Snoblog

As an emailer said, Sarah Boxer is at it again. The NY Times culture writer assigned to the internet — lucky us — now takes it upon herself to formulate a strange Marxist (or is it Maoist?) analysis of We’reNotAfraid.com, the wonderful weblog of Photoshopped images of solidarity, stiff-upper-lippedness, and defiance to terrorists.

The site displays a range of defiant postures. Some people hold up their middle fingers, presumably for the terrorists to see. Some people posted pictures of American soldiers, presumably for Londoners and Americans to see.

But more and more, there’s a brutish flaunting of wealth and leisure. Yesterday there were lots of pictures posted of smiling families at the beach and of people showing off their cars and vans. A picture from Italy shows a white sports car and comes with the caption: “Afraid? Why should we be afraid?”

A few days ago, We’re Not Afraid might have been a comfort. Today, there’s a hint of “What, me worry?” from Mad magazine days, but without the humor or the sarcasm. We’re Not Afraid, set up to show solidarity with London, seems to be turning into a place where the haves of the world can show that they’re not afraid of the have-nots.

What’s the most charitable word I can give to that: Sophomoric? Yes, that’s it.

And so what if we do want to flaunt our prosperity in defiance of those who would kill us for it? We should damn well flaunt exactly what the terrorists hate and fear most: freedom, sex, commerce, speech, women’s rights, openness, success, prosperity, tolerance. I proposed (in a suggestion the NY Times editorialists today would have really hated — see the post below about the 9/11 memorial) that we should use the now-disputed space at the World Trade Center to build not an International Freedom Center but instead a mall and a theater that shows R-rated movies. Now I say we should have Donald Trump send in a picture of himself wearing a “We’re Not Afraid” button. And pictures of women and Jews, too.

The worst of Boxer’s analysis is that it feeds right into the why-they-hate-us culture: It’s as if she’s offended on behalf of the terrorists for showing them what we have and they do not: freedom. Well, damn it, we are successful and that is what they hate most and so we should brutishly flaunt it.

Further, to hide the essence of our culture and our era — our ability to be prosperous and leisurely — is some strange signal of defeat. Should we hide our westerness, our modernity, our openness, our success, and our freedom as, say Jews had to hide their Jewishness in ’30s Germany? If we do, then it’s time to get out the burkas, ladies.

But, of course, that’s absurd.

This is the same Boxer I complained about when she wrote about Iraqi bloggers (which led to this exchange [and see my parenthetical full disclosure in the post below]).

Snoblog

Snoblog

: As an emailer said, Sarah Boxer is at it again. The NY Times culture writer assigned to the internet — lucky us — now takes it upon herself to formulate a strange Marxist (or is it Maoist?) analysis of We’reNotAfraid.com, the wonderful weblog of Photoshopped images of solidarity, stiff-upper-lippedness, and defiance to terrorists.

The site displays a range of defiant postures. Some people hold up their middle fingers, presumably for the terrorists to see. Some people posted pictures of American soldiers, presumably for Londoners and Americans to see.

But more and more, there’s a brutish flaunting of wealth and leisure. Yesterday there were lots of pictures posted of smiling families at the beach and of people showing off their cars and vans. A picture from Italy shows a white sports car and comes with the caption: “Afraid? Why should we be afraid?”

A few days ago, We’re Not Afraid might have been a comfort. Today, there’s a hint of “What, me worry?” from Mad magazine days, but without the humor or the sarcasm. We’re Not Afraid, set up to show solidarity with London, seems to be turning into a place where the haves of the world can show that they’re not afraid of the have-nots.

What’s the most charitable word I can give to that: Sophomoric? Yes, that’s it.

And so what if we do want to flaunt our prosperity in defiance of those who would kill us for it? We should damn well flaunt exactly what the terrorists hate and fear most: freedom, sex, commerce, speech, women’s rights, openness, success, prosperity, tolerance. I proposed (in a suggestion the NY Times editorialists today would have really hated — see the post below about the 9/11 memorial) that we should use the now-disputed space at the World Trade Center to build not an International Freedom Center but instead a mall and a theater that shows R-rated movies. Now I say we should have Donald Trump send in a picture of himself wearing a “We’re Not Afraid” button. And pictures of women and Jews, too.

The worst of Boxer’s analysis is that it feeds right into the why-they-hate-us culture: It’s as if she’s offended on behalf of the terrorists for showing them what we have and they do not: freedom. Well, damn it, we are successful and that is what they hate most and so we should brutishly flaunt it.

Further, to hide the essence of our culture and our era — our ability to be prosperous and leisurely — is some strange signal of defeat. Should we hide our westerness, our modernity, our openness, our success, and our freedom as, say Jews had to hide their Jewishness in ’30s Germany? If we do, then it’s time to get out the burkas, ladies.

But, of course, that’s absurd.

This is the same Boxer I complained about when she wrote about Iraqi bloggers (which led to this exchange [and see my parenthetical full disclosure in the post below]).

  • http://marginalizingmorons.blogspot.com/ CaptiousNut

    How could the Times pass on an opportunity to bash web/blog media and anti-terror hawks?

  • EverKarl

    Boxer is showing her ignorance as well as her bias. Psychologists like Dr. Marc Sageman of the University of Pennsylvania and Dr. Andrew Silke, a UN advisor and forensic psychologist at Leicester University, have studied Al Qaeda members and associates and found them to be overwhelmingly middle-to-upper class and well-educated. The same is true of suicide bombers from Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hizbollah. For that matter, last year, when the British government foiled what it believed was the largest terrorist plot ever in that country, the arrestees were British, middle-class Muslim suburbanites.

  • tb

    I don’t see any pictures of Muslim worshippers standing in front of their Mosque (in America or elsewhere) with family in tow exuding a loving caring mainstream Muslim view with the ‘we’re not afraid sign’ dangling like an albatros. I did not look at all the pictures though.

  • http://michaelzimmer.blogspot.com Michael Zimmer

    EverKarl – if that’s true (that terrorists are mostly middle-to-upper class) then Jeff’s thesis that they despire our “prosperity” must also be wrong.
    My guess is that they hate our presence in the Middle East, not our “freedom, sex, commerce….”

  • Gunther

    [Researchers] have studied Al Qaeda members and associates and found them to be overwhelmingly middle-to-upper class and well-educated. The same is true of suicide bombers from Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hizbollah. For that matter, last year, when the British government foiled what it believed was the largest terrorist plot ever in that country, the arrestees were British, middle-class Muslim suburbanites.
    I guess this means that JJ is ignorant as well, since he seems to feel that these terrorists are motivated by a hatred of freedom, wealth and things like that. No complicated sociopolitical analyses for him!

  • Gunther

    The worst of Boxer’s analysis is that it feeds right into the why-they-hate-us culture: It’s as if she’s offended on behalf of the terrorists for showing them what we have and they do not: freedom. Well, damn it, we are successful and that is what they hate most and so we should brutishly flaunt it.
    This is the same kind of blather that spills out of George Bushís mouth periodically but Iím still surprised otherwise intelligent people believe this stuff (I call this the ìthey hate us because weíre beautifulî argument). In any event, I think the key word in Boxerís heading is ìfrivolousnessî (definition:ìlacking in seriousness; marked by unbecoming levityî). Even if you believe that we should be able to ìflaunt what we gotî, somehow I donít think that actual or potential terrorists out there in the ether are going to be impressed that some frat boy living in Dubuque was able to scrape together a Cartman animation. This is the blogging equivalent of slapping a bumper sticker on your car or wearing a t-shirt with a message on it.

  • roger

    NY Times Blasts Take Back Memorial Initative
    http://911memorials.org/?p=245

  • paladin

    If you want to see “brutish flaunting of wealth”, take a look at the ads in the New York Times Magazine.

  • Dmac

    I wonder if that also means that “they” all hated our presence in the Serbia – Croatia conflict. I don’t seem to remember anyone being too upset over our intervention there, even though we were told to butt out by Europe before we finally got involved. Yes, Clinton should’ve moved sooner on it, but still…we stopped the mass genocide of Muslims going on in that conflict.
    But wait, you say, they also hated us for being…I forget where our presence was condemmed as justification for when the following attacks occurred:
    – Khobar Towers
    – Lebanon
    – WTC (the 1st time)
    – embassies in Africa
    – Richard Reid
    Jeff may not be on target here, but the “reasons why they hate us” is a non – starter for dealing with this sort of nihilism. If we pull out tomorrow from the ME they’ll try to attack us again for another specious reason.
    I also haven’t heard any terrorist group give reasons for the London bombing at this point. Probably because they’ve finally dropped their canard of justification at this juncture, and know that the game is up.

  • http://www.danielpipes.org/article/2764 Anonymuse

    Weak Brits, Tough French
    by Daniel Pipes
    http://www.danielpipes.org/article/2764
    .
    .
    .
    Counterterrorism special*ists disdain the British. Roger Cressey calls London “easily the most important jihadist hub in Western Europe.” Steven Simon dismisses the British capital as “the Star Wars bar scene” of Islamic radicals. More brutally, an intelligence official said of last week’s attacks: “The terrorists have come home. It is payback time for Ö an irresponsible policy.”
    While London hosts terrorists, Paris hosts a top-secret counterterrorism center, code-named Alliance Base, the existence of which was recently reported by the Washington Post. At Alliance Base, six major Western governments have since 2002 shared intelligence and run counterterrorism operations – the latter makes the operation unique.
    More broadly, President Chirac instructed French intelligence agencies just days after September 11, 2001, to share terrorism data with their American counterparts “as if they were your own service.” The cooperation is working: A former acting CIA director, John E. McLaughlin, called the bilateral intelligence tie “one of the best in the world.” The British may have a “special relationship” with Washington on Iraq, but the French have one with it in the war on terror.
    France accords terrorist suspects fewer rights than any other Western state, permitting interrogation without a lawyer, lengthy pre-trial incarcerations, and evidence acquired under dubious circumstances. Were he a terrorism suspect, the author of Al-Qaida’s Jihad in Europe, Evan Kohlmann, says he “would least like to be held under” the French system.

  • penny

    “But more and more, there’s a brutish flaunting of wealth and leisure. Yesterday there were lots of pictures posted of smiling families at the beach and of people showing off their cars and vans.”
    Logic would tell Ms Boxer that if you are an American standing outside anywhere, unless you are camping in the woods, the odds are there will be a car in the picture…… on the street, in your driveway, in a parking lot, whatever. And families normally have a camera handy when vacationing. It’s commonplace in our society. There is no “brutish” flaunting of wealth in that. It’s what it is – the landscape of our normal lives.
    That she attempts to ascribe ill motives to people is vile and unprofessional as a journalist, but so typical of the smarmy leftist journalists that basically don’t like us.

  • http://www.memritv.org Cog

    Have nots? Who bombed the g8 summit, days after the live 8 concerts, which were both going to offer a lot of aid, debt reduction and trade modifications to help Africans, of which many are Muslim?
    Who is attacking the oil infrastructure in Iraq, professors, doctors, small business owners, who is kidnapping/attacking/murdering foreign diplomats looking to restore relations, who is trying to create a civil war in Iraq?
    “We’re Not Afraid, set up to show solidarity with London, seems to be turning into a place where the haves of the world can show that they’re not afraid of the have-nots.”
    I think if “We’re not afraid” had a wider group of conrtibutors, it would show the world that the haves and the have-nots are both not afraid of the have-suicidebombers.

  • http://bayoucalvinist.blogspot.com blake

    More than likely the terrorists’ hatred is caused by a combination of things but I would guess mostly it is a self-inflated sense of importance and honor (and hence an inflated view of having been slighted), which allows them to feel that all means justify their end (namely humiliating those they feel do not properly recognize their worth and their rightness). The fact that people (those that send in their pics to we’re not afraid) are able to have a somewhat enjoyable time by ridiculing the terrorists’ very notion of their own importance and seriousness(which the terrorist feel their acts underline) is, I would think a good thing.

  • http://www.bloodandtreasure.com/publishing Noel Guinane

    This outlook is to be expected from the NY Times, but what the NY Times says anymore isn’t worth bothering about too much. Let them sit in their ivory towers, hatching plans to charge everyone for access to their online editorial content, while the new medium on the block, regular people, start to voice their opinion and gain credibility.
    I can understand them not liking it and wanting to dismiss it, and though exactly how blogging is going to develop is not clear, I really can’t see it going away. Being elitist is going to be poor compensation for being on the sidelines.

  • http://www.elflife.com/ carsonfire

    They hate us for our freedom.
    No, not terrorists. Leftist totalitarians, soci alist elitists, pro-taking anti-property, anti-religious absolutionists, etc. The same people who sit around DU talking about armed revolution because elections aren’t going their way, and executing and jailing right wing dissidents for their ThoughtCrime.

  • http://michaelzimmer.blogspot.com Michael Zimmer

    Further, to hide the essence of our culture and our era — our ability to be prosperous and leisurely — is some strange signal of defeat. Should we hide our westerness, our modernity, our openness, our success, and our freedom as, say Jews had to hide their Jewishness in ’30s Germany?
    This reasoning seems problematic. Should our culture/era really be defined in terms of prosperity and leisure (which could just as easily be described with terms like consumption & waste)? And do you really want to insinuate that Western culture (as you define it) is being persecuted for its prosperity on par with how Jews were persecuted by the Nazis?
    To me, Boxer is revealing how so many people define themselves by what they own, showing comfort in their possessions. (Reminds me of some research I heard at a conference recently where people’s photos on online dating services were analyzed, and so many men had photos with their cars)

  • http://michaelzimmer.blogspot.com Michael Zimmer

    And I don’t mean to say that prosperity and leisure aren’t nice things. Just that other features of our society might also be suitable candidates for defining our era: ie, liberty.

  • penny

    To me, Boxer is revealing how so many people define themselves by what they own, showing comfort in their possessions
    First of all, have you seen the offending pictures? They sound pretty pedestrian to me, not glamour shots of an inventory of everything I own. Just ordinary Western images with cars and beaches, for God’s sake.. Boxer extrapolates motives in ordinary slice-of-life photos that she can’t prove and to sympathize with the prejudices of the enemy.
    And, yes, Islamofascists hate us for our freedoms and culture:
    “Usama Bin Laden feels authorized to kill you and your children because you drink wine or beer, because you don’t wear a long beard or a chador, because you go to the theater and to movies, because you listen to music and sing songs, because you dance in discos or at home, because you watch TV, because you wear miniskirts or shorts, because at the beach you go naked or almost naked, because you make love when you like and where you like and with whom you like. Doesn’t this even interest you, you fools? I’m an atheist, thank God. And I have no intention of allowing myself to be killed because I am.”…………Oriana Fallaci

  • Thomas

    you know, looking at the photos, most of them seem like they just don’t give a shit.

  • EverKarl

    Michael Zimmer wrote:
    My guess is that they hate our presence in the Middle East, not our “freedom, sex, commerce….”
    The 9/11 Commission report summarizes it thusly:
    Bin Ladin’s grievance with the United States may have started in reaction to specific U.S. policies but it quickly became far deeper. To the second question, what America could do, al Qaeda’s answer was that America should abandon the Middle East, convert to Islam, and end the immorality and godlessness of its society and culture: ‘It is saddening to tell you that you are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind.’ If the United States did not comply, it would be at war with the Islamic nation, a nation that al Qaeda’s leaders said ‘desires death more than you desire life.'”
    However, as OBL changes his grievances to fit whatever the current conventional wisdom is on the left, I prefer to look at what OBL and AQ do than to guess.
    It turns out that we have a test case in Spain:
    “Initially, it appeared that terrorists targeted Spain because of the government’s support for the U.S.-led war in Iraq. But weeks after outraged Spaniards voted out their pro-U.S. government and the new leaders announced the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq, another bomb was found on the tracks of a high-speed train line.”
    Appeasement doesn’t seem to be working out too well for Spain; they still have check those train tracks.
    As Christopher Hitchens put it:
    “We know very well what the ‘grievances’ of the jihadists are.
    The grievance of seeing unveiled women. The grievance of the existence, not of the State of Israel, but of the Jewish people. The grievance of the heresy of democracy, which impedes the imposition of sharia law. The grievance of a work of fiction written by an Indian living in London. The grievance of the existence of black African Muslim farmers, who won’t abandon lands in Darfur. The grievance of the existence of homosexuals. The grievance of music, and of most representational art. The grievance of the existence of Hinduism. The grievance of East Timor’s liberation from Indonesian rule. All of these have been proclaimed as a licence to kill infidels or apostates, or anyone who just gets in the way.”
    Last I checked, neither Darfur nor East Timor was in the Middle East. But if Hitch isn’t your cup of tea, let’s consult with Mohammed Bouyeri, who just confessed in court to the brutal slaying of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh, whose Submission criticized the treatment of women under Islam:
    “What moved me to do what I did was purely my faith. … I was motivated by the law that commands me to cut off the head of anyone who insults Allah and his prophet.”

  • lucklucky

    She’s so civilised that forgot the foundations of the civilisation , she only knows the roof of the house and is imprevious to the walls, foundations…

  • Kat

    I wonder how she explains homegrown gutblowers with university degrees to the British. Must’ve been their schooling in the koran.

  • penny

    I wonder how she explains homegrown gutblowers with university degrees to the British.
    She and her ilk at the NYT’s and all of the other sad little pc multiculturalist lemmings, unable to explore an alternative paradigm, have I’m sure concluded that the little gutblowers are the real victims. They had issues. Taunted by the cars in the photos.

  • http://michaelzimmer.blogspot.com Michael Zimmer

    penny – what “alternative paradigm” are you referring to? it seems that multiculturalists, by definition, are quite capable of exploring paradigms other than their own

  • penny

    Not really. The premise that all cultures and religions are accorded equal worth is the multiculturalist pc paradigm. That’s the mindset. It pervades the liberal media and campuses where the thought police are at their best. Challenging those assumptions are immediately countered with you are a prejudiced person.
    The rotten underbelly and violence of Islam can’t be examined because 1000 years ago Christians were “as bad”. Mohammed as a twisted model for a prophet can’t be examined because Jerry Falwell denounced gays. You get the picture. Some commentors to this board play that game.
    It’s an oxymoron for a multiculturalist pc sheeple to compare and criticism other’s values or lack of them any more than the communists wanted public analysis and debate on the merits of the capitalist economies and quality of life.

  • penny

    One more thing, Michael, another of the flawed excesses of the multicultural pc paradigm is its tolerance of the intolerant. An example is with Islam, a viciously intolerant religion, where permission isn’t granted by the pc police to call it as such. We must pretend it is equal to Christianity and Judahism in tolerance in spite of all of the empirical evidence in the last 30 years.

  • http://jimtreacher.com Jim Treacher

    The brutish flaunting of wealth and leisure is bad enough, but what about the brutish flaunting of all those women’s exposed faces? Talk about Why They Hate Us!

  • JTHC

    I don’t know what this woman is ranting about; a quick perusal of the photos on that site shows a bunch of hastily taken snapshots of people in various settings.
    Where exactly is the “brutish flaunting” of wealth? I was expecting to see people in furs or showing off big diamond rings, but no such photos are evident. God forbid I show anyone my photo album of myself and the family in various vacation spots or on the streets of my city–what would people think of my callous insult of the have-nots?

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    Wait a minute–they hate us for our freedoms? I thought they hated us because Islam is an inherently violent religion. Silly revolving conservative talking points!
    You know some of those freedoms include tolerance/respect for homosexuals and freedom of expression, a couple of things the Right has a particularly abysmal track record of defending. Which is why a lot of the War on Terror’s biggest hawks were actually quite chummy with Islamic conservatives prior to 9/11. Hell, we were paying the Taliban–our staunch allies in the War on Drugs, another open-ended joke of a campaign launched by a Republican President–to destroy poppy fields as late as the Summer of 2001! Birds of a feather…

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    Not really. The premise that all cultures and religions are accorded equal worth is the multiculturalist pc paradigm. That’s the mindset. It pervades the liberal media and campuses where the thought police are at their best. Challenging those assumptions are immediately countered with you are a prejudiced person.
    Penny–where you are getting this from, reruns of the movie PCU on Comedy Central? Multiculturalism is so 1990’s. The humanities canon may have expanded significantly as a result, but I can assure you that critical thinking is alive in the Academy as ever. Witness the rise and popularity of “Great Books” curricula in colleges and universities as an alternative to the “design your own degree” whimsy of the recent past. The spirit of humanism may have been severely tested by the likes of Derrida and Foucault, but only the diehards out there still maintain that there is no such thing as Truth and that all cultures are equally valid, kind of like you still find a Marxist here and there in your economics department or a Freudian on the psych faculty.

  • Kat

    {Mr Ahmed said his nephew went to Pakistan for two months earlier this year to study religion.
    He denied earlier reports that his nephew travelled to Afghanistan and took part in training camps.
    “There is no way, I have seen his passport.”
    Mr Ahmed described his nephew as “calm and collected”.
    He added: “He was intelligent. He went to university, Leeds Met, to study sport science. His plan was to go into sports.”
    He added: “He had everything to live for. His parents were loving and supportive. They had no financial worries.”
    He said he now accepted the family may have to move away from the area.
    ‘Proud to be British’
    Mr Ahmed said his nephew, who had studied in Lahore in Pakistan, was “proud to be British”. He said if he had known he was involved in any fanatical groups or organisations he would have put a stop to it.
    Mr Ahmed said he came to Britain in 1961. “It’s the only life I know. It’s a long time,” he said.
    He said the family were well-respected in the community adding: “They live in the community, they are respected in the community. How is the community going to react now?
    “Our lives have been shattered. It’s impossible to describe it. We have had a very pleasant time here. I don’t think we can continue here.”
    He said other people in the community had been “quite helpful so far” and they had not received any hostility.
    He said other members of the family had not been arrested by the police but were being looked after by officers.
    Asked what may have drove his nephew to commit the atrocity he added: “There is no explanation I can come to.” http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=355677&in_page_id=1770&ct=5
    I can come up with an explanation–it’s the first sentence of this quote: “Mr Ahmed said his nephew went to Pakistan for two months earlier this year to study religion.” The religion he studied taught hid jihadism-the muslim art of gutblowing.

  • penny

    Witness the rise and popularity of “Great Books” curricula in colleges and universities as an alternative to the “design your own degree” whimsy of the recent past.
    No, I haven’t witnessed this “rise” and I doubt you have either. And I know something of the “Great Books” curriculum as one of my kids is a St. John’s. grad. It’s not out there in any meaningful way, my friend. Between the rot of gender, women’s, ethnic and all of the other whimsical and lame victim studies out there, who would have the time to teach Aristotle?

  • Franky

    The problem with the stupidty of they hate our freedom argument is that it will lead us on the wrong path when we try to understand this threat. Equally the argument that these are evil people. Let’s take an example: the morons get in control and refuse to look at anything more than these are “evil people” – subsequently we’ll be looking for people with history of violence, with criminal records, sociopathic personalities etc. When in fact as we’re seeing with these london bombers one of them dedicated much of his time to charity. To search and root out and destroy the people and causes of these bombings is too serious to be left to people who struggle to formulate an argument longer than a bumper-sticker.

  • http://whataretheysaying.powerblogs.com mary

    To search and root out and destroy the people and causes of these bombings is too serious to be left to people who struggle to formulate an argument longer than a bumper-sticker
    True. What sort of people should we be looking for?

  • Franky

    Dear Mary,
    As someone with family and friends in London I really wish I could tell you – but what seems a common denominator of suicide bombers in the first world is a profound dislocation from the modern world, that what capitalism has to offer is not enough hence the recruiting in universities where students are disillusioned as they look forward to the rest of their lives.

  • EverKarl

    Certainly, universities would be a good place to look for people who don’t like capitalism, but I’m sure Franky isn’t suggesting that law enforcement should add “leftist” to their profiling…

  • Franky

    you would be correct in being sure I’m not suggesting that – i don’t think history has ever produced a leftist suicide bomber.
    I think a first world bomber will probably be educated – and here’s why: they’ve got the chance to do something with their lives but realise they’re not interested in that route, they look for something more spiritual, they turn their back on expensive cars and apartments. I think the poorer muslims won’t be as likely to make that decision because they’ve yet to see that capitalism won’t make them happy, still expending their energies on getting the money together.

  • http://michaelzimmer.blogspot.com Michael Zimmer

    “No, I haven’t witnessed this “rise” and I doubt you have either.”
    Your kid’s (singular) experience notwithstanding, many major universities require foundational courses that teach what you’re calling “Great Books.”
    NYU’s Morse Academic Plan
    Columbia’s Core Curriculum
    Stanford’s General Education Requirement
    just to name a few…

  • thomas

    “Certainly, universities would be a good place to look for people who don’t like capitalism”
    probably the unemployment lines as well…..

  • http://whataretheysaying.powerblogs.com mary

    Franky ñ apparently, a university educated terrorist believes that a middle-or upper class lifestyle in a multicultural, democratic nation doesnít offer them ëenoughí.
    What is it about a multicultural democracy that is so disappointing?

  • Franky

    Because it’s not seen as fulfilling enough, these are people who search for a purpose beyond working each day and picking up a paycheck. This disillusionment with everyday life is common in all cultures, but it is taken to lethal degress when mixed with wahabbi-funded preachers who seek to guide these impressionable young men to take murderous actions.
    I remember a group that shared all the values of the taleban at my university that woud target unhappy muslims. They sought to offer them answers, solutions to this exitensial depression. Then a guy who started a few years after me went on to kill Daniel Pearl.

  • Kat

    Oh, Franky, just be honest and admit that pleasing allah is the reason for the gutblowers–it has nothing to do with US policy–other than the US will never become an islamic caliphate–we will purge them before we bow to allah and become their dhimmi.
    1. Muslims believe that they have the right to compel people to accept Islam because it is the truth.
    2. Muslims believe that Mohammad was given a divine command to fight against people, not in self defence or for economical or political reasons, but because people do not worship the one Mohammad worshipped.
    3. Forcing Islam on people is justified if later on they will become Muslims. It is not an exaggeration then to say that the sword is Allah’s final word. If you don’t accept peacefully, they are allowed by allah to kill you.
    {Of all the forms of intolerance and xenophobia abroad in the world today, none is as violent, oppressive, and widespread as radical Islamism. Islamist persecution is in the news almost daily.
    Islam is not at all incompatible with political democracy or religious pluralism.
    Islamism is a power-obsessed ideology. Like other 20th century ”isms” – Communism, fascism, totalitarianism – it is radical, repressive, cruel, contemptuous of human rights, and deeply hostile to outsiders. Countries ruled by Islamists, such as Iran, Afghanistan, and Sudan, are among the most unfree places on earth. They strangle basic freedoms, oppress women, incubate terrorism, and persecute religious minorities.
    Islamist xenophobia and violence has many faces. In Sudan, the regime uses chattel slavery, forcible conversion, and mass murder as weapons in its ”jihad” – holy war – against black Africans in the south. Islamist gangs in Egypt carry out deadly pogroms against Coptic Christians. Afghanistan’s Taliban demolished ancient Buddhist works of art, then ordered every Hindu in the country to wear yellow identification badges. Terrorist networks like Osama bin Laden’s and Islamic Jihad place a premium on killing and wounding Americans. Death sentences are pronounced against authors – like Salman Rushdie or, more recently, the American Khalid Duran – who write books the Islamists don’t approve of. The litany is grim, the victims are many, and the threat is global.
    Durban, racism, and Islamism, Jeff Jacoby, Boston Globe, Sep. 3, 2001

  • Franky

    Sorry Kat, no one is going for it. The british, be they muslims and christians, have all come together to condemn these bombings. You won’t get your racewar there.
    But don’t worry you’re not alone.
    “Thursday 7/705 was the day Britain woke up to the fact that it is at war. A ghost army of Islamic terrorists has assembled in our country with one aim ñ to wage war and inflict murder upon us until we surrender to them and an Islamic Fascist State is imposed upon us.”
    http://www.bnp.org.uk/columnists/brimstone2.php?leeId=54
    Doesn’t that sound exactly like you kat? That’s the first response from the British nazi party, known as the BNP. If it walks like a nazi, and if it talks like a nazi….

  • Franky

    “The Koran has some tolerant verses, but they are outweighed by ones which are either blatantly intolerant and full of hate towards unbelievers or ñ to be charitable ñ can be interpreted as intolerant and full of hate towards unbelievers. It is not a Book of Peace but a handbook for conquering other peoplesí countries ñ through a combination of example, persuasion, guile, coercion and naked violence.”
    This is from the nazi chairman of the BNP kat.
    http://www.bnp.org.uk/columnists/chairman2.php?ngId=22
    doesn’t this also bear a striking resemblance to your writings?
    if it walks like a nazi, and if it talks like a nazi…

  • http://whataretheysaying.powerblogs.com mary

    This disillusionment with everyday life is common in all cultures, but it is taken to lethal degress when mixed with wahabbi-funded preachers who seek to guide these impressionable young men to take murderous actions.
    How do you know that the Wahabbis are funding this kind of murderous activity?

  • Kat

    We all know Mein Kampf is on the best seller list in most muslim countries–second only to the koran so go figure. Militant Islamism is one of the fastest-growing movements in the world today. Like Communism and Nazism, Islamism is a brutal, coercive utopian movement ñ a politicized and virulent interpretation and implementation of Islam — bent on nothing less than total world domination. The sooner we all realize that, the better off we will be.

  • Bill Hedrick

    A note about race-bating: Those who hate Muslims don’t hate them because they are brownskinned, they hated Muslims because those who claim to be the most righteous of the religion want to kill/convert/dhimmitize all infidels. A thing that should be noted is that “infidel” is a label that is applied to any Muslim that doesn’t buy the whole package of Wahabbism

  • penny

    Well, Michael, for starters your palty list doesn’t qualify as a “rise” in Great Books education. My kid’s “experience” was a little more than that. It was essentially a degree in the “Great Books”. St John’s is the only school in America that offers this as it is their only curriculum.
    It is a fact that liberal arts education has been degraded by the rot occuring in English and Humanities departments with little respect for “dead white men” in place of lame victim’s studies and agendas on the part of non-serious faculties.
    Universities were once a market place of ideas open to honest debate. They are now the worst intellectual gulags where whole words and thoughts are forbidden.

  • Franky

    jeff,
    it’s been presented to you and if you still don’t get it why real journalists would feel rage about someone who’s never stepped foot in Iraq making such comments there’s nothing more that can be done to explain it to you.
    Just go do a conference on it with Hugh Hewitt.

  • Franky

    sorry wrong thread

  • Michael Zimmer

    Penny – your link to your kid’s St. John’s degree didn’t work.
    How many universities’ humanities departments have you visited lately, or cirricula have you reviewed in order to make you sweeping generalizations?

  • kl

    “sorry wrong thread”
    No problem, it’s not like you ever change the record anyway.

  • Eileen

    Crackin’ up, kl. G’night.

  • Kat

    I wonder if the terrorist apologist knows that the gutblower drove a Mercedes. The little bastard was flaunting his wealth, obviously.
    {Thursday, July 14, 2005
    LEEDS, England — A few months ago Shehzad Tanweer was telling lots of jokes, driving his father’s Mercedes …………..

  • Allan

    Michael, this may work: http://www.sjca.edu/asp/main.aspx?page=1003
    I was recruited by St. John’s when I was a high-school senior. I’ve often wondered if I missed out on a good thing–but they’ve got an Eastern Classics master’s program that looks interesting….

  • Ryan

    The worst part is that she juxtaposes the We’reNotAfraid site with the We’reSorry site about Bush being re-elected.
    “But not every moblog is created equal. In 2004, there was Sorry Everybody (sorryeverybody.com), a Web site where hundreds of people posted pictures of themselves apologizing for the re-election of George W. Bush. Now there’s We’re Not Afraid (werenotafraid.com), a mass pictorial response to the terrorist bombings in London. We’re Not Afraid has exactly the same form as Sorry Everybody, but a wholly different tone and effect.”
    The tone was certainly different with We’re Sorry but was it superior? I guess in Boxer’s mind it was.

  • penny

    Allan, My daughter loved St. John’s. The first year is spent almost entirely on the Greeks. The format is Socratic with small seminar groups. No teaching assistants; real professors in front of you. No lame electives. They have two campuses – Annapolis and Santa Fe.
    The Eastern Classics program is good. Good luck to you if you choose to attend.