading legitimate voice of Islam in America if all they did was watch cable TV.

    Again, the laziness and superficiality of the journalists in America is stunning. Well, Stalin’s murders got right by them, 20 or more million people killed while the NYT argued that the U.S. was unnecessarily hostile to Russia. Gotta love em.

  5. Recommendation JamesK

    You might want to look at Vindicating the Founders at Amazon.

    The author looks at a lot of post-modernist cliches about the Founders and colonial America and pretty well demolishes them. He provides ample footnotes to primary sources if you want to hunt his references down to the original source. The slander of the Founders that he reveals is truly eye-opening.

  6. As Muggeridge described Stalin’s Apologist New York Times reporter Duranty as:

    “the greatest liar of any journalist I have met in 50 years of journalism.”

  7. Jerry, check out Useful Idiots

    Mona Charen, in her book Useful Idiots : How Liberals Got It Wrong in the Cold War and Still Blame America First, carefully documents the egregiously false statements made in support of Soviet Russia by leading intellectuals in America, people with Ph.D’s from leading Universities and many published books. She then produces hard documentation of the reality in Russia. But, best of all, she follows up with some of these same intellectuals who are still teaching and writing and their views on Marxism are unchanged, despite the fall of the Berlin Wall and the mountain of evidence available to historians now.

    This is a movement impervious to failure.

    Prof.’s work on a very simple principle. Youngsters leave home and want to establish their own identify and think things through for themselves. For a short while, the fact that an opinion is held by their father is a strike against it. the Prof plays to the vanity of the youngsters. They signal that the student can join the sophisticated of the world by abadoning the supposedly childish and ill-informed ideas of their parents and adopting the Prof’s outlook. It is very attractive to college-age kids. These people couldn’t sell this stuff to mature adults. Classes with substantial numbers of non-traditional students, people who have served in the military or who have raised kids or who have run a busines are nightmares for these Profs. The returning non-traditional students frequently have the information and arguments to challenge the indoctrination.

    Any parent out there should very, very carefully investigate the college he sends any child to. Most Universities are totally dominated by the Left. At least prepare your child.

  8. Cassandra f/k/a Missourian

    I’ve read Mona Charen’s book.

    I also like the book In Denial: Historians, Communism, & Espionage, by John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr. The authors trace how American academics are in denial that espoinage went on in America by Soviet spys and sympathizers.

    (Here’s a link to an article the authors wrote on the subject: Professors of Denial

    And Koba the Dread: Laughter and the Twenty Million by Martin Amis. Amis traces Stalin’s genocidal acts and the nonreaction of his apologists.

  9. One of my favorites: Intellectuals by Paul Johnson. Quite a bit of historical breadth, going from Rousseau up through the twentieth century. The Amazon editorial review was a little snippy about the book, but fessed up that, “Whether one agrees or not, Johnson’s profiles are frequently amusing and illuminating, as when he suggests that the only proletarian Karl Marx ever knew in person was the poor maid who worked for him for decades and was never paid, except in room and board, for her labors.”

  10. Augie,

    I have started reading Paul Johnson’s book but haven’t finished it yet. Seems that ol’ Rousseau was quite a troublemaker in his day and ours.

    Thanks for the tip.

  11. Note 59. Augie, let me add my second to your recommendation. “Intellectuals” is a great book in that it exposes the hypocrisy of Leftist intellectuals, ie: they never themselves lived in the ways they prescribed for the rest of humanity.

    A classic you may never have heard of but is required reading for anyone interested in intellectual and cultural history as far as I am concerned is Carl Becker’s The Heavenly City of the Eighteenth Century Philosophers. Becker looks beyond the veener of the Enlightenment philosophs and exposes their dependence on Christian intellectual categories, which were carried forward of course in Marx’s secular millenialism (and in more crude forms in the political millenialism of the modern Left, such as the Nation’s proclivity towards totalitarianism outlined by Missiourian elsewhere, for example).

    While we are at it, Peter Gay’s The Enlightenment: The Rise of Modern Paganism is a good read, even though Gay is a naive towards the Enlightenment experiment. You will notice that in the Amazon review as well, where the French and American Revolutions are granted equal weight for example, even though the French crowned a tyrant. Still, Gay is a penetrating historian, and he is honest about his bias.

    All this recalls a quote from Solzhenitsyn I read years ago: Rosseau is the father of modern totalitarianism.

    Mona Charen’s Useful Idiots : How Liberals Got It Wrong in the Cold War and Still Blame America First is a great read too, btw.

    Check out this review by OT columnist Chris Banescu: Intellectual Morons: How Ideology Makes Smart People Fall for Stupid Ideas.

  12. I wonder, If Muslims draw Jesus’ cartoons, what will be the atraction of christian world? Will it be the right for speech again?

  13. #62 They already produce anti-Christian cartoons, plus anti-Jewish propaganda. Outside of Islamic countries there has been criticism by Christian groups (which is acceptable in the concept of free speech), but Christians haven’t burned down Arab embassies over them.
    As far as Christians under Islamic rule, well… they just don’t have freedom of speech.

  15. If you haven’t already done so, ask everyone to buy Danish products. Cheese, ham, beer etc. They can find sites on the web, listing products. If everyone did this we would eliminate the trade deficit and what a statement we would make!
    A LIST OF DANISH PRODUCTS
    Food:
    Arla Foods is Europe’s second-largest dairy company and the leading Danish exporter to Saudi Arabia, where it sells an estimated 328 million dollars worth of products every year
    Brands
    Rosenborg
    Lurpak
    Dofino
    Denmark’s Finest
    Mediterra

    Danish Crown (meat)
    Lurmaerket Butter
    Danish Bacon
    Thor Fish
    Danisco Food

    Candy:
    Toms (chocolate)
    LAgermann
    Galle & Jessen
    Ingeborgs Chocolate

    Beverages:
    Tuborg Beer
    Carlsberg Beer
    Aalborg Aquavit (snaps)
    Danish Distillers

    Medicine:
    Novo

    Audio Equipment/Home Theater
    B&O (Bang & Olufsen)
    Cilo
    Eltax
    Tangent

    Cigarettes:
    Prince

    Clothing:
    H2O
    Hummel
    Per Reumert
    Munthe plus Simonsen
    Bruuns Bazaar
    Veromoda
    Only
    IC Companies
    In Wear
    Matinique
    Sand

    Shoes:
    Ecco (USA Site)
    Jaco

    Toys:
    Brio (toys)
    Lego (toys)

    Danish Design:
    B & G Porcelain
    Georg Jensen
    HTH- kitchen
    Morsoe (Fireplaces)
    PH-lamps
    Pipes
    Raadvad (knives etc.)
    Royal Copenhagen
    Royal Danish Porcelain
    Skagen (Watches)
    Stelton
    Trip Trap
    Vesta (Windmills)

    Other:
    Danish Yarn
    Nexo Fireplaces
    Nilfisk Vacuum Cleaners
    Watco Danish Furniture Oil

  16. There are legitimate, serious complaints to be made against the Muslim nations of the world for their mistreatment of Christian and other religious minorities.

    However, instead of placing ourselves in a stronger position to engage the Muslim world in a dialogue over their behavior, we have placed ourselves in a weaker position. Instead of instead focusing the attention on the Muslims and their mistreatment of Christians, we have focused their attention on ourselves and created a faux issue for Muslims to become offended and outraged over, once again, .

    There is a reason Christ told us: “”Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.”

    Christians will always be surrounded by enemies. But, if we act like idiots our enemies will certainly destroy us – so we have to be smarter than our enemies and not play into their hands.

  17. How do you propose the “dialogue” should take place, and what concessions should the West offer to appease the Muslim states?

  18. I’m a big fan of Brio toys, esp the wooden railroad sets, but I believe Brio is a Swedish company. It’s sort of funny to think of being able to buy Danish beer, cheese, etc, and feel virtuous about doing so – talk about having your cake (cheese) and eating it too. (I bought a Danish roll from a local patisserie last week, but I don’t suppose that counts.)

  19. Note 66.Sad that Dean Thinks “Free Speech” is a Faux Issue:

    The central fact of this controversy is the MOTIVATION for the original Danish cartoons. Let us review: an authori was UNABLE to find an illustrator for his book about Mohammed. Why? We all know why. The world lives in DEATHLY FEAR of Islam. This FEAR is the product of a CONSCIOUS and well co-ordinated TERROR campaign which has been going on all over the world. The world has been thrown into crisis by a world-wide terror campaign by Islam. This terror campaign has had GREAT SUCCESS in suppressing free speech and its perpetrators know it.I refer you to this website http://www.thereligionofpeace.com which tabulates the worldwide jihadi terror campaign. The website has collected stories published by standard news sources, such as AP and Reuters, that document thousands of ruthless attacks.

    Dean ignores the existence, intentionality, pervasiveness and lethality of the terror campaign. His annalysis simply ignores the threats against Salman Rushdie, and the deaths of Pym Fortyn and Theo Van Gogh.The cartoons were a PROTEST against the deaths of Pym Fortyn and Theo Van Gogh. They were, in the proudest tradition of the West, an exercise of FREE SPEECH in the face of a violent fascistic movement.

    By REFUSING TO IDENTIFY AND CONFRONT this totalitarian and fascistic campaign against the CORE VALUE of Western civilization Dean becomes an enabler.

    It is important to note that the VERY IMAMS which the Danish government had honored and consulted and “dialogued with” concocted much more offensive cartoons and traveled around the Middle East fomenting trouble. The offers at “dialogue” extended to “Muslim leaders” resulted in the goodwill of the West being betrayed.

    If someone has decided that they are a pacifist, that STILL does not ABSOLVE them from EXCUSING, CONDONING and SIDE-STEPPING the onslaught of evil. You may choose to refrain to use force to defend yourself, but, that does not mean that accommodation of evil is acceptable.

    The jihadis are making great progress in shutting down the intellectual life of the West, the CARTOONS were a PROTEST against their terror campaign and the deaths of people who resisted their intimidation.The failure to join ranks with those fighting true totaltitarianism is a disgrace and it will result in the end of our freedoms and it will usher in the beginning of a truly terrifying Dark Age.

  20. NOte 66. No compromise between “DEATH TO BLASPHEMERS” and “FREE SPEECH”

    Dean, despite 1400 years of Islamic history, despite probably hundreds of posts by myself and others. You still are unwilling to accept that there is no compromise between free speech and totalitarianism. Islam is a totaliltarian thought system which openly asserts its “right” to control the intellectual life of its subjects. It is having great success today, through the violent acts of its agents.Not all Muslims were violent, but, virtually all Muslims AGREE that free speech should be limited and people should not be permitted to comment on or criticize Islam. Islam stands virtually united on this point, no one should criticize Islam or its blood-thirsty leader.

    No one seriously disputes that prior to the 19th Century, all Islamic countries or political entities were theocracies. All Islamic countries enforced the unambiguous Islamic teaching the blasphemy and apostasy are punishable by death. The harshness of this truly oppressive set of laws were softened by exposure to the West and by colonial powers. However, there isn’t a single Muslim on the planet who will not tell you that the traditional Muslim teaching is DEATH TO BLASPHEMERS. Since Islam has a rule for nearly everything, any deviation from its “teaching” could result in a blasphemy charge. For instance, if I were a Muslim and I hazarded the opinion that “dogs were nice.” I would be blashpheming as I contradicted the direct teachings of Mohammed. Express this opinion in many Islamic countries today and you could be subject to prosecution for blasphemy.

    This isn’t the product of a “misunderstanding.” If we “dialogue” with Islam, we may understand them better but it will not change the teaching of traditional Islam. Islam is THOUGHT CONTROL, unabashed and unashamed. Our culture (and its success, I might add) is based on Free Speech, there is no principled compromise between these two positions. Suggesting that principled compromise exists is an immoral betrayal of our civilization and our Faith.

    We could have “dialogued” with Hitler all we wanted to, however, at the end Hitler would have steadfastly asserted that Jews should be killed and we, I hope, would have refused to accept that proposition. There are times when one needs to fight ( if one choses to refrain from using force, fine, but there are many ways to fight for what is right.)

    Dean’s adamant and total refusal to confront and to call Islamic totalitarianism what it is, is , in the end a betrayal of free speech, our civilization and our Faith. The battle has been joined and Dean is working busily to prevent people from recognizing the enemy, recognizing our peril and fighting back while we still have the freedom to do so.

  22. NYT’s Willingness to Use Photos to Inflame the Muslims World, and to Demonstrate the Helplessness of Christians

    The NYT published a series of stories on Abu Ghraib over a 8 month period. The story showed up probably once a week. With nearly EVERY article, the NYT reprinted the infamous picture of the person covered with a hood with his hands attached to electrodes. The electodes were in fact, fake, they were not used to shock the prisoner. That fact was never noted. This photo was reprinted as often as possible to inflame Muslims. After its initial publication, it did not serve to advance discussion of the issues.

    The NYT in less than a week has declined to publish the Danish cartoons, thereby depriving those without access to the internet of a chance to JUDGE THE CARTOONS for themselves. This was done out of a respect of the feelings of Muslims. During the VERY SAME WEEK, the NYT republished repulsive pictures of a piece of art portraying the Virgin Mary covered with dung. What more does anyone need to say?

    The NYT has made clear that it will not allow anyone to criticize Islam directly or indirectly through its publications. It has also made clear that Christianity is a disfavored and disdained religion. Christianity is helpless before the NYT and Christians may expect nothing but ridicule and disrespect.

    People naturally want to avoid social disapproval, we are social animals just as dogs and horses are.We are most comfortable with the approva of our community. The NYT constantly sends the message that IF YOU WANT THE APPROVAL OF THE SUPPOSEDLY “ADVANCED” “LEADING” “INTELLECTUAL ELITE” you will not give respect to Christianity. This is a “cold shoulder” warning of who will be allowed into the party and who will be given a warm handshake. CAIR, yes, but Pope Benedict XVI? No.

  23. EU considers policies/laws restricting press freedom

    Here it is, unvarnished and without apology. Directions from the EU bureaucracy to the press to avoid huring Muslim’s feelings. I will spare the blog my list of things which have recently been reported to “hurt Muslims’ feelings.” There are also press reports of British Muslims meeting to organize for a new law restricting the ability of writers to “offend religious sensibilities.” I think we know which sensibilities they mean. Can full sharia compliance be far behind?

    From Reuters:http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060209/wl_nm/religion_cartoons_eu_dc

    LONDON (Reuters) – The European Union may try to draw up a media code of conduct to avoid a repeat of the furor caused by the publication across Europe of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad, an EU commissioner said on Thursday.
    In an interview with Britain’s Daily Telegraph, EU Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini said the charter would encourage the media to show “prudence” when covering religion.

    “The press will give the Muslim world the message: We are aware of the consequences of exercising the right of free expression,” he told the newspaper. “We can and we are ready to self-regulate that right.”

  24. Missourian, master of the baseless generalization, writes: “The NYT has made clear that it will not allow anyone to criticize Islam directly or indirectly through its publications. . . . Christians may expect nothing but ridicule and disrespect.”

    “Contest for Cartoons Mocking the Holocaust Announced in Tehran”
    Nazila Fathi. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Feb 8, 2006. pg. A.10
    ————————–
    Cleric Convicted of Stirring Hate ”
    DON VAN NATTA Jr., Adam Liptak contributed reporting from New York for this article, and Alan Cowell from London.. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Feb 8, 2006. pg. A.1
    ————————
    Those Danish Cartoons; [Editorial]
    New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Feb 7, 2006. pg. A.20
    “The governments of the countries in which the demonstrations are occurring are responsible for keeping them nonviolent. Lebanese officials have rightly apologized to Denmark for failing to control a protest that ended with the torching of the Danish Consulate in Beirut. That’s in stark contrast with what happened in Syria, a nation where there is no such thing as a spontaneous demonstration, yet where large crowds managed to assemble and set fire to the Danish and Norwegian Embassies.”
    —————————-
    Believing in Doubt; [Op-Ed]
    Austin Dacey. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Feb 3, 2006. pg. A.23
    “JUST before he became pope, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger warned that Western culture was sliding toward ”a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires.” In his first encyclical, ”Deus Caritas Est” (”God Is Love”), Pope Benedict XVI does not use the word ”relativism,” but he does fault modern people for missing the transcendent meaning of love and instead caring for one another just because we feel like it.”
    ——————————
    For the Love of God; [Op-Ed]
    Lorenzo Albacete. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Feb 3, 2006. pg. A.23
    [Fr. Albacete is a Roman Catholic Priest]
    “I believe that interpreted against the background of these discussions, the encyclical offers an important view of where Benedict intends to situate the church in the cultural clashes threatening world peace today.”
    ————————-
    Beirut Mob Burns Danish Mission Building Over Cartoons
    KATHERINE ZOEPF and HASSAN M. FATTAH, Katherine Zoepf reported from Beirut for this article, and Hassan M. Fattah from Safaga, Egypt. Lina Sinjab contributed reporting from Damascus.. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Feb 6, 2006. pg. A.3
    “An early morning march through downtown Beirut soon exploded into violence, when a breakaway crowd surged toward a high-rise building that houses the Austrian and Danish Missions, chanting obscene anti-Danish slogans in Arabic and vandalizing cars, office buildings and a Maronite Catholic church nearby. Other protesters burned Danish flags and flags bearing images of the cross.”
    —————————
    Osama at the Kit Kat Club; [Editorial]
    Thomas L. Friedman. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Jan 25, 2006. pg. A.21
    “Reading about the latest tapes by Osama bin Laden and his sidekick Ayman al-Zawahiri, my gut reaction is that they sound like a couple of burned-out rock stars who keep recycling their greatest hits in hopes of catching on one last time as the lounge duo in some Las Vegas hotel.”
    —————————
    Warm and Fuzzy TV, Brought to You by Hamas
    Craig S. Smith. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Jan 18, 2006. pg. A.1
    “As he describes it, his television show, which begins in a few weeks, will teach children the basics of militant Palestinian politics — the disputed status of Jerusalem, Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails and the Palestinian refugees’ demand for a right to return to the lands they lost to Israel in the 1948 war — without showing the violence that Hamas’s pursuit of those goals entails.”
    —————————–

  25. Jim,

    How do they characterize the Islamic violence? Sure they report the violence, who can miss it? They report that violence is lead or encouraged by “fundamentalists” or “extremists.” The use of the term “extremist” makes sense in the Western world because in a democracy disputes should be settled by peaceful debate and elections, not violence.

    They quote taqquiyah apologists who suggest that those who believe the Islam oppresses women are “bigots.” They never directly confront the appalling chasm that exists between a society in which monogamy is the norma dnd polygamy is the norm. They never directly confront the appalling chasm that exists between a society in which free press is a central value and one in which Islam may never been insulted, critically discussed or analyzed in any normal way.

    Here is what they don’t do.
    They do not report to their readers that Islam does have an defined and ascertainable orthodoxy (granted there any many subcurrents). They don’t report that Al-Hazar University is the leading school of Islamic Sunni theology. They don’t report that the CURENT publications of Al-Hazar, publications stating summaries of Sunni theology, clearly describe “jihad” as what it is. War for the advancement of the temporal power of Islam. Therefore the use of force to advance the power of Islam is not “extreme” in Islam, it is the historical and theological norm.

    What do they do? They quote some Muslim in America who states that “jihad” is a personal spiritual struggle.

    They fail to take the long-view of Islamic terrorism, including the Islamic terrorism against Isreal, Russia, the Phillipines. They cut off long-term analysis and suggest that 9/11 violence was in response to some relatively recent dispute between the West and the Muslim world. They fail to discuss why OBL has talked about today’s Spain as Al-Andulusia (spelling?) This is significant because OBL is conducting the same jihad as his medieval predecessors.

    They quote taquiyah apologists who suggest that those who believe the Islam oppresses women are “bigots.” Yet the Koran directly tells Muslim men they can beat their wives. They never directly confront the appalling chasm that exists between a society in which monogamy is the norm and polygamy is the norm. They never directly confront the appalling chasm that exists between a society in which free press is a central value and one in which Islam may never been insulted, critically discussed or analyzed in any normal way.

    They refer to instances of Christian piety as ignorant nonsense (such as programs to advance abstinence), while they address instances of Islaimc piety with hushed tones of reverence. Of course, any Muslim girl who was foolish enough to become pregnant out of wedlock is at risk of losing her life at the hands of her father or brother.

    No, Jim, the cat is out of the bag on the NYT. Most educated people have access to the net now. They can read alternative sources of information from all over the world. They can get direct information from local Danes, or local Frenchmen about what is really going on in Europe. After they do this, they realize just how much the NYT has been withholding from them. The gig is up.

  27. John Stewart’s Islamophilia

    John Stewart has been a big succes with the Daily Show. More and more of Stewart’s humor consists of little more than holding Bush up to ridicule for his style of speech.

    [Note, I can propose several paragraphs of substantic critiques of Bush’s policies, but, he remains the only President we have an heaping general contempt on him, is not good for country]

    In a single episode, Stewart expressed his admiration of Islam and his contempt for Christianity. One reporter on the episode interviewed a high school social studies teacher who had begun a club for high school student that stressed abstinence. This high school teacher openly stated that it was a Christian club for teenagers. The teacher was ridiculed as if he was the most ignorant person on the planet, his idea: that abstinence instruction was a good policy, was also deeply ridiculed.

    Same episode, five minues later. A guy by the name of Spurlock is interviewed. He is doing a piece on 30 days as an American Muslims. Spurlock plays a tape showing a get together of five Muslim men before the marriage of one of the men. Spurlock jokes with the Muslim men and says “this is like a Muslim bachelor party, huh?” Big Smiles. The Muslim men smiles in return and says, yes but no drinking or naked girls. Spurlock practically PURRS in admiration of the clean living style of these Muslim men. How notable they are to refrain from roudy behavior, how superior to those that do stoop to crass bachelor parties before marriage. No hard questions like “Do you plan to exercise your Koranic right to beat your wife if she disobeys you?” Nothing. Zero.

    In one episode, Christian piety (promoting chastity before marriage) is mocked heavily, while Muslim piety (promoting chastity before marriage, is breathlessly admired). One episode. Stewart apparently thinks he has more to fear from Christians than Muslims. Gotta wonder what kind of bubble he lives in.

  28. BBC Interview Displays the Insanity of British-Muslim Relations Today

    Source: The Daily Ablution: Permalink:
    Scroll down the page a bit.

    OMAR BAKRI: BRITISH MUSLIM LEADER IS INTERVIEWED ON BBC: “WHOEVER INSULTS THE PROPHET HE MUST BE EXECUTED”

    Mr. Choudray’s mentor, Omar Bakri, also makes an appearance on the Today programme (streaming RAM), and further expounds on the teachings of the Religion of Peaceâ?¢, mass murder-wise:

    James Naughtie: “So, if you don’t agree with what someone says, exercising the right of free speech, you think you have the right to attack them.”

    Omar Bakri: “Actually, no – nobody said that…”

    Erm … I think that’s precisely what your followers in London are saying, Omar. But do go on:

    OB: “… the freedom of speech doesn’t mean at all [indistinct] if you disagree with me I’m going to attack you or I’m going to use violence against you – you see, if you disagree with me I have the right to disagree with you …”

    How nice to hear Mr. Bakri’s expression of tolerance! Oh wait … there’s a ‘but’:

    OB: “… but I’m talking about, when somebody go beyond that, and he start to insult, you see, a sacred man, like the messenger Muhammad, or like Jesus, or like any other prophet.”

    JN: “So free speech does not give people, in your judgement, the right to say anything which you find offensive.”

    OB: “You see, anything, which is [indistinct] offending other people belief or their own honour, I think they have the right to be angry, and that will lead for them to react, and everybody react according to certain code of conduct.”

    JN: “Well …”

    OB: “And our code of conduct is the Divine Text, not really what the man-made law says, but what God says we should react to any, you know, offending material.”

    JN: “Well, you use the word ‘react’, and you use the phrase ‘code of conduct’. What does your code of conduct, in your mind, allow you to do by way of reaction? What do you think is justified by what you see as an insult to your faith?”

    OB: “Obviously the insult has been established now by everybody, Muslims and non-Muslims, and everybody condemned the cartoonist and condemned the cartoon. However, in Islam, God said, and the messenger Muhammad said, whoever insult the Prophet, he must be punished and executed …”

    JN: “Executed?”

    OB: “Yes, that is according to Islam.”

    Religion of Peace, indeed!

    Of course, immediately after saying that Muslims should be driven by the “Divine Text”, and not by man-made law, Mr. Bakri goes on to explain that he’s most definitely not calling for people to go kill cartoonists – even though the Koran says they should be executed – as to do so would violate man-made law. So the cartoonists have nothing to worry about, obviously.

    After his explanation of compassionate Sharia jurisprudence, Mr. Bakri ends by making an eloquent call for universal respect for all:

    “You need to realise we are living in one global village. It’s about time now to respect each other.”

    In the past, Mr. Bakri has expressed this respect by supporting calls to “Kill all Jews”, and by stating that “all Israelis must be destroyed

  29. Fr. Hans writes: “Jim, guess what? With all the talk of Fred Phelps lately, it turns out he’s a liberal!”

    Ha! I read that piece. Phelps is . . . well, what can I say. He truly is unique. He defines “unique.” No doubt about that. And focused too, I’ll say that for him. But as William F. Buckley might say, he has no sense of decorum.

    Is Phelps a Christian? I suppose in the popular mind he’s a Christian, but I don’t think so. Or perhaps there is a planet on which he is a Christian, but not this planet.

  30. I read the piece too, but I didn’t see how it claimed he was a “liberal,” unless anyone who’s ever had any ties to the Democratic party is a liberal, in which case it’s an even more meaningless term than I thought.

    About Jon Stewart (note: it’s Jon, not John), comparing fake-news bits on TDS (The Daily Show) with interviews on TDS is comparing apples and oranges. Jon Stewart is Jewish, but all religions get skewered. His typical manner in interviews, however, is fairly deferential; I’m thinking of some of his interviews of top Bush campaign operatives during 2004 (Ken Melman, for example). In fact, if you Google for the terms “jon stewart” and deferential you’ll see some complaints about that.

  31. Progressive is probably more accurate (not all liberals are Progressive, all Progressives are liberal), given his support of Hussein and Castro, although he voted for Gore, runs as a Democratic when vying for office, etc. The main point however, is that Phelps, who is trotted out as the poster boy of the religious right by liberals time and time again, is closer to the liberals than the religious right. Once these facts get out you will never hear his name mentioned again.

  32. Juli,

    I reported on a single episode. My report was factual. A Christian pastor promoting social clubs for Christian teens and teaching those teens abstinence was ridiculed as a pea-brained extremist. IN the same episode, Spurlock’s fawning presentation of the “high piety” of Muslim men in Michigan was greeted without question. No questions asked about wife-beating or polygamy.

    Last night,February 9, 2006, a pharmacist who was unwilling to dispense a prescription for the morning after pill was mercilessly ridiculed. No customer would have been refused a prescription, there were other pharmacists in the same town that would have been wiling to fill the prescription. However, the state of Illinois has a law which states that no one can practice pharmacy unless he is willing to dispense the morning after pill. Taken to its logical conclusion, this approach could drive Christians out of the medical profession. This could be the beginning of a long-term effort to marginalize Christians from positions of influence in elite professions.
    The segment was painful, very personalized attack on this man, it was painful to watch and went on for 20 minutes.

    Again, it is every so “hip” to ridicule Christianity but ever so “hip” to admire Islam. I welcome you to the new dhimmitude. All those people who were so adamant about “women’s rights” have NOTHING whatsoever to say about institutionalized and religiously approved wife-beating.

    Frankly, I think that the Left is so concerned that their domestic political enemies might gain an advantage that they are willing to betray their culture and Western civilization. It is a very disappointing conclusion to come to. I considered myself a progressive for decades and I had, and have, many friends that remain in that camp. I am appalled that their visceral and unreasoning hatred of Bush leads them to join his enemies, even if that means, joining the enemies of our country.

    Make no mistake about it Juli, Muslim misogyny is no myth, yet it goes unprotested by the most of the Left in this country.

  33. Note 81: OK Fr. Hans, I can visualize the Venn diagram you imply between the parentheses, but what is the difference in substance between progressive and liberal?

  35. does the muslim society have absolutely nothing better to do with their time than protest everything the west does. do catholics protest every time mother mary is in the paper or a joke about a priest and a young boy. don’t they have things to blow up or something. i wish they’d hurry up and do it already.

  36. Joe,

    The rioting is an intentional tactic to show people the risk that they undertake should they criticize anything Islamic. It’s a feature, not a bug.

  37. Missourian writes: “The rioting is an intentional tactic to show people the risk that they undertake should they criticize anything Islamic. It’s a feature, not a bug.”

    I get the feeling that there is a different worldview in operation in this situation. I mean, the Islamic folks are living in the modern world, but there is something middle-ages, or even ancient about this situation.

    I remember reading about Christians rioting in ancient Alexandria over disputes related to the Trinity. Today, I doubt you could get four people in the street over the Trinity.

    I think that most of the world, especially the Christian world, has developed to the point that they simply know how to handle religious disputes without killing each other. We — people in the Western world with Western values — simply do not respond to religious issues in this way. We don’t burn down the local Mormon or Jehovah’s Witness church over religious disagreements. This is due to — dare I say it — liberal values that have developed over the centuries.

    People can criticize tolerance as a liberal flaw, but when you see what happens when people haven’t learned tolerance, it seems like a pretty nice thing to have around.

  38. Jim, Today’s Liberals Promote Speech Control

    It is nice that you believe you can appropriate “free speech” on behalf of today’s liberals. Given today’s academic climate, it is the so-called “liberals” (once a respectable term) that promote unconstitutional speech codes. In America, today, speech codes are a product of the Left. Again, Jim, you can see it all able reported at http://www.thefire.org.

    The Left’s “tolerance” in America today promotes dividing the American people by their skin color, promoting the idea that people with differing skin colors think differently, and requiring quotas in every human activity.

    Better not take too much credit for free speech, Jim, it was first codified by our Founding Fathers and the Left has spent the last 30 years dragging our Founding Fathers as deep into the dirt as they can. See the book I have recommended called Vindicating the Founders for a documenation of the treatment of the FF in modern college textbooks.

  39. Jim, Liberals in the U.S. have given the MULLAHS the keys to their lips

    It was CNN that said “it respected Islam” and wouldn’t run the cartoons, while on the very same program it ran anti-semtic cartoons from the Middle East. This was pointed out to Wolf Blitzer directly by Robert Bennet at the time and Blitzer just stood there like a deer in the headlights.

    It was FOX that displayed the cartoons. AT the University of Wisconsin-Madison it was the CONSERVATIVE student newspaper that displayed the cartoons, not the vaunted liberal rag students have to pay for.

  40. Missourian writes: “It was FOX that displayed the cartoons.”

    Well, this whole issue seems to me to be a matter of whose god gets gored, so to speak. Print a Mohammed cartoon and you’re either an attacker of religion or a champion of free speech. Display Piss Christ and youre either an attacker of religion or a champion of free speech.

    Missourian writes: “The Left’s ‘tolerance’ in America today promotes dividing the American people by their skin color, promoting the idea that people with differing skin colors think differently, and requiring quotas in every human activity.”

    First of all, some people on the left are into that, but certainly not all.

    You can make fun of different versions of “tolerance,” but I’m talking about the tolerance in which you don’t kill someone over religious differences.

    This kind of tolerance didn’t originate in the Jewish tradition. It didn’t originate in the Christian tradition. It developed as a Western, secular, liberal line of thought, and today forms the basic understanding of religion in the U.S.

    In other words, not killing people over religion is a cultural accomplishment, and we can thank secular liberalism for that.

  41. Jim, You Haven’t Confronted the Truth about Speech Codes

    You have no response to the factual assertion that actual, active SUPPRESSION of speech (with severe penalties attached) is practiced in the United States by the Left, most frequently in our Universities. I have referred you to http://www.thefire.org for complex documentation. You have no response to that because it is absolutely true. It is the Left that is suppressing thought and speech on campus.

    You have no response to the factual assertion that the American Founding Fathers were the FIRST to CODIFY free speech protections and give it real meaning and real force. It is the very same Founding Fathers that the Liberal secular professoriate is bent on defaming and degrading in our Universities. The Founding Fathers were fully and completely products of the Christian tradition. You can’t rewrite history. Just as Euclid and geometry was a product of Greek pagan culture. The First Amendment was a product of Christian culture. Can’t have it both ways, Jim, can’t call the FF racist pigs that should be reviled and then claim that you are a champion of free speech.

    As has been pointed out many times, Christian taxpayers have every right to comment on Seranno’s P-S, Christ. Christians confined themselves to writing letters and peaceful protest. Nobody was put in the fear of death.

    You can go on with your “romance” with secular liberalism, and you can continue smugly to think that all religions are alike. I suggest that that path is dangerous for you, because as you refuse to recognize the very real and unique danger posed by Islam, you will abet Islam unwittingly and it will blindside you.

  42. Missourian writes: “You have no response to the factual assertion that actual, active SUPPRESSION of speech (with severe penalties attached) is practiced in the United States by the Left . . .”

    That’s because you’re trying to change the topic. I’m talking about tolerance, in the sense of not killing other religoius people. You’re going off on a different topic in order to confuse the issue.

    Inasmuch as I know about speech codes, I don’t like them. But if you want to get all riled up about speech codes, you have no further to look than the workplace. Forget universities, you can get fired from a job — lose your income and benefits — because of a minor difference of opinion with your boss, or because he or she doesn’t like your tie. You want freedom of speech, great. How about the workplace? Of course, we know that’s not going to happen.

  43. Jim, Public Universities Use Government Power to Sanction Speech

    What I am getting “all riled up” about is the exericise of free speech by legal adults who are attending government sponsored institutions of higher learning. If you don’t care about this, you don’t care about free speech.

    The First Amendment prohibits the use of government power to restrict political speech. Speech codes have been adopted at hundreds, if not thousands, of public universities. These public universities are agents of the government. They have the power to punish political speech through speech codes. The punishment is not trivial because it can lead to expulsion from school and other very severe consequences.

    This is official, government backed, penalty enforced restriction of free speech. It occurrs today, in the United States on behalf of the Left. As I noted http://www.thefire.org contains abundant documentation of this from Universities, public and private across the country.

  44. Missourian writes: “What I am getting “all riled up” about is the exericise of free speech by legal adults who are attending government sponsored institutions of higher learning. If you don’t care about this, you don’t care about free speech.”

    I didn’t say that don’t care about the issue. I said that in general I don’t like such codes. But it’s not a huge issue for me. Students have challenged certain speech codes in court and some of those speech codes have been held to be overbroad.

    But what’s happening in universities is no different from what happens in the workplace, public or private. Put up a confederate flag or a “Jesus Sucks” bumper sticker in your cubicle at work one day and see how many more seconds you are employed there.

    The threat to free speech that worries me more is when the government prevents their own employees from speaking publicly on issues. Take, for example, this story:

    “Testifying at a hearing of the House Science Committee, Griffin heard lawmakers from both parties ask the space agency to guarantee “free and open inquiry.”

    The debate began three weeks ago after NASA climatologist James Hansen accused a political appointee in the office of public affairs with muzzling his views on global warming because they conflicted with those of the Bush administration. Career public affairs officers in the agency have since charged that interviews were denied to news organizations deemed too “liberal” and pressure was applied to hold down the number of news releases on earth science.”

    Things like this worry me a lot more than some some college kid who can’t wear his “I hate fags” t-shirt to class.

    Missourian: “This is official, government backed, penalty enforced restriction of free speech. It occurrs today, in the United States on behalf of the Left.”

    It happens all over the place, in behalf of the left and the right. It’s just that when it happens in favor of the right, you don’t notice.

  45. Speech Codes vs. Alleged NSA Whistleblowers

    Compare and contrast. CASE ONE. A federal employee who has the protection of “whistleblower” legislation AND access to a press corp who is thrilled to find anyone who disagrees with the Bush administration on any issue. True whistleblowers have tough rows to hoe, but, they are not alone and powerless. True classical conservatives support a smaller government and would be philosophically open to hearing from whistleblowers calling an out of control government to heal.

    Case Two: Entrenched in universities all over America, there exist a cadre of dedicated Leftists who have used their power to enact speech codes. These speech codes throttle THOUGHT at the very centers institutions which should be the center of FREE THOUGHT. These speech codes not only suppress legitimate political speech of students BUT they suppress real scientific research. Look at Larry Summers, he was nearly lynched for suggesting that men and women may differ in intellectual abilities. Even the President of Harvard and former Treasury Secretary was “brought to heel” by the politically correct crowd.

    HISTORAL FACT: It has been the avowed secular and Leftist socialists and communists who have perfected the totalitarian method of thought control and suppression. It never ceases to amaze me that the American Left after championing the cause of Soviet Russia in writing and preserved in the archives for decades NOW act as if they never supported totalitarians.

    The American Left is agitated on behalf of Cuba, North Korea, Iran and a myriad of totalitarian governments who have been allowed to grow in power because of the lassitude of Europe and the hamstringing of America after Viet Nam.

    No, sorry Charles, you Leftists have made a modern science and art of suppression of speech and you continue with Feingold McCain. If those sponsors have their way, every thing done on the NET will have to be reported and given a monetary value as a campaign contribution.

  46. Jim Holman,CNN and NYT and WAPO jump to the Mullahs command

    Again, Jim, in the most important issue confronting the WORLD today, the jihadi war to defeat Western civilization, the Left is out to lunch. You have no real response to the FACT that FOX was willing to discuss and display the cartoons and CNN “respects Islam.” You had better get used to the mental posture of “respecting Islam” Jim because that will be the only item on the menu if Democrats get their way.

    Dems have attacked immigration control, VISA reform, security measures on planes, security measures in airport concourses. At virtually every step America’s legitimate efforts to protect itself and avoid another episode of mass murder is hamstrung and attacked by the ACLU, the NYT, The Nation and the Rest.

    Diverting the discussion to the NSA matter, doesn’t constitute a defense. Global warming won’t be problem if a major American city is irradiated or contaminated with nuclear waste material. Again, Jim, I think you are more concerned with attacking Bush than you are with defending our country.

  47. Missourian writes: “You have no real response to the FACT that FOX was willing to discuss and display the cartoons and CNN ‘respects Islam.'”

    Given the response of Muslim extremists around the world, and given that CNN operates around the world, do you think that showing the cartoons might have put their staff at risk? Obviously, on the internet anyone who wants to see the cartoons can. Do you think it would be prudent for CNN to do something that everyone knows up front will antagonize violent Muslim extremists? Also, I find it interesting that you think that CNN is a “leftist” news organization.

    Missourian: “Dems have attacked immigration control, VISA reform, security measures on planes, security measures in airport concourses.”

    Most of the security measures at airports do absolutely nothing to make air travel safer. What measures have been implemented are often not even done very well. The Republicans control both houses of Congress, and the White House. Whatever they want to do they have the power to do. So the question to ask is why these other measures have not been implemented.

    Missourian: “At virtually every step America’s legitimate efforts to protect itself and avoid another episode of mass murder is hamstrung and attacked by the ACLU, the NYT, The Nation and the Rest.”

    Hamstrung in what way? Your dudes run the government, in case you haven’t noticed. With all due respect, I think you’re living in a fantasy world. What do you think happens — Bush says “oh no, the Nation doesn’t like border control, so I better not do that!” Give me a break.

    Missourian: “Global warming won’t be problem if a major American city is irradiated or contaminated with nuclear waste material. Again, Jim, I think you are more concerned with attacking Bush than you are with defending our country.”

    Tell me again about how the Bush administration proposes to protect American ports? You mentioned something about ulcers earlier, but I forget the details.

  48. Jim, CNN and the Cartoons:

    Given the response of Muslim extremists around the world, and given that CNN operates around the world, do you think that showing the cartoons might have put their staff at risk?

    Given the response of the Muslikm extremists around the world, and given that FOX operates around the world, do you think that showing the cartoons might have put their staff at risK?

  49. Jim, Criticizing Bush and The “Dudes” the Run the Government and Harry Truman Democrats

    I have consistently stated that I consider myself to be a small government conservative/ I am fully capable of criticizing Bush. I have criticized Bush’s policies on many occaisions. The difference between me and someone who suffers from Bush Derangement Syndrome is that there are times when I am capable of applauding Bush’s policies if I think they are worthy.

    Republicans run the government because they have consistently won elections.
    Review: Carter, Reagan, Regan, Bush I, Clinton, Clinton, Bush II, Bush II. Republicans have won 5 of the last 8 presidential elections. Democrats have steadily LOST SEATS in the Senate and the House. This has occurred all over the country. Message: Americans are increasingly rejecting the party of Michael Moore and the weird folks in NARAL, and Moveon.org and Code Pink. More and more normal Americans who have real families and real jobs, see the Democrats as a party led by misfits who hate their families, hold religion in contempt and hate America.

    You Democrats have lost the Harry Truman democrats. Visit Independence, Missouri, the town proud to be Harry Truman’s hometown. Notice the high number of CHURCHES. Notice the high membership in VFW and Boy Scouts. Notice the high attendance at Fourth of July Parades. The Democrats have lost people who revere their families, their faith and their country, hence you lose elections.

Comments are closed.