Posts Tagged ‘new york times’
Posted by avideditor on January 30, 2011
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: al queda, al-qaeda, Dhimmi, Dhimmitude, Egyptian, Egyptian Revolution, Islam, Islamic, Islamic lies, Islamic violence, Islamist, Islamist taking over egypt, jihad, Jihad taking over egypt, Jihadi, Jihadis, Jihadis Taking over egypt, muslim, muslim brotherhood, muslims taking over egypt, new york times, NYT, Revolution, sharia, taliban, taqiyya, terrorist | Leave a Comment »
Posted by avideditor on January 17, 2011
The NYT and the liberal media is using its favorite scape goat again. Despite Israel not being involved in the Tunisia revolution in the least the NYT is blaming them.
MRA’s Dr. Aaron Lerner points to a New York Times article about the situation in Tunisia–and notes that at last there is unrest and instability in the Muslim world which truly has no connection with Israel.
No. It isn’t Jewish construction in Jerusalem.
In point of fact the unrest has absolutely nothing to do with and of Israel’s activities or even existence.
That doesn’t rule out, of course, the possibility that some ruler may find that instead of solving the problems that are the source of tension in their country that they divert the wrath of the mob by seeking conflict with Israel.
And that’s the problem with the naïve assertion that somehow peace in and of itself would provide Israel with security if we forfeited defensible borders and gave the Arabs everything they wanted.
Because there is a world of reasons an Arab leader could choose conflict with the Jewish State that have absolutely nothing to do with Israel.
However, as Elder of Zion notes–pointing to the same New York Times article–the good people of The New York Times simply cannot pass up any opportunity to blame at least some aspect of the Muslim world’s problems on Israel.
Read the article and see for yourself.
Personally, I don’t think we’ve seen the potential for a domino effect like this since Bush’s attempt to bring democracy to the Arab world.
This time around, we will all be more cynical about the possibilities, but it will be interesting to watch and see what happens.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by avideditor on April 6, 2008
From: Anne Lieberman
Date: Sunday, April 06, 2008 8:36 AM
Subject: World > Countries and Territories > Israel
Since Israel is the only predominantly Jewish country in the entire world, it seems odd to me that you would top your Israel index page with a picture of a mosque.
Are you TRYING to be offensive? Or are you simply unconscious?
Things may be getting a little better at the Times since Ethan Bronner has replaced Steven Erlanger as Jerusalem bureau chief; see for example Bronner’s front page article about Sderot.
But still … so much damage has already been done and there’s no taking it back. I will go to my grave remembering the front page of the Travel Section, Easter Sunday 2006:
Posted by avideditor on March 16, 2008
UPDATE: Holger Awakens just posted on this story. I recommend reading it.
NY Times: In defense of Islamic Law: “This is totally reprehensible and shows how far left the morons at the Times have gone. The disgusting alliance between Islam and the left has created a two-headed monster.This writer should be fired…period.NY Times – Why Shariah by Noah Feldman
In some sense, the outrage about according a degree of official status to Shariah in a Western country should come as no surprise. No legal system has ever had worse press. To many, the word ‘Shariah’ conjures horrors of hands cut off, adulterers stoned and women oppressed. By contrast, who today remembers that the much-loved English common law called for execution as punishment for hundreds of crimes, including theft of any object worth five shillings or more? How many know that until the 18th century, the laws of most European countries authorized torture as an official component of the criminal-justice system? As for sexism, the common law long denied married women any property rights or indeed legal personality apart from their husbands. When the British applied their law to Muslims in place of Shariah, as they did in some colonies, the result was to strip married women of the property that Islamic law had always granted them — hardly progress toward equality of the sexes.In fact, for most of its history, Islamic law offered the most liberal and humane legal principles available anywhere in the world. Today, when we invoke the harsh punishments prescribed by Shariah for a handful of offenses, we rarely acknowledge the high standards of proof necessary for their implementation. Before an adultery conviction can typically be obtained, for example, the accused must confess four times or four adult male witnesses of good character must testify that they directly observed the sex act. The extremes of our own legal system — like life sentences for relatively minor drug crimes, in some cases — are routinely ignored. We neglect to mention the recent vintage of our tentative improvements in family law. It sometimes seems as if we need Shariah as Westerners have long needed Islam: as a canvas on which to project our ideas of the horrible, and as a foil to make us look good.
hattip: ZIP—Related Articles at Infidels Are Cool: