It's not your mother's Readers Digest anymore, or maybe it still is. Thanks to Interested.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali risks her life to fight for oppressed women in her adopted country—and in Britain, tooWhen Somali-born Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali took part in a television programme about Islamic Sharia law in 2003, she ended up contributing much more than her opinion on Islam and its treatment of women. A young woman from a Muslim family told the programme makers she was in fear of her life from her relatives who hit her and called her a whore for wanting to go out with her friends and wearing western clothes. Hirsi Ali listened to her story, then took the young woman to the police, only to be told: “We can’t help you. There are so many girls like you and this is not police work.”
It is not usually a politician’s job to look after threatened Muslim girls either, but that is what Ayaan Hirsi Ali did. She took the girl into her own home for nearly a year, enabling her to finish higher education. “She encouraged me every day,” says her protégée, who now has a job and her own flat. “Because of her I am stronger. It’s very difficult and dangerous for women from my community to speak out. Ayaan does that for us. We need her.”
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, 36, believes passionately that showing Europeans what goes on in some Muslim homes in our midst will kick-start a process of emancipation. “If only people, including those in Britain, were aware of the sheer number of girls living in terror,” she says. “Just going outside without your father or your brother’s permission can lead to your being taken to the home country of your parents and being shot dead. You can be forced into marriage with someone who’s going to rape you every night. You will conceive children year after year when you don’t want to be pregnant.”...
That woman deserves it.
Thanks, Rebecca, for transforming my original Eeyore post - damning with faint praise - into a bouncy Tigger.
That's what Americans are for.
Nighty night.
There was a time when Reader's Digest was the most popular magazine in America.
Congratulations Hirsi Ali.
Bravo to both Hirshi Ali and Readers Digest.
Not to steal any of that remarkable woman's thunder, but I wanted to share with you good people some wisdom from two American 60s radicals who had the sense and the ethics to re-evaluate their views and their lives.
David Horowitz and Peter Collier are re-issuing their 80s classic ‘Destructive Generation.’ They’ve written a new introduction for it. I’ve taken liberties to abridge it and offer up the best parts for your enlightenment and enjoyment.
ABOUT THE LEFT
"Progressives — self-defined prophets of social justice — had killed more than a hundred million people in the U.S.S.R., the People’s Republic of China, and other workers’ paradises in the twentieth century to make their fantasies come true. But these social engineers and their pep clubs in the West did not have the vaguest idea how to create the material prosperity or political freedom that much-loathed capitalism had accomplished, let alone the perfect world they had so extravagantly promised. Instead of the commune they created the gulag; instead of cornucopias of plenty, a desert of human deprivation and want. Never in history had so many people been made so poor or seen their lives reduced to such miserable parodies of a human existence as when progressives took command of their destinies.
"Yet this disaster created no epiphany for the [Western] Left, which during the Sixties had seen epiphanies everywhere in America’s confusion. The vast architecture of evil that collapsed in the Nineties wasn’t “true” socialism at all, the Left shrugged; it was merely “actually existing” socialism, an ineffectual warm-up whose failure did not mean that the great game of Marx was not worth playing some time in the future."
ABOUT THE AIDS EPIDEMIC
"In ascribing political roots to the AIDS epidemic in this article, we intended to draw attention to the way in which a political culture of “sexual liberation,” one of those Sixties attempts to “break on through to the other side” (in the words of one of the era’s anthems), created both a breeding ground for the actual contagion and also a political rationale for the subversion of a public health system that had been able to contain other epidemics, including those like polio or tuberculosis that were far less easily controlled than a virus that had to be passed directly into the bloodstream to thrive.
"Our article appeared in roughly the third year of the contagion. It came at a time when preventive measures still could have been taken if the public health bureaucracy had not capitulated to gay radicals who were more interested in the survival of the bath-house culture than in the well-being of their brothers."
ABOUT THE ACADEMY
"Nowhere is the entrenchment of the Sixties mentality more complete or more destructive than in the university. That the Left should now dominate the academy involves a savage irony, of course. It was only after failing in their intent to burn down the university in the Sixties that radicals decided to get on the tenure track in the Seventies. Unimpeded in their long march through these institutions by fair-minded centrists of the sort they themselves now refuse to hire, these Leftists have brought a postmodern Dark Age to higher education — “deconstructing” objective truths to pave the way for chic academic nihilism; creating a curriculum of contempt for American history and culture; and transforming many classrooms into chambers of inquisition and indoctrination. Some of them now profess to be embarrassed by the “excess” of a Ward Churchill, and no wonder: his sin is to reveal by his blatancy the agenda they try to disguise through stealth and subtle misdirection."
ABOUT COMING OF AGE AND COMING TO TERMS
"How could we have changed and given up such politics? This is the odd question we are sometimes asked by the handful of our old comrades who still speak to us. The question has many layers. On the surface they are asking how we could have gone from being, like them, bitter critics of America to being defenders of its promise and advocates of its power to do good in the world. At a deeper level, though, they are wondering how we could have turned our back on the Sixties, those good old days when we were all so bad. The answer we give is not one that they like: at some point it is time to grow up and construct a profit-and-loss statement of one’s commitments and their consequences."
Read it all…
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20800
that showing Europeans what goes on in some Muslim homes...
What's this? Some Moslem homes?! What's going on in every Moslem home is Islam, in the form of the Koran, the Hadiths, and the Sharia.
ALWAYS ANGRY ALWAYS AGGRIEVED ALWAYS BITTER ALWAYS MOSLEM ALWAYS
No, tell the self-loathing infidel sheep who populate the EU the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but. After being let in on what's really going on, they might not produce as much wool, but Scotch sales should go up nicely.
This brave and beautiful woman deserves every honor that can be bestowed on her. I wonder if anyone has the guts to nominate her for the Nobel Peace Price?
Someone might nominate her, but not one of the Nobel decision-makers would vote for her; its just not good form to critique the ROP™.
I am continually surprised that the world hasnt cast off this faux religion and its tenets, especially with the daily mounting evidence of its absurdity and grotesqueness.
Are there really that many out there who are ignorant of cankerous islam, or are there many but they stand silent and afraid?
ABOUT THE AIDS EPIDEMIC
While it is true that sexual excesses took place, I find your applause of Ali very disingenuous. Remember Ali champions women's issues and homosexuality. Do you agree with the former, the later, or neither?
This article is replete with hatred of Homosexuals. It attacks homosexuals with such ferocity that it foolishly blames far too much of societies ills on them. It blames homosexuals for viruses that sooner or later would have spread to the US. Do homosexuals really have as large on effect on society as the author suggests? I think not. Are homosexuals the patsies that Frontpage seek to blame all of societies problems on? Hey, I’m homosexual and I’m here am I not? Look where I am, on JW/DW buddy. Like Pim Fortuyn, I am not ashamed. I am not the cause of America’s problems, nor I am on the other side of the terror war.
ABOUT THE ACADEMY
If material excess and "meism" and drug use are what you are referring to, then yes, there was great excesses. However, does this mean that we must return culturally to the period PRECEEDING the 60s, the period of absolute hypocrisy? No, I should hope not. Society is far more balanced today. Contrary to what the author may like you to believe, far fewer gay men are in bathhouses, far fewer teenage girls have children, drug use is overall down considerably. And what would you do to remedy the situational above, turn to the Ministry of Vice and virtue to begin the floggings? Do you challenge the fundamentals of Western Civilizations like the Islamists do?
SOCIALISM
Point on socialism: right on point.
ABOUT COMING OF AGE AND COMING TO TERMS
RE: Red/state blue/state state yada yada. Well I can say there are issues of wealth, education and resources too that the author does not mention.
Read it all…Well I did, but I did not ingest all of it, only 50%. Like all things you must read it with a careful eye. Things are not as simple as we would like them to be. There are no simple black/white answers like there are in the Koran. That’s why stupid minds turn to Islam because it provides simple answers to complex questions.
I remember Reader's Digest publishing some pretty damning anti-left stories-- both about domestic and foreign policy-- during the '90s. There was some hard-hitting stuff in the midst of the health and heartstring-pulling articles. I hope they're getting back to that in a big way, and get a big boost from this article. I know I'll pick up a copy the next time I'm out shopping.
As I listen to the deafening silence from women's groups in the US and Europe, the more I think about it, the more I think feminism in particular has a certain affinity for Islam:
- Both hate sexuality. No one can look at anyone with the remotest thought of attraction.
- Both despise and want to silence their opponents. Law, shmaw.
- Both want to spell out exactly what rights everyone has and to what degree everyone has them, which imposes arbitrary, hairsplitting limits.
-----> US Constitution, Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. (Smart guys!)
- Both want to intrude into every aspect of life.
- Neither will rest until everyone agrees with them or is intimidated into submission.
- Both hate the West and the values it stands for. And by the time the feminists realize that "the enemy of their enemy" is not their friend, they'll be wearing burkas.
Shinoliite:
Consider who hates pornography in the US, both the feminist women (who say woman are degraded) and right-wing conservatives.
Consider who hates prostitution in the US, both the feminist women (who say woman are degraded) and right-wing conservatives.
Europe's rising class of believers: Muslims
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0224/p10s01-woeu.html
Islam provides simple answers to problems like male infidelity. Women cannot commit adultery, women are "cared" for, and men can marry more women thereby satisfying their primal urges. Adultery is so easy and fun and simple then! Neat little package that is.
Indeed there is much to blame the left for, but the right is far from perfect. One can learn from the other.
All honor to Hirsi Ali!
This one woman has more balls that every man in the EU combined.
(I hope Condoleeza Rice has a subscription to Reader's Digest.)
"(I hope Condoleeza Rice has a subscription to Reader's Digest.)"
Maybe, maybe not. But Laura Bush seems more the Reader's Digest sort of reader; and who knows, maybe she'll digest something that will give her indigestion and cognitive dissonance about her husband's repeated assurances about Islam as a religion of peace.
Indeed there is much to blame the left for, but the right is far from perfect. One can learn from the other.
Very true. I definitely think it takes all kinds to make a society work. I scored a near-bullseye as a "centrist/moderate" on "The Political Compass" (http://www.politicalcompass.org/), but I think that in the sphere of dhimmitude, among others, the left in particular offers more problems, selling self-hatred in the West and "tolerance" of other cultures' most oppressive rules, even when their adherents reside in Western countries.
The main crime of the right wing, identified with the GOP, as far as dhimmitude is concerned, is either being silent, or having gradually assimilated the views of the left. Never mind that the Democratic Party (and its Dixiecrat offshoot which later polluted the GOP) were often on the wrong side of civil rights history (arguably until FDR/Truman); the Republican party is terrified of being labeled "racist" or "bigoted," which is the instant charge leveled against anyone challenging the dhimmi status of the West.
It's always a tragic waste of time when a political entity cares more about its image and self-preservation than about doing good in the world.
URL fix:
http://www.politicalcompass.org
Unfortunately one Ayaan Hirsi Ali doesn't make a spring.
The struggle will be long and bitter.
My Mother never touched Reader's Digest!
But my father-in-law has subscription and passes them on to me. I may get this around Easter. Which of course is the strength of Reader's Digest in the UK. In the waiting rooms of dentists, doctors and vets, in the year 2009, when Gruesome Georgie Galloway's antics in BB are a distant memory, people will still be reading about Ayaan Hirsi Ali and her couragous good sense.
KAFIR NON BELIEVER: "This article is replete with hatred of Homosexuals. It attacks homosexuals with such ferocity that it foolishly blames far too much of societies ills on them."
How unfortunate you see it that way. Horowitz was not attacking homosexuals, he was attacking a culture of promiscuity that first spread the disease like wildfire, and then the political correctness that precluded appropriate public-health policies that might have contained the epidemic and saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of gay men.
- Both want to intrude into every aspect of life.
- Neither will rest until everyone agrees with them or is intimidated into submission.
- Both hate the West and the values it stands for. And by the time the feminists realize that "the enemy of their enemy" is not their friend, they'll be wearing burkas.
Posted by: Shinoliite at January 8, 2006 10:51 PM
How true is that? Applause for comments, mate!
And Corny above also got it right:
"...he was attacking a culture of promiscuity that first spread the disease like wildfire, and then the political correctness that precluded appropriate public-health policies that might have contained the epidemic and saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of gay men..."
Sorry Kafir. I am also a non believer.
But you have to face some unpleasant truth's. ...
Doesn't mean we can't be allies in the war against the Mo-bots!
I suspect this is going on in America as well. The evil madrassas must be terrorising the women of islam with their madness.
Wow!! I didn´t know that story from the protected for Hirsi Ali, she is a heroine!!!
"The main crime of the right wing, identified with the GOP, as far as dhimmitude is concerned, is either being silent, or having gradually assimilated the views of the left."
Mostly the latter, and it exposes the "it's not a Left/Right issue" canard as even more ridiculous than it would be if only Leftists were Leftist. Leftists long ago won the culture war in America and in the West in general, by, among other things, infecting the majority of people in the Center and on the Right with the PC worldview; and people as intelligent as Robert Spencer still can't see that?
* Rights inhere to the collective; not to the individual.
* Direct political limits on free speech.
* Rule by olympian council.
* Termination of due process and equal protection.
* Persecution or advancement by group.
* Wealth distributed according to entitlement, not productivity.
ALWAYS WHINING ALWAYS WINNING ALWAYS PINING ALWAYS SINNING MOSLEMS
These embody our current day move to the land of Devo, be that a Stalinist Republic or an Islamic Republic. What's the diff, except that with one you are forced to "pray" five times a day. Better to be a commie, where all ya have to do is sit around and grouse about capitalists.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali is an International treasure. Every country should honour her for the stand she has taken to show the world the ugly, depraved side (the truth) of Islam that is hidden from all. Congratulations to Hirsi Ali & the Readers digest.
Ms: Ayaan Hirsi Ali is an International treasure. Every country should honour her for the stand she has taken to show the world the ugly, depraved side (the truth) of Islam, that is hidden from all. Congratulations to Ms:Hirsi Ali & the Readers digest.
It is funny seeing Turks claims ancient history and even Byzantine history. I have seen this madness on www.allempires.com a few times. I know there were cases where entire villages converted rather than face dhimmitude but the Turks as a culture and race have nothing to do with Anatolia's ancient past. I am sure some Turks have Byzantine ancestry but to claim this as a Turkish heritage is bunk!!!
Stockholm. A stamp. An address before Congress. Use those good looks for all they are worth, to get a hearing for what really counts.
"Horowitz was not attacking homosexuals, he was attacking a culture of promiscuity that first spread the disease like wildfire, and then the political correctness that precluded appropriate public-health policies that might have contained the epidemic and saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of gay men."
I COMPLETELY agree with you that promiscuity is highly distasteful, but how on earth do you intend to prevent consenting adults from having sex, creating a Vice and virtue squad?
Those of you who are posting are largely men. You know yourselves, and as such, you understand the sex drive of men. Why do you suppose the sex drive of gay men is any different? The only difference is their target of attraction. Of course many gay men will be promiscuous, many men are or would LIKE TO BE. It seems to me they best solution is to encourage gay men to "settle down" with a partner, which many extreme conservatives have begun to understand. But for this to work, you need to ENCOURAGE them to do that, not do everything you can to hinder it.
The "culture" of contraceptive rights, rights of speech (to openly display ones sexuality) and rights of association will be tough cookies for you to crack if you believe in civil liberties. What about prostitution? Do we opt for Islamic hypocrisy and have temporary wives?
Here's an analogy: even with a Palestinian state in place, terrorists will remain. The sad truth is that promiscuous men (gay and otherwise) exist even when encouraged to "bind" with another. But perhaps, their activities can be lessened.
That said, I admit that over concern over privacy rights of gays led to the DEATH of many innocent young men due to failure to disclose their status. This is something most gays will never admit, but know it full well.
Oh and by the way, Sheik yer Mami, it's ok friend,
I bet you realize my position here is in part based on self-defense. But I ask you to see that as a gay guy, I loathe being vilified in this way.
KNB: "That said, I admit that over concern over privacy rights of gays led to the DEATH of many innocent young men due to failure to disclose their status. This is something most gays will never admit, but know it full well."
My friend, it wasn't just "concern over privacy rights" that led to the deaths of thousands of gay men, it was a culture of gay affirmation that refused to acknowledge any social responsibility.
Why weren't the bathhouses closed in 1984, when doing so would have actually have made a difference in stemming the spread of the epidemic? Why wasn't the 'Gay Pride' parade cancelled that year and the next, to prevent thousands of homosexuals across the nation from descending on San Francisco, where many were infected and brought their infections back to partners in cities and towns across America?
Why?
Simple. Because to do so would have curtailed gays from celebrating and expressing their sexuality as openly and freely as they had grown accustomed to. In essence, hundreds of thousands died because gays were unwilling to alter their lifestyles, and for those like Horowitz who were calling them to account, the cry of bigot and homophobe became the standard reply.
KNB: "I COMPLETELY agree with you that promiscuity is highly distasteful, but how on earth do you intend to prevent consenting adults from having sex, creating a Vice and virtue squad?"
This is not a matter of what is tasteful or distasteful. It is a matter of social responsibility.
KNB: "Why do you suppose the sex drive of gay men is any different? The only difference is their target of attraction."
There is (or at least was) another important distinction.
Horowitz took it upon himself in the name of journalistic integrity to visit a bath-house in San Francisco so he could witness for himself the goings-on. He entered one room - called the "orgy room" - where the lights were dim and where bodies interacted en mass...a scenario so ideal for the spread of disease that he described it as "one gigantic petrie dish."
He interviewed homosexuals and found that it was not unusual for them to have had over a thousand sexual encounters in a year, mostly of the anonymous variety inside the bath houses.
Again, this is not about what is tasteful and what is not. It's not even necessarily about homosexuality per se. It's about the gay lifestyle in America in the 70s and 80s. There was an undeniably significant sub-culture in the gay community that engaged in repeated episodes of anonymous sex with multiple partners, something almost - though not completely - unheard of among heterosexuals.
So it was not just the viability of anal transmission that decimated the gay community, it was the culture of promiscuity, one that quantitatively distinguished itself from the heterosexual world. Why can't this be acknowledged?
KNB: "It seems to me they best solution is to encourage gay men to "settle down" with a partner, which many extreme conservatives have begun to understand. But for this to work, you need to ENCOURAGE them to do that, not do everything you can to hinder it."
I've always been of the opinion that what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their home is nobody's business but their own. I make absolutely no moral judgments of gays or lesbians for being who and what they are. Be neither do I excuse them from the same standards that I judge everyone else by.
Victimhood has gained great currency in our present culture. But coming clean, fessing up and taking responsibility is a much more tangible form of empowerment. I'm still waiting for the spokesmen and leaders of the Gay Community to acknowledge their flight from responsibility in the 80s, when it was easier to blame Ronald Reagan for the deaths of thousands than their own irresponsible behavior.
**“If only people, including those in Britain, were aware of the sheer number of girls living in terror,” she says.**
It astounds me that the world doesn't know at this point. Or, they do know, and just don't care. Or, they just can't believe true evil certainly does exist in this world. It's name is Islam.