Ms. Gallant wears a hijab

Not surprising coming from Newsweak.

Another example of the left's infatuation and alliance with Islam.

Well, I will say that Ms. Goofus is much better looking. Hope that's not too offensive to the nice Muslim girl, who I'm sure is much smarter and superior due to her awesome religion.

Maybe if Ms, Goofus would put on a hijab I would not have such evil thoughts...

There is a parallel between the doctrine of racial superiority of Nazism and the doctrine of moral superiority of Islam in that violent coercion are required to establish their respective utopias.
Now you know why I like pop-tarts.

To me, the Muslim girl looks encumbered by all her garb, and despite being so covered she still seems to be having trouble calling attention to herself. Ms. America on the other hand is free and confident enough to raise her bare arm all the way for everyone to see. There's a living Statue of Liberty for you.

Good points about the distinctions subtly (and deceptively) drawn by Newsweek with this photo. The pure and good Muslim female (hardly a looker, but I digress) contrasted with the apparently slatternly young woman to her left is ipso facto evidence of how the clueless media in this country will do anything it can to pull the West down (due to self-loathing, itself a mental disease) while propping up the followers of the most effective totalitarian creed ever devised by man. What this should function as for so many of those who post here is yet another warning shot across the bow that the struggle to insure that Islam does not make further headway in the West will be a constant one, not only because of the enemy per se, Muslims, but also because of the willing useful idiots, in this case Newsweek, who will aid the followers of Mohammed's malevolent cause. We live in troubled and dangerous times indeed.

Forget the hot blond, what about the obvious slag punk behind her reason enough to attack the west! Never forget the media has an interest in seeing the west destroyed Who does it doesn't matter to the liberal elites

This picture aside, one has only to look at this Newsweek page (On Faith: Muslims Speak out) to see the uncritical kumbaya at work. Newsweek must really think Americans are all kindergartners. This is not journalism. It is not even propaganda. It is the most obvious and infantile form of unthinking, reassuring, all-is-well, politically correct crap one could imagine.

It is a sign of Western decadence, the decadence of multiculturalism and consumerism combined in one reassuring package: don't worry (about the future), be happy (Muslims love you). So buy me. Buy this magazine. Feel good.

I don't know if it's liberals at work here in this exercise so much as admen who just want to sell copy, a magazine that makes you feel groovy and good about life. Or both, probably. Liberals can be, after all, as capitalistic as the worst of the robber barons. Wine and cheese liberals.

Anyway, Newsweek is saying about Muslims... These are the droids we're are looking for. Move along. Move along.

I guess our real enemies are ourselves: our own irrational prejudices and the "fear of the other." Because, of course, Islam is a religion of peace, love and Apple pie all the way. Yeah, that must be it. Thanks, Newsweek. Kumbaya.

Featured are feel-good (feel-bad later) pieces like:

"MUZZAMIL
SIDDIQI
Fatwa Against Terrorism
UNITED STATES: Terrorism, suicide bombings or any other kind of bombings, shootings or violence that target civilians are totally forbidden in Islam and there is no justification for these acts."

"ABDUL MUNIR MALKHAN
Jihad Against Violence
INDONESIA: True jihad consists of opposing (suicide bombings), in the name of God and His religion."

and

"SAMA HASAN
Freedom to Believe
ENGLAND: The predominant modern Muslim view no longer regards apostasy as a crime."

Oooh,

I will definately take this one on, lol,

OK so, what we have here, is the media portrayal of a woman's worth,

by 'what she is wearing'. Hmmm, patriarchy on both ends here, I have to laugh because at the college here, I see Muslim women all the time with the hijab on,

then wearing tank tops and tight jeans, and some of them are literally falling out of their tank tops.

Its like the laughing joke among men on campus. Anyway, the thing with college is that the majority of students, male and female, are working Plus going to school, and many times students show up to classes with their pajamas on.

The article doesn't say if the Muslim woman works, or if she is taken care of by a big family or husband and her only obligation if school, where as the woman next to her looks tired, probably from having worked the evening before then cramming/studying all night then having to show up for class then off again to work.

But no, rather than focus or even ask, the target is 'how they are dressed'. Just because ms purity in all white is sitting up straight doesn't necessarily mean she's a better student--but if she is,

it and I can almost assure you, has more to do with the fact that ITS THE ONLY FREEDOM OF INDIVIDUALITY SHE DOES HAVE OR EVER WILL HAVE. UNLIKE the woman next to her, her husband will have automatic despotic say so on every aspect of her life, INCLUDING HER WORK AND CAREER.

If

she's allowed to have one.

They should show that, but this is true, there are leftists [far leftists] who point out [and sadly, some feminists too because of the revolting against the sexualization of women and including little girls that we are bombarded with in our society] the lack of modesty of SOME WOMEN

and what it really is, is a backlash against the women's movement. Because THIS issue is about who controls women's sexuality,

men, society, or religion or the woman herself.

So, this portrayal could just as well be, from a right wing anti-feminist perspective as well as a leftist catering to Islam perspective--regardless--

ITS SEXIST, PERIOD.

Its the same thinking that says, 'she was raped because she was wearing jeans or mini skirt--never--she was raped BECAUSE THE MAN IS A RAPIST'.

Either way, its never about the behavior of men or patriarchy--but of what women do or don't do.

and let me just say for the record, the main reason I got fed up with the far left was due to the blatant sexism and male suprasuperiority in that whole political movement. They are more sexist than a lot of the right wing men.

btw, just so you know, thats where radical feminism came from, feminists in the far left who got fed up with the double standards, hypocrisy and sexism and they formed their own theories and ideology--where the whole concept of women's space came from.

they didn't come from the right, they came from the left. and that is why you will often hear the liberal men and left wing men accuse radical feminists of being more like right wing Christians, esp on issues such as porn and prostitution and media sexualization of women, etc.

and you are correct, these types of images are EXACTLY FOR THAT PURPOSE, and women's bodies and lives will be the battle fields. The deception is that the woman in the tank top is not showing herself in a sexual way,

she's just dressed comfortable and most likely its probably hot outside. She is paying attention as much as the Muslim woman, just sitting in a more relaxed way--

I've gone to college with many Muslim women wearing hijab and believe me--they don't sit that way..they are just as slouched and lying back in chairs as the rest of them,

in fact, I do dress conservatively and always did on campus. So this whole picture is KAKA.

and I can assure you, little ms purity probably was just as slouched and then the camara came up and bam

up and at attention she went.

probably because she was afraid daddy or brother or husband would see her laughing and laying back and enjoying what little bit of freedom she does have and was terrified they would jump her ass when she got home--

I say this because I know, they do that. They police the women on campus, even spy on them and tell their brothers, and so forth. Why the women rebel every chance they get, if not in dress, in mannerisms or the music they listen to or the books they read.

Kid yourself not...then before they go home they get all prepped to face the family and the men do the same damn thing. This photo is laughable, it really is, the typical media slam against women's rights in this country.

this is one area that the right does play into the hands of Muslims, its not always the left. something to really consider the next time,

you hear someone making a sexist remark against a woman or women.

Natasha

I often agree with your analysis of news, but this time, I think you read to much into the picture.

This important tidbit was apparently left out of the original article.

The question they were all responding to was: "Raise your hand if you believe the Muslim Prophet Mohammed was a pedophile."

"Islam could turn not only Ms. Goofus, but your daughter, from a materialistic social butterfly into an earnest, focused, modest, and well-dressed young lady."

All well and good, but focused on what? Becoming a martyr herself or merely birthing one?

Fox had a report about some of the girls "saved" from the Red Mosque. They were in full veil (not burkha, but the one that shows only the eyes) and they were talking so excitedly about the idea of becoming martyrs. No need to go to school for that, unless you're looking to case the place and pick the time and place for your rendezvous with Allah. Some want to start their own madrassahs to teach others about martyrdom. It's their highest calling.

No one is noticing the obvious....

Everyone is raising their hands. It would be much more impressive if she was the only one raising her hand.

Wouldn't it disprove the purpose of the hijab if someone hit on her?

Why is she called Ms Goofus?

Because she is good-looking, has blond hair, and is wearing a sleeveless top?

Robert, I think that your sexism is showing.

Semiotics:

Muslo-girl looks prim, proper, respectful, sits neatly upright, and meekly raises her hand.

The American slackers in the backround are undisciplined, lax, loose, and yet arrogant.

We are the boors and boobs.

Islamo-girl is the surperior type.

How many shots did they sift through to get this iconic little "off the cuff" image?

Everything is propaganda in wartime.

This is to undermine us and promote them.

All without any critical examination of the threat of Islam.

The cover might as well say:

ISLAM? MOVE ALONG, NOTHING TO SEE HERE, MOVE ALONG.

For one, I like my women just a little on the trashy side.

There's no doubt she gets good grades, though, whether honestly or dishonestly. If she cheats on an exam, it's okay, because it's a class taught by a Kaffir and she wants to go to Med School to serve Allah. So it is not harem. Plus, if she gets caught, she can just call in CAIR, and CAIR will say she was unfairly accused of cheating because she is Muslim. So she's got it made.

Where is Eleanor Clift?

Doesn't she care about the rights of these women?

Do the media who want to see the West destroyed think they themselves won't suffer in the end? Are their gated communities THAT secure?

Dave: Read too much into the picture? Look again. It's precisely subtleties like this one that we should be most attuned to.

profitsbeard: Good analysis. My compliments.

Voltaire: It says this was was posted by Marisol, not Robert.

Dear Newsweek.

The one on the left has been married for 5 years, has three kids and doesn't know any better.

The one on the right could care less; and knows better.

Hmmm.mmmmmmmmm

Voltaire-- I wrote this one.

If you're not familiar with the Goofus and Gallant comic strip:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goofus_and_Gallant#Goofus_.26_Gallant

It's been widely parodied over the years.

My point about the hair color has to do with the fact that it's dyed/highlighted-- something I think is a significant facet of why this girl has been used as an exemplar of supposed Western vanity and materialism in contrast with Islam's supposed "liberation" of women from all that.

That said, the fact that she represents a certain stereotype in the picture is also problematic.

Voltaire:

Robert, I think that your sexism is showing.

Hmmm. I didn't write this. Marisol (a woman) did.

Voltaire, I think your sexism is showing.

Cordially,
Robert Spencer

I don't know.

They both look like uncovered meat to me.

Fine analysis of the image. It is obviously a more subtle aspect of the islamofascist information warfare. I wonder if a certain Mr.Fareed Zakaria, the (Muslim of Indian origin) editor of Newsweek had any role to play in this.

Goofus vs. Gallant

I see things in this picture a little differently. Notice that Gallants arm is only partially extended. She looks unsure of herself, almost afraid the instructure might call on her for the answer. Maybe even afraid the instructure might crack her upside the head if she gets it wrong.

Goofus, on the other hand, has her arm fully extended. She's confident, she knows the answer. But she won't be devistated if she gets it wrong.

rational-

Reality has nothing to do with this.

We're talking about a white and glowing good girl in the foreground, who is "not aggressive" (which you mistake for hesitancy), versus a louche and indifferent, pushy and hubris-filled not-so-good girl (which you consider normal) in the backround.

Of course, you're right.

But only because you aren't wearing your multi-culti K-ray specs.

Wellington-

Thanks.

We only get a hint of unmoderated accuracy from the MSM when the event is too overwhelming for them to instantly "frame" (like the WTC Towers being hit on LIVE tv and the immediate horrific aftermath shown without ideological manipulation or pacifying moderation, since shock paralyzed their propaganda filter temporarily... although they've managed to have the 9/11 images essentially become "disappeared", as far as the regular media's recollection is concerned, since about early 2002. Actual Muslim terrorism doesn't fit their model of "we are the bullies, they are the oppressed", so it gets filed away as "too upsetting").

It's not so much the image alone but the whole package if you look at Newsweek's major effort to whitewash Islam. There is absolutely nothing critical about Islam there. It's all about how misunderstood Muslims are and how they are all beautiful people, just the next great wave of immigrants coming to make America stronger, richer, more gloriously diverse.

Muslim in Americans. They are just like Italian Americans or any other immigrant group that was not accepted at first but then assimilated. You know, the WASPs used to frowned upon Italian immigrants, viewed as lesser Southern Europeans. They were all in the mafia. Now they are as American as Apple Pie. We can even romanticize the old mafia mystique in the Godfather and Goodfellas (both by Italian-Americans). It's like 20th century wild west, and we love 'em.

One day, we will look back and watch movies by Muslim filmmakers about suicide bombers and falling towers and just laugh and laugh. "Hey, Infidel... You're saying I'm a clown. I amuse you? I make you laugh... I'm here to amuse you? Kaboooom." The audience will roar.

Yeah, I can just picture it.

Rational:

I agree with you. She doesn't look jaded. In fact, her expression says, I know the answer to that question. In no way, a jaded look.

Little Miss Sunshine...not to demean the movie of like title...seems tentative and unsure at best, but; perhaps, with a gleam of hope that she can break free of her indoctrination. Let us hope so.

According to Iranian moral cops, the muslim girl is too westernized and looks like a hussy.. if this muslim girl would be walking the streets of iran, she would be stopped and sent home to change her clothing. so for Newsweek to put on this scam of a picture is the usual liberal suspect. send that reporter to iran and lets see how much islam is okay,, right.. stupid reporters work for stupid magazines and the NYT!

I have looked at the picture and what I see is that Miss Goofus looks a lot more confident than Miss Gallant. The young blonde has raised her hand in a more confident manner. The Muslima does not look all that confident because her hand is only partially extended, the same as the dark haired girl behind the blonde.

I haven't seen a video of a blond like her wearing a homicide bomb belt and giving her last will before going to blow up innocents. However, I have seen several pictures of Muslim women in modest hijabs with guns giving their testimony before heading out to blow up people just because they are not Muslim. Wearing a hijab does not make one holy/ok/conservative; wearing a tank top does not make one unholy/not ok/decadent There is nothing any magazine can say/print nice pictures that will change my view of Islam and Muslims. Islam is a violent cult and no amount of modest window dressing can change that.

I'm with Dave. I think this photo is hardly a topic worthy of Jihadwatch. With all the daily manifestations of Islamic intolerance perpetrated around the world to highlight, this kind of thing makes Jihadwatch look a tad overly sensitive...if not downright paranoid.

Sorry Marisol. Just my opinion.

PS - If you felt it was necessary to post this piece, why not on Dhimmiwatch?

Most of you forget that Newsweep is heavily infiltrated, if not owned outright, by Muslim-Arab interests.

Whenever I read an editorial by the smarmy Mohammed Atta clone Fareed Zakaria it gives me the creeps. These guys have an agenda, and that agenda is Islam.

Islam, Islam, nothing but Islam...

Yeah, right "(S)newsweak".

I'll tell ya what they DON'T mention...and Ms. Goofus wouldn't want anything to do with, either.

15 yr old Fameeda attended a local school here, along with her sister, Leia. Both were part of the "religion of peace" & *ahem* "virtue".
They were both friends with most everyone at school, despite their shi'ite-y persian upbringing.
Same like minded attitudes, pretty much everything.

Nothing happened...until one day of their sophomore year (10th grade), both girls turned 15...suddenly, they disappeared, without so much as a kiss-my-ass to their friends, no word from the school staff... nothing.

However, next year news came out...their peers in school found out at 15, they were both married off to guys of legal age...Fameeda is married to some guy, not in pakistan, or afghanistan, or saudi... but in san francisco.
Leia however went into hiding and is under threat of death...ooops, I mean "honor killing" for her "insolence" at being a woman and daring to say "no" to anyone.
Leia, however, not only defied the perfect wisdom of the "bosses", but she (dare I say it) CONVERTED to Christianity!

Her father, livid at her insolence, tried hunting her down...at least until the cops could find something to go after him with...namely threat of imminent murder, by his own words.
The good part is...though he threatened to kill anyone who got in his way, the man he did it with was also a police detective.
After his arrest, he posted bail, bolted, and was never seen in the US again. It was later found he went back to iran..and works for the republican guards "vice & virtue" gestapo.

Leia is now safe, emancipated, and a US citizen.
Her mother played the game until the hubby bolted, and is also applying since she also coverted, thus under threat of death.

Fameeda still lives, under guise of islam, with her "husband", in san francisco, towing the line, and 3 kids...she's barely 20.
In Ms. Goofus' world this is known as statutory rape, felony assault of a minor.

The state, school district, nor anyone else can legally do anything about it...thanks to political correctness.

How do I know so much about it?
The two girls were among my youngest son's & his peers' best friends...and neighbors across the street.
I also helped harbor Leia, and her mother, with the full knowledge of the police, since they're equally sick of political correctness (and in the proto-marxist state of the peoplez republik of kalifornia, that's saying something), and found legal precedent to legally harbor them from harm.

The father has no knowledge, nor will he.
One of a myriad of reasons I laugh at these pathetic propaganda pieces of garbage such as polls taken by such pahblum pimps as pew and newsweek.

We see it every day...but you'd never know that by such one-sided absurdities as those put out by the politically correct publication machine.

Cornelius--

We cover the same sort of thing as it's found in text and speech all the time; I think it's well worth pointing out that photojournalism can be as agenda-loaded as the printed page, only often more subtly. And this was a suitable example of that, particularly for how the unspoken elements interact with the text of the article.

I can see where this also would have fit at Dhimmi Watch, but our other coverage of the poll has occurred here, along with that of other cases of high-profile deception and/or willful ignorance in the media, as the jihad certainly does have a highly aggressive propaganda arm.

I'm still trying to figure out why muslims subject themselves to the indignity of attending Western schools and universities when they are more highly evolved and infinitely superior to Western, non-muslim people. The hypocrisy and hubris of muslims are simply astonishing!

When the rabid members of the local Muslim Student Association meet to plan their da'wa and jihad strategy, do you suppose they ever contemplate why they are attending a kaffir university in the first place since the islamic world has so many superior institutions of higher learning?

It's just a short diversion into something a little different. Nothing to get worked up over.

The mysterious woman in white, (white is the symbol of purity) is wearing cheap and gaudi jewelery on her wrists. And fashion framed glasses. That could get her arrested in anytown Iran. Also the woman has numerous papers on the table in front of her. The Blond has what looks like an empty lunch bag in front of her. The Blond knows the answer without looking it up. The muslim woman has obviously looked up the answer. She is greatly out-numbered, and appears to be by herself. There is a respectable distance between her and the kuffars. No one is paying the least bit of attention to her. It's hard to tell if this is a classroom or a lunch room.
We dont know if the question is scholastic, or about food. All who want hot dogs for lunch, raise your hands...

Dave said

I think you read to much into the picture.

I agree. Maybe these subtle psychological shadings unconsciously affect peoples' perceptions, but they can't compare to the daily headlines of Muslim-on-Muslim and Muslim-on-infidel bombings and enraged mayhem. Those are really affecting peoples' perceptions, slowly but surely.

Give Ms. Goofus a break.

Give Ms. Goofus a break.
Posted by: special_guest

No breaks for Ms.Goofus, Special_Guest.
Wearing western garb and eating hot dogs is more than Allah can bare. Only a full pardon from Geo Bush can save her now.

The image supports what muslims say and the way they say it.You know when they say others do something when in fact it is they who do it.

In other words they are showing the female as being treated with equality and modernism.Meanwhile she goes home to unequality with the respect of much leess than that for a man.

"The test of any man is in his actions"

This is just more talk and white wash.More polishing of that pile on the neighbors lawn.

We are supposed to see how well they intergrated into the western society when in fact they are not.This just to restate the obvious.

One of the real problems i have with this type of propaganda (knowing there are the truly "few" who are somewhat(?) intergrated)is that it not only matters how well they are intergrated here but how they are accepting of others in thier neck of the woods.

This BS PR propaganda (probably brought to us by K street) only proves the one way street.

Build a church in downtown Saudi land just a few blocks from the palace and a synagogue and temples and we will talk.

We have funded the building of many roads and highways in this country thats great. But all the money we have spent to build a road with Islam has ended up a one way street.

What a joke.

It's just a picture, one that very well could be a staged shot.

It is not about how they look, or what is worn that we see. It is the ideas carried in the heart and mind that can reach out and touch, or kill, or destroy.

A picture can fool you, as this one may have been taken, to do just that.

And, it was not taken in the M.E.

It is as staged shot.
Pure Islamic propaganda. And Newsweek the willing fools.

It is as staged shot.
Pure Islamic propaganda. And Newsweek the willing fools.
A war was declared by the Muslims on our civilization and people in our midst still bend over backwards to please our enemies.

My first impression was that the photograph was doctored. I get the feeling that neither woman was in the original picture. They seem to be looking in a different direction than everyone else. And they are BOTH dressed differently than everyone else.

Posted by: Natasha at July 27, 2007 10:09 PM

Thank you! Thank you! And once more, Thank you!

Abscedere

It's a staged shot to signify how innocent and wholesome Muslims are.

Miss "Gallant" is actually a nerd. What can be more harmless than a nerd?

That's what Newsweek wants to portray.

Newsweek lied. People died.

"It is not about how they look, or what is worn that we see."---Islofob IS-1

"I often agree with your analysis of news, but this time, I think you read to much into the picture."---Dave

What? Are we taking it out of context?

Umm... Then why was a picture used, at all? If it is a staged shot, what are we supposed to be looking at?

Pictures do matter, and I think the analyses of this one, by other posters, is well worth considering.

For us to become desensitized to the sight of a woman wrapped as a living mummy is just what the enemy wants. If the photo was staged, then this is all the more true. Maybe I'm just sensitive to it because I'm one of the potential living mummies...

Personally, I think it serves as an alert to the presence of the "enemy within", our own so-called photo journalists.

Let them were their shame-scarfs, it makes them easily recognizable as a heretic & my enemy, I give Newsweak no recognition as a truthfull "news" magazine anyway!

Though I usually agree with Marisol's commentaries, this time I second the statements of the following posters:

Dave said:

I often agree with your analysis of news, but this time, I think you read too much into the picture.

Cornelius said:

I'm with Dave. I think this photo is hardly a topic worthy of Jihadwatch. With all the daily manifestations of Islamic intolerance perpetrated around the world to highlight, this kind of thing makes Jihadwatch look a tad overly sensitive...if not downright paranoid.

Specialguest said:

Dave said

I think you read too much into the picture.

I agree.

There are three agendas I do see in the photo:

1. Photographer knows the hot blond will sell the photo to the magazine; magazine knows the hot blond will help the magazine move off the newstands.

2. Muslim looks harmless enough not to offend PC readers and Muslims;

3. The bizarre visual disjunction, strongly reminiscent of an M.C.Escher impossible structure, adds visual interest: A languidly, sensually disposed (not "slouching") unashamed animal blond, next to a little upright uptight all-covered-up purity-white nunnish-looking Muslim.

The bizarre contrast is not only in the radically different sensual presence of the one vs. the sterile mousy quality of the other. The Escher-like quality also is there in the bizarre disjunction of cultures. The beautiful blond female is in many ways as American as apple pie, a sort of archetypal American ideal. The magazine wants to show the bizarre contrast between that core aspect of American culture on the one hand, and Islamic culture on the other. The problem is not that the magazine is subtly attacking the blond and the culture she represents. I don't believe that's a subtext behind Newsweek's use of the photo. No, the magazine is "value neutral," and seeks to make the Muslim girl's culture look harmless, and that's the problem, since the Muslim girl, however innocently, represents a totalitarian culture.

Shes the only one with the very studious glasses. The white speaks of purity and virtue. Shes in the forefront, of course. Your eyes are directed to her first, as being, by default, best in class. You think, I want my daughter to look and dress just like this, except for that thing on her head. The comparison between her and "Britany Hilton" next to her is most striking. You think, "the muslim kid is perfect and the ho in the red dress is an American mess". You think miss purity is, without a doubt, a virgin and the other girl "knows" the whole football team, when of course, the opposite could be true. She has a warm friendly smile, and the others dont. Her look says "Im getting an "A" in this class just like all my others. The girl next to her could be thinking "If I show a little more skin to this old geezer I might come up to a "C" minus.--Etc.

The observations by Marisol are right on and hers and mine are just part of the thousand words that this picture generates.

Veeery interesting, wouldnt you say?

Perhaps muslims will agree with the analysis Marisol gave, but to me the young woman in red just looks like a totally normal, free and reasonably attractive person.

* hair dyed blond - so what? The point of gender relations in the west is that women looking a certain way isn't permitted to invite *unwanted* attention. It's called civilisation.

* in a red tank top - Looks cool and comfortable to me. I wear things like that often. In a civilised society, men are above reacting like animals to the sight of women's bodies.

* slouching slightly - She's not, it's just that her shoulder is raised.

* looking jaded - no, she doesn't. She looks keen to speak and her facial expression is just a momentary movement. Someone really jaded from partying all night wouldn't be at class, or at least not raising their hand with such enthusiasm.

Is this a worthwhile topic? You bet: islam keeps women down, yet the whole religion revolves around women's 'purity'. And comments such as "'the ho in the red dress is an American mess'" just helps islam along in the belief that women dressing in a non-islamic way are actually prostitutes. That is what 'guide inside' has just suggested!! Hey 'Guide', maybe she's just thinking 'nice colour, this red, and it's cool on a hot day'.

Some here have remarked that this photo op has inspired unwarranted, superficial attention by comparison to everyday Islamic violence and mayhem. That may be true, but it has also inspired some of the most interesting postings I've seen on JW in quite a while. Apparently human interest gets us more fired up than the incessant morbidity of Islam.

lycaste,
You are right, and I didn't mean to agree with the comment saying this is not a worthwhile topic. It is worthwhile. I just differed with some of the interpretations.

off topic: NASA says a computer intended for the international space station has been sabotaged, but the upcoming shuttle flight will not be delayed: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6918490.stm

jcom972:
You really are in the Resistance. Harboring fugitives from the totalitarians.

jcom972

I agree with Traeh, that is an amazing story. You are a true hero, I applaud you.

HUGH FITZGERALD DOESN'T GET IT

I tracked the fusion of Political Islam and Communism to a single issue of New Left Review, with every manifestation of same, echoed in the jargon of Talal Asad (son of Muhammed Asad). I track the current fusion of Islamofascism and Leftism, not to its creation but to its seeding by the dark apostle of pseudo-freedom, GWB. When he pronounced "Islam is peace," every parasitic imam on the face of the earth saw the opening. 9-11 humility evaporated, and one month later, al-Jazeera was cheerleading Taliban/al-Qaeda with thousands of innocent Americans still being dug out of the WTC rubble.

The dhimmi majority - including most nation-builders here - who see nothing wrong with marching America's finest troops into IED/sniper death traps - should at least make an attempt to understand Islamic culture. Maybe if you can decipher the following, you might learn that our enemy is: Muslims, even those who have yet to learn of their jihad-terror obligation. Personally, I don't want that enemy to vote - as does the George-Condi farce; I want militant sectors of same to die, and I don't care if it takes tens of millions of enemy losses.

http://www.blackelectorate.com/articles.asp?ID=1047

For many of the minority convert communities and the diaspora Muslim communities, Islamic Spain has emerged as an anchor for their identity. Moorish Spain was a place where Islam was in and of the West, and inhabited a Golden Age before the rise of the genocidal, imperial West, a historical moment that disenchanted Westerners can share with Muslims. Neither Muslim nostalgia for nor Western Orientalist romanticism about Andalusia is new, but it is new for different subordinate groups in the West to be yearning for "return" to Moorish Spain's multiracialism. In this worldview, the year 1492 is a historical turning point. On Columbus Day in October, Chavez urged Latin Americans to boycott celebrations of the "discovery," saying that Columbus was "worse than Hitler." That the longing for pre-1492 history is shared by many minorities throughout the West is an indication of their lasting exclusion, and how the stridency of Western nationalism since September 11 has revived memories of centuries-old trauma. As one African-American activist put it recently, "The profiling and brutalizing of African-Americans didn't begin after September 11. It began in 1492." [59] In a similar spirit, after Moussaoui was arrested in the US and granted the right to represent himself in court, one of his first demands was "the return of Spain to the Moors."

With African-American and Latino converts speaking of the tragedy of 1492, and with Muslim minorities in the West becoming increasingly race-conscious and inspired by black America, the world is witnessing a new fusion between Islam and pan-Africanism. Today, however, this racialized Islamic internationalism contains elements of other cultures and diasporas as well. Islam is at the heart of an emerging global anti-hegemonic culture, which post-colonial critic Robert Young would say incarnates a "tricontinental counter-modernity" that combines diasporic and local cultural elements, and blends Arab, Islamic, black and Hispanic factors to generate "a revolutionary black, Asian and Hispanic globalization, with its own dynamic counter-modernity...constructed in order to fight global imperialism."

I remember one incident very clearly. I was pregnant with eight months and I was to the doctor for my routine check ups. There many seats were occupied by Medical representatives and some were by husbands accompanying their wives. None offered me one. Ok I have no option but to keep standing till my turn. After that I have some work in HSBC. I was climbing the steps slowly, and tried to open the door, it was heavy for me that time. Anyway, I managed. While returning back, two cool dudes banged the door at my face and I was watching one Ms. Goofus from America, (she was showing her passport to someone) with interest. Because she was in extreme hurry and looking hassled. But once she spotted me and saw my plight, she left everything and opened the door for me, waited on me to pass.So none of the Indian girls covered from head to toe came to my rescue, but Ms. Goofus. I still remember that incident very fondly and will try to teach my little girl the same manners, irrespective of how she choses to dress up. And the less said about the media and politicians the better. Our Indian politicians just ousted our revered scholor President APJ Abdul Kalam. Because he didn't fit the bill of a usual muslim and these politicians can't grab enough muslim votes in his name. These politicians knew that he will not take a minute dismissing mercy petition of Mohammad Afzal, a conspirator in the attack on Indian Parliament. These politicians made sure the papers didn't reach him. Media also is not interested in presenting him as Ideal candidate for Predident because there is nothing controversial about him. And most of the muslims don't consider our ex president as muslim, maybe because he was the head of the missile program of India, who created missiles for fellow brothers(Pakistan.)Or he was part of nuclear program also which again ......

And the morale of this story is - only a muslim can marry both of them! ;)

Thanks for the compliments...but I'm no hero.
It was just the right thing to do.
Main thing is...the mom & daughter are doing fine.
That makes it all worthwhile.

I don't think the picture really is meant to convey what has been suggested in the article. It's more of a combination of the following:

1) Muslims are a part of American society... this girl wears a hijab to school and her classmates are unfazed, paying no attention. She has integrated into the fabric of American life, yet maintains her own traditions and nobody around her sees anything amiss in this. Muslims are here to stay, they pose no threat.

2) The Muslims are quite enlightened... see, it's not all honour killings and servitude and genital mutilations! Muslims are quite nice people and allow their girls to go to school, because they're in America now and women have opportunities in America.

I get the feeling a lot of people here are easily swayed by the power of suggestion.

Wrong...it's called the power of first hand experience.
Enjoy your Kool-Aid.

jcom972 your story is inspiring, and other posters are quite right in saying you are part of the resistance. when muslims see how real Christians live and the love of their fellow humans, they will leave islam and some will convert. that is why islam needs a big leash/stick to keep their people inline as they know their cult of death is a dead end. nothing inspiring with islam where killing in its name is professed in the kuran. where such a child rapist becomes their prophet who does any human remain sane and muslim at the same time?

Costumes are a subtle signals of seperation or supremacism. Hitler understood the value of costumes.

Islam is a patriarchal and oppressive belief system. No one flees to the Mideast or other Muslim dominated countries for religious freedom, freedom of conscience. Islam's costumes represent supremacism and intolerance-especially where Muslims dominate. The more I know of this religion the more it leaves me feeling cold. It's very similar to Nazism. It's an Arab based supremacist belief-system. At its essence, Islam is the engine of Arab Imperialism.

This is a rather odd photo. Newsweek is a liberal rag so I am a little miffed by them pushing the D'Souza line:

Muslim girl is religious and moral and thus good
American girl is secular and decadent and thus bad

I thought liberals wanted us to be secular and decadent etc etc. This picture is proof that the old tag line "liberal" and "conservative" are not useful anymore. The new tag line should be...

"Loyal" and "Sellout"

Newsweek may be liberal and D'Souza may be conservative but they are both sellouts. Paid to advance what ever CAIR and other muslim racket organizations want. Just look at Newsweek and MSNBC's (and others) stories about muslims. You cannot deny the agenda they are pushing. Is it a liberal agenda? I suppose it is what you define as liberal. It is a multiculturalist agenda there is no doubt about that however G.W.B. is multiculturalist too and last time I looked he is a republican.

As long as people get caught up in the liberal vs. conservative side show none of this will ever be solved.

However you could look at the picture and see something else too. As several commenters have said the Amercian girl has her hand raised higher and really looks more confident even with the slouching. She has her hand raised high showing her aggressive competitive nature. She wants to be seen (dress) and wants to be called upon (hand Raised high) yet she still wants to be cool about as if she is not trying too hard. The muslim girl looks meek for fear of having an Islamic cane wacked over her head. She sits up straight because of fear not liberty!

Who knows...

The power of suggestion to establish an impression and set an agenda is active even on this site.

They are not wanting to answer a question from a teacher - they're voting. The Muslim girl looks timid about it, possibly from inexperience. The blond looks boored, possibly from cynicism.

The surprising aspect of the photo is that all are voting. Therefore it must be an Australian photo where voting is compulsory, not an American where a large minority don't bother.

PS - All the above is pure invention.

This is a pro islam propaganda picture that has at least 9 major distortions:

(1) it misrepresents that Moslem women are supposed to learn;
(2) it misrepresents that Moslem women are allowed in a class and school that has boys;
(3) it misrepresents the wealth of moslem people by showing Ms. Islam with expensive jewelry rather than showing that most moslem women are among the poorest in the world and that in the U.S. and Europe they are heavily subsidized by western welfare support;
(4) it shows Ms. Islam as the only student wearing glasses and possessing detailed computer generated graphics. The picture falsely suggests Ms.Islam is smart and studious instead whereas she is from a culture where the men are encouraged to memorize the koran and the women study nothing;
(5) it misrepresents that she as a participant in a civics class (notice the use of the Acropolis and Western civilization in the background) and mispresents she is part of that tradition rather than from a culture that murdered the hapless hagia sophia martyrs as the church was converted to a mosque by approving immams and sultans to murder, rape and enslavement of the christians). It misrepresents the values of her culture where by conventional moslem theology the Acropolis must be torn down or converted to a mosque.
(7) it shows Ms. Islam as healthy and the western women as not healthy where more likely the western women are the most healthy. Ms. Islam at the age featured is more likely to have three children and three missing teeth.
(8) the picture misrepresents Ms. Islam's right to vote by using the word vote in the background where she has no such rights in sharia and where if she is religious girl, she would be against the right to vote not only for herself but for for men and anyone else also;
(9) ms. islam is pictured in white suggesting she is pure or the good guy;
(10) it misrepresents that that ms. islam is allowed to learn and work and contribute to society on an equal basis.

Yeah. And what's with the "Vote Aqui" sign?

Such pictures are akin to the performances of the Muslim women, usually Pakistanis, who come to elementary schools to "talk about Islam." They bring pretty postcards of mosques, a prayer rug that can be turned Meccawards, and are eager to share information about "family-centered" Islam. Everything concentrates on the trivial (for Infidels) rituals of worship: Shehada, zakat, salat, hajj, and especially Ramadan, which allows for all kinds of wide-eyed wonder at the depth of feeling which Muslims must have to stick to a daytime fast, for a whole month, and then of course the discussion can be all about not only what good things there are to eat at the break-fast Iftar dinner, but how various are those things because, you see, "Islam is not monolithic."

Add to this a few phrases about how Islam is one of the "three great abrahamic faiths," that Jesus and Moses are "revered in Islam" (wekl, not quite, but respected, as long as they are understood to be the Muslim Jesus, and the Muslim Moses, part of a long line of prophets who were not quite the real thing, until the real thing, Muhammad, came along). There may also be a quoting of 5.32 without 5.33 (Bush has done it, Blair has done it, every Muslim apologist and non-Muslim apologist for Islam has done it), and of course, the usual "there is no compulsion in religion" without any discussion of what that phrase must mean, given that under Muslim rule the treatment of non-Muslims is one of official humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity, such that over time many, to escape this fate, converted to Islam -- in other words, were forcibly converted not by the sword, but by the need for more secure, less unpleasant and imperilled lives, that is the lives of non-Muslims under Muslim rule.

The picture above does not tell us what is in the mind of the hijabbed girl, nor in the minds of her family members. How does she think of her non-Muslim classmates? What does she think when she studies -- does she study? -- the American Constitution, or the history of the United States, and finds out the principles of the legal and political institutions that Americans have formed, and that for several hundred years have been formed them.

This is what those pictures, or that Show-and-Tell about Ramadan (a heartwarming subject for all those "Islam in America" stories in the press and radio and televisiion), do not tell: what is in the mental baggage, what is being transmitted, what is deeply believed in.

And if that were known -- and it could be known, simply by reading and re-reading those texts, and studying, and re-studying, the history, remarkably consistent whatever variants in food and dress (that's what "Islam is not monolithic" mainly comes down to) may exist among Believers, in the treatment of non-Muslims.

That is what is wrong with the press coverage -- that above, and that in Newsweek, and that in The Bandar Beacon, and everywhere.

Attention is paid to the outward show and the smooth, transparently (to those who know something) misleading apologetics.

A permanent problem.

"2) The Muslims are quite enlightened... see, it's not all honour killings and servitude and genital mutilations! Muslims are quite nice people and allow their girls to go to school, because they're in America now and women have opportunities in America. I get the feeling a lot of people here are easily swayed by the power of suggestion. - Posted by: Holy Wart

Oh, the irony.

A photographer on assignment takes a lot of pictures, brings them back to the office and the editors select the ones to go into the article. Images are taken in at a psychological level that the printed word can't compete with. The publications know this. But the photographer, as often as not, is working on the basis of gut feel for the composition, telling or suggesting a story. For every picture that shows up in the news, perhaps ten don't make it. But the ones that do make it into print do so for deliberate reasons. In this case the objective was to show a Muslima fitting in, a now familiar sight in the Western landscape. See folks? Normal! No bomb belt! She just wants an education like everyone else in the classroom.

Such pictures should be heartily welcomed. In fact, they should be aggressively encouraged. In this spirit, why not follow this young woman back to her neighborhood, perhaps to the home where she will help her older "sister" take care of the children, waiting for their shared husband to take them out shopping? This will help the Western world better understand Moslem family values, particularly if such photographs are inserted above articles describing Moslem family values, written by an objective hand. There they are: Mom, Dad, kids, Oops! Another Mom, more kids, etc. This will help the Western world to better understand just how Islam protects and honors women and promotes family values, values which include peacefully helping themselves to the social services of the Infidel West while gently reproaching with their presence all taxpaying non-believers in sight for their selfish ungodly lives, lewd and lascivious. Yes all of us non-Moslems know those "lewd" and "lascivious" types don't we, the ones purportedly without family values, our mothers and fathers, grandparents and ourselves as we raise our own children to study, work hard, contribute to society and not to take advantage of others.

Besides Goofus and Gallant, there was another famous kids' cartoon called "What's Wrong with this Picture?" I think that one might be more apropos.

"On the right, we see a non-Muslim girl, hair dyed blond, in a red tank top, slouching slightly, and looking jaded."

I do not see the girl slouching or looking jaded, or having dyed blond hair. Her hair has highlights, but not dyed blond. The Muslim girl is extremely unattractive and downright homely. Sometimes I have to question Marisol's views and wonder which side she's really on. Sometimes I even wonder if she's one of them.

I think the worst that should be offered about this photo is what Hugh suggests....it is an attempt to candy-coat the Muslim presence in the West by offering a visual snapshot of effortless integration.

All this disparagement about the appearance of the blond is conjecture bordering on paranoid fantasy.

And dare I say it, I agree with Gary from Australia and Holy Wart; there has been quite an evolution of group-think in the comments here since the early days in 2003-04. That's why the comments section has become so boring...and one reason I only post when I'm in disagreement with the prevailing wisdom. What's the point of regurgitating the same conformist opinions over and over?....yes, Islam is a sociological evil, no question about it. But sadly, the comments section has become more of a forum to vent than to what it could be at its best, which is a laboratory of ideas from which argument and discourse might allow the most insightful and prescient opinions to rise to the surface.

Am I being unfair?

Cornelius-

Add something, then.

What propaganda issues do you think this photo does NOT raise that you would like to?

Or, take it as handy springboard to go off on a tangent that you think is more vital.

"The picture, meh!, that's insignificant compared to...".

Analysis of the overlooked images (as such images are intended by the editors to be naively "overlooked" by the viewers) exercises the b.s. detector muscles.

Got a better Nautilus?

The raised arm of the woman on the right looks very peculiar. It doesn't seem possible that the arm and the hand could be in the positions that they are. It looks like it was taken from an exhibit at a museum and glued on to her body.

PROFITSBEARD: "Got a better Nautilus?"

RESPONSE: What I have is priorities. The attention given this photo is more relevant for the ammunition it might give the detractors of this web-site than anything else.

Hey Lili--I would NEVER suggest the girl in the red dress is a prostitute. I was speaking to, as Marisol suggests, the power of images and verbal media to quietly advance an agenda. Chatillon "gets it". The purpose of Marisol's posting isnt about what you or I personally "see" as it is about what an editor at Newsweek has as an objective; his or her agenda driven goal.

Hmmm, this picture may be worth much more than a thousand words.

the non muslim girl has her hand /arm raised higher than the muslim and her face is slightly "contorted" in eagerness. the muslim looks less sure of herself. the non muslim wins in arm raising eagerness. plus she's better looking.

What a crock this picture is. i agree with bgordon about Goofus' arms/hands.

I once had a hijabed Muslim student in one of my classes. I know it's unwise to extrapolate from one example to an entire group, but that student was obviously uneasy about her appearance, in a class full of all kinds of individual "rebellious" identity markers--nose rings, multiple eyebrow rings, tongue studs, revealing tank tops and elaborate hair styles--and tried to compensate for her discomfort with insolent body language and rude behavior. She would slouch deep in the chair, or she would put her feet up on her desk; she would start eating lunch in the middle of the class, and she would refuse to speak when called upon. It was clear to me she was a very unhappy girl, who felt demeaned by her hijab and expressed that sense of offence the best way she could.
A couple of months into the semester she quit school. I was told she was depressed and would not return.

For all those who find the photo of this young woman in Muslim garb innocuous, try this easy mental exercise. Just imagine the same young woman in a Hitler Youth or a Communist Youth outfit, everything else unchanged. Would you still think it doesn't mean much? I proceed on the assumption that Islam is a form of totalitarianism, except a spiritual form rather than a secular one like that of Nazism or Marxism. All are evil. Therefore, the sartorial make up of a follower of any such ideology conveys a great deal. A picture, after all, often is worth a thousand words, and I submit that this one is.

Cornelius, you said:

I think the worst that should be offered about this photo is what Hugh suggests....it is an attempt to candy-coat the Muslim presence in the West by offering a visual snapshot of effortless integration.

All this disparagement about the appearance of the blond is conjecture bordering on paranoid fantasy.

And I agree Hugh Fitzgerald's take is accurate.

Wellington,
I'm not sure anyone here has said the photo of the Muslim woman is innocuous. The objections have all, or almost all, been to the interpretation of the blond.

And dare I say it, I agree with Gary from Australia and Holy Wart; there has been quite an evolution of group-think in the comments here since the early days in 2003-04.

I see you've noticed the change in the comments section too and the changes have not been for the better. I've also been here since 2003 and I rarely comment anymore I spend most of might time at various conservative political blogs where the global jihad is also discussed.As for the women in the photo I also think too much is being read into the picture. Whenever I see a hijab wearing Muslim I see someone making a political statement. I also view the hijab with contempt and I see it as a symbol of inferiority, not modesty or superiority.After all a hijab wearing suicide bomber is neither modest or superior.

Wellington,
To clarify my last post: the dissenters on this thread have been saying that the photo's presentation of the blond is innocuous and did not contain the subtext ascribed to it by Marisol's article and by commenters who agreed with Marisol's article. But no one on this thread, or almost no one, has denied the harmful PC subtext behind Newsweek's candy-coated presention of the Muslim girl in class.

traeh: Perhaps you're correct but a post like Dave's where he said that too much was being read into the picture made me think that the Muslim girl was getting off too easily. After all, Marisol's own post referred to the attempt by Newsweek to portray virtually all Muslims as "impeccable citizens."

The true meaning of the picture is probably much more banal than is being suggested here. When there was discussion, recently, in one of the German regional states, about banning the headscarf from schools and possibly public buildings, one Muslim spokesman said that such a suggestion was absurd, stating quite truthfully: "Seeing women around you wearing the hijab has become a normal part of German life."
Pictures like this simply accustom us to the sight - until we don't think there is anything out of the ordinary in women thinking, or being pressured into behaving as if they think, that their hair should be concealed in public.

Those of you that know about the Commie CBC TV channel in Canada will know that they launched a farcical sit-com called "Little Mosque On The Prarie" , and the main reason why CAIR touts this show as a valid showcase for Islam and Muslims is because it paints white-folks as ignorant redneck bigots that had no morals or civility until Islam came to town.

Christians are portrayed as idiots and Islamophobes while Muslims are the wise and peaceful beacons of tolerance and peace.
When the show started it had a reported audience of 300'000 but quickly dropped to about 100'000 when the CBC tried to move it to a night where it was up against REAL comedy shows , CBC quickly moved the time-slot again to get back viewers but avoided publishing the numbers for viewership.

Muslim females wear Hijabs and the men are misogenistic and loud when the argue, this may be the reason that CAIR loves the show because that's Hooper's perspective of the World in Islam and under Shariah Law.
Just try have a show in Saudi-Arabia called "Little Church in Mecca" while the script portrays Muslims as idiots and fascists , Hooper will never admit to the Racism and Fascism of the Muslims in that Country and will only admit that SOME people have perverted the True teachings of Muhammed and that us filthy pigs and infidels are too ignorant about islam to know how tolerant and peaceful it is with an acceptance for all Faiths because of the Pluralism within Islam.

Blah blah , blah blah, blah blah blah balh blah.....sorry...what was that Mr.Hooper?...I fell asleep for a moment just as your lips started to move , I must have assumed you were about to lie.

Those of you that know about the Commie CBC TV channel in Canada will know that they launched a farcical sit-com called "Little Mosque On The Prarie" , and the main reason why CAIR touts this show as a valid showcase for Islam and Muslims is because it paints white-folks as ignorant redneck bigots that had no morals or civility until Islam came to town.

Christians are portrayed as idiots and Islamophobes while Muslims are the wise and peaceful beacons of tolerance and peace.
When the show started it had a reported audience of 300'000 but quickly dropped to about 100'000 when the CBC tried to move it to a night where it was up against REAL comedy shows , CBC quickly moved the time-slot again to get back viewers but avoided publishing the numbers for viewership.

Muslim females wear Hijabs and the men are misogenistic and loud when the argue, this may be the reason that CAIR loves the show because that's Hooper's perspective of the World in Islam and under Shariah Law.
Just try have a show in Saudi-Arabia called "Little Church in Mecca" while the script portrays Muslims as idiots and fascists , Hooper will never admit to the Racism and Fascism of the Muslims in that Country and will only admit that SOME people have perverted the True teachings of Muhammed and that us filthy pigs and infidels are too ignorant about islam to know how tolerant and peaceful it is with an acceptance for all Faiths because of the Pluralism within Islam.

Blah blah , blah blah, blah blah blah balh blah.....sorry...what was that Mr.Hooper?...I fell asleep for a moment just as your lips started to move , I must have assumed you were about to lie.

Sorry. I take second place to none in my disdain for Islam but the blonde lady looks neither bored nor less studious than the Muslim woman.

You are extrapolating way too much from this one picture.

Sometimes I have to question Marisol's views and wonder which side she's really on. Sometimes I even wonder if she's one of them. - Bonniea

That's a hefty accusation there. But I'm curious: specifically which of my views make you think I'm "one of them?"

You've expressed some bitterness before about having your comments deleted. It's not a personal thing; that should go without saying. Rather, it's based on what's in the comment. And while I'm not the only one with a "delete" button, I don't think it's happened much recently.

I wouldn't say the picture is staged but MANIPULATED

yes,

and I can assure you, I still remember so many classes and one in particular, a speech-conflict class where I sat right across a Muslim woman, who always sat slouched, full veil [she was from Palestine], full black dress, in fact more conservative dressed then this woman who is obviously Sunni [as Sunni's tend to wear the white].

Believe me when I tell you they don't sit like that--that was, oh here is a camara person I had better sit straight and act all serious because I have an 'image' to uphold [that and well if daddy or brother sees her like maybe looking like she's having fun and goofing off or relaxed THEY WILL SAY SOMETHING.

I haven't seen the full article/text but I know how the 'media' manipulates images and stories, and several here have said the message has the intent of 'lets accept Muslims' etc and maybe we could like learn from their pure ways, after all our women have just gotten too 'uppity'

AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS IMAGE IS SAYING, WITH THE WORDS PRINTED WITH IT THAT I'VE READ THUS FAR...

and I can say this because I've heard these statements from 'some' feminists [who rad fems term as 'painted birds' because they are actually tools of the patriarchy, they tend to blame women for the violence rather than address the violence perpetuated against women] and I've heard these types of statements from many 'sexist men' in the far left.

And should I dare say it--I will--I always here those types of statements by the 'machismo mentality' within the immigrants rights community, esp "some" [emphasis on Some, not all] of the People of Color who are angry and who jump in on the 'time for whitie to pay' mentality and if that means jumping into bed with the extremes then so be it--those are easy to pick out, they are the ones who scream 'down with white imperialism' or 'down with white middle class feminism'

and they are usually the machismo ASSHOLES.

believe me I've dealt with them many times--they love Islam because they are pissed that their Own women are fed up with the chauvinist crap so they turn it against 'western feminism' and they LOVE articles/photos like these. Its a tool to use against women,

but the thing is, its not just about freedom of women, because it goes much, much further. Camus wrote about how when an enemy wants to 'control' or 'colonize' a nation they target the women first...now he's referring to the French promising liberation to the Algerian Muslim woman [who btw were direly oppressed] and how the natives accuse the liberator of wanting to 'rape' the nations women, etc etc etc...

but now take that logic, and turn it around. Muslims are doing the same thing,

but its the 'hey women, you are sexualized and raped and harassed and the men don't take care of you and feminism has done this, this, and this and see we value women and mothers and blah blah blah [don't believe me check out some of the Islamic forums, they talk about it all the time]

and this is why we are seeing women in Mexico, Europe, and America convert over to Islam. They see ills and exploit them, and many women are tired of the having to live up to this supermodel and superwoman stereotype, and that is true, we have some problems in our society,

but the HYPOCRISY IS: Islam will not free women, sure they are protective--protective to the point where a woman is not able to do anything other than lie on her back, bear children and be lead round like some dumb dog...this is NOT TO SAY Muslim women are stupid or weak,

they are not. Muslim women who are fighting this sexism are some of the strongest women there is, they have a lot against them and so I relay this with no disrespect to them, I'm referring to the 'attitudes and beliefs' of Islam towards women. What many feminists who have left Islam, term as 'the caged virgin syndrome',

because thats what they do, they cage in the virgins and women. They control every single aspect of their lives, which brings me to This point and its very relevant here.

One of you mentioned the jewels she has on and the glasses--BINGO YOU NAILED IT...YOU SO NAILED IT AND HERE IS WHY,

the Jewels is what they are adorned with, like objects, like Christmas trees, in fact there is a really good book, by Hanan al-Shaykh, "Women of Sand and Myrrh", and she talks about the adornement yet ENSLAVEMENT of the women in Islam,

now to be fair this varies among countries and regions, just like,here in the states, in parts of the Midwest and South there is more traditional strict gender roles thinking compared to like CA--not always but generally speaking.

But the thing is, these jewels, well the thing is, women are 'owned' in Islam, they are PROPERTY and I don't care how many Muslim women say, 'oh but Islam gives us this, this, this,'

BULL.

And I could take a day and write a forty page blog full of entries of nothing but case after case after case of women who lose their children, who are killed in honor killings, who are forced to marry men three times their age because ole daddy makes a pretty hefty 'dowry' for each girl he SELLS and in fact, its become a problem in Saudi because the price is So high, that if the father wants to buy his daughter back [in those cases where the father actually cares and daughter is stuck with an abusive jerk, he can purchase her back] and they are complaining that the dowries are too high, and I'm talking about in the high thousands...

so thats why I have not an issue with stating, women are PROPERTY in Islam--

when you SELL HUMAN BEINGS, THATS SLAVERY, PROPERTY...

why when Leftists [esp Marxists] are sympathetic to that I just am like--OK have you ever fricking read Marx because I thought the whole base of the ideology was anti-slavery, duh, but

welcome to the messed up world where everything is now turned upside down--good is evil, and evil is good. Go figure!

but anyway, the jewels, the thing that gets me, is here we have all the 'boo hoo anti-imperialism capitalist bad blah blah blah" and Hey I concur with a LOT of that, ok,

but here is where its really screwed up....how many of those jewels and gold adornments on the ankles and wrists of chained virgins in Saudi and Egypt and Africa and Pakastan,

came off the wrists and feed off of a poor woman who was raped, enslaved, forced to convert, and/or killed?

Yea, thats just it, back in the day thats EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID---read history of Islam, they not only raped and killed women and little girls, they stripped the gold and they looted and guess where those pretty little jewels wound up????

on the hands and feed of the caged virgins. Thats one of the dirty little secrets that no one likes to talk about--thats how Imperialism works. How many of those gold and silver, are

BLOOD JEWELS?

same thing about diamonds, the blood diamond trade in Congo--why I refuse to buy diamonds...or jewels depending on what they are, because of just that.

but anyway this is one of those little dirty fascist panties that just gets me about the "oh I'm so pure and I cover and blah blah blah--oh, but of course I wear jewels and gold and diamonds purchased off the blood of innocents".

Now to be fair, Muslims aren't the only ones who do this--but it shows, the HYPOCRICY of Islam,

doesn't matter if you cover up in a fricking steel box o.k. Purity, is what is in the heart--if you lie, gossip, are bitter, do nothing when ole hubby is raping your infant daughter or rapes other women...guess what sweetie--you aren't pure,

you're an exploiter. If you are locked away in some high fancy castle in Saudi and your hubby is raping slave women trafficked from Indonesia and you are beating them and forcing them to do all your dirty work, guess what sweetie,

you aren't pure, you're a rapist assister and a colonizer and a butcher.

ALL THE BLACK AND WHITE VEILS AND SHEETS AREN'T GOING TO COVER THAT UP....

give me a half dressed woman ANY day--if her heart is kind and she is a good person, if she shows compassion for the poor and homeless, if she actually DOES SOMETHING TO CHANGE THE WORLD

THATS PURITY, AND SHE IS A JEWEL--THAT WILL OUTSHINE ALL THE WHITE AND BLACK SHEETS

FOR ETERNITY.

and THATS what feminists need to start standing on--to hell with the patriarchial bullshit about 'its women fault because oh my they are educated or they work or they dress in shorts'

WOMEN ARE HUMAN BEINGS--H.U.M.A.N.

the whole point of feminism was to fight to see that recognized--so to Newsweek--we say,

WE AREN'T GOING BACK TO THE CHASTITY BELTS AND WITCH BURNINGS....

Peace,

Natasha [sorry bout the venting there--you may think that is reading too much into that picture but in the world of feminism we are seeing a lot of this type of crap so it needs to be said].

yea one more thing, I normally won't use the term sweetie--I chose to use it because the hypocrisy just gets my blood boiling and I've actually had it out with a few Muslim women who go on and on about how 'pure' they are in Islam and how western women are loose and etc etc etc,

[I am the same way towards ANY patriarchial loving woman] but the whole thing with the veil and purity and all that CRAP

when I read cases at least once a week of women kidnapped or tricked into working and they find out they are over in Saudi or Iran or Indonesia or Pakastan,

or in THE UNITED STATES being enslaved and beaten and raped by Muslim families, and the women, many of them rich, could care less.

AND THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF THESE CASES--so the whole purity thing--

hear me and hear me loud -- ITS BULLSHIT PEOPLE--HEAR ME MR AND MRS MUSLIM--SUPPORTERS OF MISOGYNY--

ITS BULLSHIT.

Its not different than rich women in the west who have immigrants, especially women or who buy clothes made in sweatshops where the conditions are HORRID,

its the SAME DAMN THING so just because one is covered up,

doesn't mean KAKA.

and for the liberals and left and multi-cultural SEXISTS and yes I will say it because I've seen it and worked with these types of men--

THEY KNOW ITS KAKA TOO.

its just leverage, like many of you here are saying, and you are right, its manipulation and leverage, the 'see how they fit in and its no big deal',

that would be true, if THATS ALL IT WAS. The Amish are conservative in dress and lifestyle too--but they aren't like forcing their ways and raping women in Darfur and kidnapping and tricking thousands of women from the former Soviet Union/bloc countries and holding them

PRISONERS

then screaming, how pure they are and how decadent the west is.

In Iran the prostitution rate is EXTREME--the poverty and women barely surviving is EXTREME

and they want to talk about DECADENCE?????

and THIS IS AN ISSUE that feminists should be UP IN ARMS ABOUT

but they are not and It does--PISS ME OFF TO NO END

because why bother fighting for women's rights in America then cowering down to a sytem of beliefs that is 100 TIMES WORSE FOR NOT JUST WOMEN, BUT LITTLE GIRLS?

And I have seen this, seen and been around feminists who are so quick to jump on the Christian right on issues such as abortion and domestic violence and feminization of poverty, most of which I totally am in solidarity with,

but when it comes to Islam its like, all of a sudden they are sympathetic and understanding and I'm like WTF???

'oh its just the fundamentalists' oh REALLY,

uh DUH, I don't think when you have an entire nation that dictates that women can't even drive a car,

thats its only fundamentalists.

something a tad 'off' with that thinking--so when I see images like the one in Newsweek here--I see an agenda that goes much further than just 'lets accept Islam'.

You know its like this, if they want us to accept and be tolerant of Islam, well, why then don' t the Muslims give us a reason to accept, like,

why don't they get in the masses and protest the RAPES OF LITTLE KIDS, FORCING CHILDREN INTO WARFARE, BEATING THEM AND FORCING THEM TO CONVERT, AND PRAY,

KIDS THAT THEY KIDNAPPED FROM THEIR PARENTS AND FAMILIES IN

DARFUR?????

WHY DON'T THEY MASS PROTEST AND DEMAND THE PUNISHMENT OF THOSE SHITE WARLORDS IN AFGHANISTAN WHO GANG RAPED AN 11 YEAR OLD GIRL, LAUGHED ABOUT IT THEN SOLD HER FOR A

DOG?

WHY DON'T THEY MASS PROTEST AND DEMAND THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT END THE 'PROTECTED BROTHELS WHERE THEY HAVE ALLOWED LITTLE GIRLS TO BE SOLD INTO PROSTITUTION?

WHEN THEY DO THAT--THEN WE CAN TAKE THEM SERIOUS--

AS FOR NEWSWEEK--WHO OWNS YOU? WHAT DEFENSE MINISTRY OWNS YOU?

I know majority of media is owned by corporations that are also in the defense business--so which one owns Newsweek? What is to gain, by an image like this? Who are they trying to dupe and why?

Or is it, more cheap labor that they want in the U.S.A.? Especially women because they know, women fill up those sweatshops, as do children.

Its like this Heather Jones case in Oman, here you have an American woman who married and converted to Islam and works in Oman [or did] and now she is finding out the hard way, what NO RIGHTS she has--under Islam the kids automatically go to the father once they reach age of seven, [varies but its close--girls especially because HEY--thats income baby--you know can't let the mother keep daughter thats gonna make ole pop some thousands]

and yet, how many JOBS have and will be lose [HP FOR INSTANCE--WORK IN THE WHITE COLLAR COMPUTER INDUSTRY--YOU MIGHT WANT TO PAY ATTENTION TO BUSH'S DEAL WITH OMAN--AND THE NUMBERS OF WORKERS RIGHTS COMPLAINTS OVER THERE--

PSST, GUESS WHAT--THEY HAVE NO RIGHTS, CHEAP LABOR]

wonder if Newsweek has some ties to Oman, in the Labor/Profit margins industry?

what ya think?

maybe later I'll do some research ,follow the MONEY TRAIL--ITS AMAZING WHAT YOU CAN FIND OUT.

in the meantime--maybe Newsweek could do some stories about the numbers of forced slaves found here in the United States, working for Islamic families--

they can start right in COLORADO-,

WHERE A MUSLIM FAMILY KEPT THIS POOR WOMAN AS A SLAVE FOR YEARS, HUSBAND REPEATEDLY RAPED HER, WHILE MS COVERED UP DID NOTHING--

and do a story about how those so called 'Muslim feminists for Jihad' [hand on, I always puke when I think of them],

are throwing ACID in the face of women in India and Pakastan who they deem aren't 'covered enough'.

you know, let me see a woman doing that--I'll hang her with that damn chador.

Natasha

The message to be taken from this picture is that Muslims are welcome in America and that we should hold our heads high and not feel we have anything to prove. Does it not matter that Ms. Gallant is accepted in American classrooms, while Goofus never would be accepted in an Iranian classroom?

Goofus looks very serious, not decadent. She's not slouched. Her left arm is raised higher and it is almost straight up, forcing her to put more weight on her right side to maintain her balance. All you see is the corner of her desk, making it possible to draw false comparisons.

Marisol, you should try both ways. The Islamic woman is holding her arm at a right angle. She doesn't care whether or not she is called upon but still, this woman is not sitting upright. Note her elbow on the desk. She's in a slouch. It's slight, but still a slouch. The blonde has raised her hand almost as high as it can go. She cares. She looks serious, not jaded. In order to keep her hand elevated she must transfer weight to the other side. It's not even a slight slouch. The person who is slouching is the Muslim woman. Perhaps she's still diffident, afraid of speaking up and drawing attention to herself because of the way she was raised?

This picture should be shown all over the Islamic world and all the people there asked: would you be as accepting of people from another culture who don't accept your mores? If not, why not? If not, why would you expect others to welcome you into their homes? If you would accept the blonde on her own terms, where in the Muslim world is it being done today?

Guide, this is what you wrote:

"You think, "the muslim kid is perfect and the ho in the red dress is an American mess". "

'Ho' means prostitute. You were suggesting that people would think this of that unfortunate young women.

Don't see it, myself. Maybe it's just my revulsion for anyone in a hijab, but Galammad looks like the typical Muslim automaton. And doesn't her hand-raising look more like a fascist salute than the usual way students raise their hands in classrooms?

You could really spin this picture that way as well -- the Western girl looks normal and free-thinking, and is raising her hand high to indicate how she throws herself at life, grabs for the brass ring. While OTOH Galammad is repressed and unthinking and so beaten down and submissive that she can only meekly raise her hand, barely getting it above her head.

Or, y'know, maybe it's just a picture. Anyhow, I sure don't see the Western girl as jaded. She seems real and alive and engaged in the world, while her wrapped-neighbor is more of a pathetic medieval symbol than anything truly modern and human.

Natasha, Aaaaaaahhhhh....... it does feel good to vent some steam every now and again. That is why I enjoy the forum so much.

Surely it wouldn't have been too hard for Newsweek to have found a picture of a hijab-clad schoolgirl eating a live kitten. The nerve of them showing one looking like a normal person.

LOL,

well for years having read case after case of the most horrid abuses towards women, not only in the Muslim world,

but statistically, just from what I've read and written on over the years, the majority YES is from the Muslim world. It breaks your heart but angers at the same time,

and that is where a lot of the rage in my words comes from, because the hypocrisy is just so obvious and blatant and sickening.

Just the photos in Pakastan, of the thousands of women crammed into prison rooms, fully covered

their crime?

they were RAPED.

Those pictures there are enough to make any 'thinking' person see something is direly wrong with the entire belief system.

They say, oh there needs to be four witnesses--thats so easy, if they truly 'cared about women', its called DNA. FOUR WITNESSES, ONE COP, ONE MALE INVESTIGATOR, ONE GENETICIST TO DO THE DNA AND ONE MALE DOCTOR TO CONFIRM THE RAPE KIT--

THERE YOU GO, FOUR WITNESSES,

but no,they don't even progress enough to do THAT because they are misogynist as shit,

there is NO EXCUSE for the type of barbarism we see in our world today, ESPECIALLY ON A SYSTEMATIC SCALE AS WE DO IN ISLAMIC THEOCRATIC REGIMES.

I have to fair and I will say as one who has read numerous accounts of horrid abuses, there are other nations that are just as bad, the Congo, horrid, where they literally shoot women in the vaginas with shotguns,

India doesn't have the best track record with women's rights, etc...

but the DIFFERENCE IS--there is hope for change. In fact in India, the women's rights organizations there have done a lot in the area of working towards laws ending domestic violence and widow burning.

Where as in Islam, they not only continue with these barbaric pratices they defend them, and then, they want for us, the west, to tolerate their doing that crap in our own backyards and under our own laws.

What is the REAL OUTRAGE though is when you see elected and nominated officials in America and in Europe allowing the SHARIA LAWS

to override Western laws in appeasement...That right here, as far as I'm concerned,

I'll borrow from Paine here--gives the People a right to overthrow the government because the government has betrayed the people. When you read that the New York City school administration has not replied to the people's concerns over the Madrassas,

thats government that is out of line, that has overstepped their boundaries. What is worse, to overstep those boundaries to pander to

none other than a monarchial religious despotism that makes King George look like a liberal pacifist. [i.e. American Revolution] What the hell ever happened to this country, seriously and I say that just from a simpleton view here, you know what I'm saying?

You know they always throw up the 'veil', I remember getting emails from two men in Europe, if you can believe that, when I sent an email to the immigrants rights people here regarding a 'meeting at the Mosque' to embrace our Muslim community and I asked them if they were going to bring up the fact that women are not cattle here and that there is real concerns for the abuse of women going on in our communities and the trafficking, etc.

Immediately I got two emails from some Muslims all the way in Europe [boy now like duh duh if THAT isn't a RED FLAG, LIKE SORT OF OBVIOUS YOU KNOW....NOT TOO BRIGHT ON THEIR PART],

but they threw up the 'veil' and I never even mentioned it. Its always sex and the veil, sex and the veil....

never do they consider, that maybe, the whole thing with forcing women to wear ridiculous sheets,

is that they will never feel

what it is like to have their hair blow across their face in the wind.

That, that may seem like its nothing but its a lot more if people really, really think about it. Its a prison sentence, its the forced Rapunzul, in the dungeon.

I've been tempted to cut my hair and make braids and give them to Muslim women to wear around their wrists, so they can stand in a field on a windy day, hold their wrist up and know, what the wind feels like.

THATS FREEDOM.

freedom we take for granted here, freedom that no matter how POOR you are, you can still walk down a street without worrying about someone throwing acid in your face or police stopping you because your strand of hair is showing or because your beard isn't long enough.

and thats the bottom line, its not about not accepting a religion or not accepting a race of people,

its about not accepting totalitarianism taking over one day and all the while, with the assistance of our very own leaders and academics.

Or like the documentary they had [can't recall which channel] about the execution of a 16 year old girl in Iran, well they showed photos of a woman who had been lashed,

I think westerners think its like some little thin strip that they lash over the clothes,

NOT. They literally rip the skin off the legs, strip these women [and men] down to nakedness [after they've raped them repeatedly] and RIPPED THEM TO SHREDS.

they are scarred for LIFE.

the one girl's crime--she was raped by three REVOLUTIONARY GUARDS,

AND THEY WERE COVERING THEIR PEDAPHILIA ASSES.

This wasn't that long ago. And then to read a feminist saying,

'we should be diplomatic'

I say, ok dumbass, lets send you over there, let you take out that tube of lipstick and see what they do to you...

when they got you strapped down in some moldy stench bench in the dark ripping the skin literally off your legs, we'll see how much diplomacy you scream then.

Every person, should read "Reading Lolita in Tehran" by Azar Nafisi.

If you never really grasped what totaliarinism is to live under, this book reveals it brilliantly. Eating an ice cream cone in public is a no no--its too provocative they say.

an Ice cream cone.

or, a woman is called aside at university because the female 'painted bird patriarchial religious ss officer' feels she needs to vent out the prior nights having to screw the man she hates,

so she picks on this girl and says, you have on mascara, which she doesn't.

and they scrub and scrub till her eyelashes nearly come out.

so bad that women just say to hell with it and hide in their house--their homes

that become prisons.

and THATS what the MULLAHS AND IMANS want to do to us here.

to the whole world.

but when we have people here, allowing this mentality to assert itself in This country, and allowing accomodation to that--e.g., letting them teach that to children in our schools, or putting up with fgms and forced marriages in our own nation and pretending they don't notice, or not punishing to the full extent of the law those men who do honor killings, [this goes for Europe too]

in my book, they are the worst kind of traitor, not just to democracy or to our laws, or Europe's laws,

but to humanity.

and they should be dealt with accordingly.

Natasha

Traeh,

Thanks for the input.

I was thinking about that poor blond....wondering how the hell she found herself the object of such scorn. We owe her a collective apology.

sorry dont' mean to be hogging this discussion,

but to your answer, yes I do think most definately--we need to end the reliance on the oil AND end the trade agreements--

but I also think--we [and the left would hang me for this but oh well, la de da]

should make it a requirement for those here--and yea yea I know about the past shit with Mexico [and current] and that US policy hasn't always been the greatest--about the genocide against Native Indians, know [but one thing, to the Native American Indians--the Muslims would kill you too--they hate pagans and animists just as much as all other infidels--just read some of the pagan history--what Muhummad did to the pagans in the Middle East--the tons of relics that were destroyed]

but I would demand a sort of litmus test--I really would, and a signed agreement--no Sharia, no forcing Islam, and acceptance of our laws as far as freedom of religion and so forth--no forced marriages, no fgms,etc and that honor killings and so forth would be extremely punished here--but then I would apply stricter punishments towards all pedaphiles [women perps included--don't care how 'feminist' they are--yea a little thing I had it out with -with some of the ole women can't do bad lot],

and I would really crack down hard on child porn, etc.

but yea--I would demand a litmus test of somekind--other countries do it, and like--you know its bullcrap with the demanding of tolerance for all sorts of human rights abuses and domestic violence and rape and castration of girls [lets call it what it is--circumcision my ass--its castration] but anyway,

you know if I was to go to ANY Islamic country I would HAVE TO ABIDE BY THEIR LAWS--

so why the fuck aren't we making them do that here? forgive the language but seriously, I mean--thats where its totally screwed up. Like the Iman in Australia who had the gall to say the teen girls who were raped, asked for it because they were infidels and not covered--

they should have taken him right then and there, shoved his sorry ass on a boat and said, adios amigo--go back home.

When a family {I read this happened in France] was in court, their 12 year old daughter raped by some Muslim thug little dick,

he was acquited and his family was calling this girl whore and spitting on her, right THEN AND THERE the French authorities should have taken them right then--locked their asses up, the rapist put in prison, the family, esp for spitting on this poor girl, they should have locked them up for a year than put their asses onto boats and said--bon voyage and DON'T COME BACK.

but no, see its 'we have to work with them' whine whine whine-

WELL-YOU know I believe in working with people too--to a point. But that sort of outright pious self-righteous arrogance like that and committing crimes, well, I have no sympathy and neither should our lawmakers.

remember the case long ago, about the young men who were caught doing something in Indonesia I think--and there was this huge protest over them being caned...and yet, they were caned anyway,

then why the hell are we putting up with these assholes and their fgms and forced child marriages [and that includes sending them out of the country] and honor killings and intimidating and threatening authors and cartoonists and putting up with them killing cartoonists--

thats where I think we need to become very tough, and I mean tough--and to those who say,

oh thats terrible and racist and boohoo--TELL YOU WHAT STUPID--GO TO ANY OF THOSE COUNTRIES AND POP UP YOUR HEMP OR PICK UP ONE OF THE WOMEN OR DRESS PROVOCTATIVE [AND I'M NOT TALKING THE CLUBS IN DUBAI OR THOSE COMPOUNDS THAT CATER TO THAT FOR $$$] BUT DO THAT

AND SEE HOW TOLERANT THEY ARE TO YOU.! AND DON'T ASK THE STATE DEPARTMENT TO SAVE YOUR ASSES EITHER WHEN THEY ARE CANING YOU...

seriously every person who is all like boohoo and whine whine and oh can't we all just get along--

time to send them on long vacation. See they wouldn't be so sympathetic if they were to go to some of these countries and try to live the way they do here, they'd get a rude wake up call.

but oh, someone was saying about the Ummah and the leftist jihadists--yea thats true, I mean you can be Muslim and far leftist--but leftism adapted to Islam,

see socialism can go either way--did in Nazi Germany, they were very socialist as far as forcing their people to work in poor conditions [and they even arrested many who sent Hitler complaints, they thought because they were German that their complaints would be taken care of--instead their names were sent to the gestapo],

and here's the thing, you asked where I stood in regards to the other things and dealing with Islam. Well, see thats just it, I do understand a little about how centralism and fascism works because I was around it in the far left party I was in--it went from democratic to centralist and see they'll do whatever, sacrifice who ever, for the ends, meaning,

any means justifies the ends and I really started to understand how easy it is for the Robespierres to take hold, and they do. Whenever a regime or body of politics or a religion sets itself as ABSOLUTE, AS GOD ON EARTH--

you have serious problems and I saw that. Personally saw it and see one day you are a comrade--the next a mortal enemy. its all who has the power and I truly started to really, really grasp,

what the 'balance of power and checks and balances' means and I will say--we don't have that today, not like we are supposed too.

Hannah Arendt wrote some very wise things in her "Origins of Totalitarianism" and there is a nother, Hoffer I think, who wrote about the masses, and another good memento by a Russian woman, can't recall her name offhand but she was married to a Bolshevik, someone high up who one day was singled out as 'enemy' and she was cut off, exiled and reading her mementos you really start to see--

so yea I mean I would like to see the no tolerance for Islamization of the west--but in no regards to I support the regimes of totalitarianism including communist--

sure like some things may have been needed, maybe even good--but does it matter if you have bread, if you live in fear every day?

Why balance, poverty is hell, but fascism is hell too. Both come from despotics and empire. So reason I'm bringing this up is that there are too, ways where the Muslims can like do right well with other totalitarian forms of government, why you see leftist Muslims who are all hating of infidels--

but infidels including communists or socialists who don't bow down to Islam.

but the two ideologies DO HAVE A LOT IN COMMON as far as ruling via fear/cult of personalities. ALL TOTALITARIANIST REGIMES DO--

but too much freedom can be a form of fascism too--because like--who has the most power,

when you have hedonism everywhere and violence--that isn't freedom either, because you are once again, living in fear.

I think when there is fear--there can't be freedom. Including giving up freedom because of fear, once a country is doing that--

they are no longer free.

when people are fearful in saying what they really feel, they aren't free, and that includes accomodating minority rights when that minority is oppressive--or if its majority, and I think--thats where people have lost the concept of what freedom is.

when people live in fear of their neighborhoods due to poverty and crime they aren't free--but too, when people cave in to warlords and thugs they aren't free either.

We are not free when we are dependent on despots to live, that means oil. How can we be--if they decide, one day to raise the price where we have no heat--thats not freedom,

thats bondage.

so yes we should do everything in our power to get out from under that bondage. And if it means a drastic way in living, so be it, where Americans would have to pull together and ditto, right or left, there are just some things that have to be put aside, but I think, that if the people were to take back government and started to 'connect' again, really connect,

a lot of those issues could be taken care of and thats what IS ironic, is that was what Marxism was supposed to be about to begin with--people, workers taking ownership, not the elites, not the governments, no the rich, etc,

now I think there is some extremes there, yes,

but either way, we are dependent on what the government says and does and who they make deals with and so in a lot of ways we aren't free,
because the government seems to be more accountable to the stock holders and corporations that to the American citizen. And we are seeing this in the tolerance of things that we, as citizens would not be getting by with as easily--

you couldn't like go marry four women, but I know for a fact that there are men getting by with this crap in New York city because they are Muslim, because no one wants to do anything or say anything--

and that shows, that people are in bondage to what the gov say, rather than the gov ruling what the People say. see this is where I think, fascism has not a problem with other fascisms--

they say, why Jihad watch.

I say, why aren't we seeing more of the Jihad watch type of sites? Why aren't we seeing more concern and discussions?

not about Israel [though that is part of it and there are problems there--that do need to be addressed, I'm not like totally in support of the policies in Israel, but not in support of the 'manipulation and other interests there either',

but like this issue with the public schools and religion encroaching on schools--the 'tolerance for Islam' but whoa let a courthouse put up a nativity scene--something that IS in our culture,

why isn't there more discussions and concerns? See its not just government, but something in our society [and this goes for Europe, I do find it interesting, this much I know, that in UK--they were like all anti-Christian back in the 80s, I remember, because I was over there and I remember so many of the churches were used for offices, etc because god was like this big joke, but now look what they have, Mosques taking over...

is it just the Muslims or was it something, a demise in society that opened the door?

these are questions that I think need to be asked, and not just about religion, but about losing something precious, especially this lack of pride in our culture, even the pluralism of America. yes we are a pluralistic society because we didn't allow one to take over the entire culture,

a melting pot. Thats what its always been called a big melting pot--

but we aren't seeing that today, when you see Muslims demanding that WE assimilate and cave in--then its no longer a melting pot.

its something else and baby it is brewing--

if we don't do something, we may be the next ones cooking in that pot--and it won't be a melting one.

Peace,

Natasha

Could be I've missed discussion of this (away on vacation) but if it was missed, this is as good a place as any to bring up this piece of PC pablum.

'...when the Tolchuk's exchange student arrives, he turns out to be Raja Musharaff, a 16-year-old Pakistani Muslim. Despite the cultural chasm between them, Justin and Raja quickly develop an unlikely friendship that just might allow them to navigate the minefield that is contemporary high school. It's going to be a very interesting year for Raja, Justin, his family and the entire population of Medora."'

http://www.cwtv.com/thecw/aliens-in-america

Once we're used to the shalwar-kameezed guy, can the burhka-babe be far behind?

(And it makes me fighting mad to see it set in my home state!)

"can the burkka-babe be far behind?"

well, maybe not, maybe they should do a movie [btw what do you expect from the network that allows the American Top Model do a portrayal of models in 'death' poses and then the comments,

oh baby you are beautiful dead, I mean, thats extreme misogyny there too--so are we really Surprised at this new show? I'm not, surprised it didn't come out sooner,

but, how about a show about

young love in Islam,

here you go people, hey CW2, do a movie about This couple,

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2006/07/06/magazine/20060709_BRIDES_SLIDESHOW_1.html

there's tons more where this came from, maybe Newsweek could go to some of the communities in New York and take some photos of these types of couples. Plaster the photos at every bus depot, and say,

but thats just it, they would never do a show about the life of a burkha clad girl,

its not hard to portray a moderate Muslim boy, but not so easy to show moderation when they are still selling off their daughters to marry at young ages. He's in high school, this girl, was forced out of school to marry a pedaphile creep.

maybe he'll die of prostrate cancer...sick bastard. [the old man]

Natasha

To the general question as to whether or not the media manipulate images to serve their purposes, few people would doubt it.

Remember the billowing smoke in Beirut? make some more! Photoshop to the rescue.

Here's another example from today's MSNBC online:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20016348/

The picture accompanies an article about this nice young interracial couple in Idaho who are marrying and praying to end racial discrimination. Nothing wrong with that, but look at the picture and the twist is on. It's actually the woman who is "white" and the man who is "black" but Lo and Behold SHE looks "black" and HE looks "white". Isn't that cute! True, he is a light skinned black man of interracial roots himself, but she is quite a light "white", and yet -- will ya' look at that! -- ha ha, how ironic, it's like they've traded skin and reversed their race. What a perfect photograph to illustrate the storyline!

I repeat: I have no problem at all with this lovely young couple. I have no problem at all with their effort to stand against racial discrimination. What I do have a problem with is the media manipulating images to suit their purposes. I guarantee that this photo did not just drop into their lap to run like that. It was MANIPULATED to serve the purpose. She was darkened and he was lightened to illustrate a point. A manufactured irony if you will. No great harm in this case. But it's done when there is harm too, and it's done to distort, and to twist. And the media wonder why they are regarded as less honest than used car salesmen (with apology to used car salesmen) or lawyers (no apology necessary).

Just thought I would toss this into the mix here.

Sorry to interrupt Natasha's right on venting with Lili and I's little "discussion".

Lili-- I was suggesting that the NEWSWEEK EDITOR might want people to think this about that fine young woman.

OK Guide, I get that. I just think that what you wrote demonstrates extreme versions of the thoughts that led Marisol to post this picture in the first place, and that others here seemed to back up:

The idea that a woman shouldn't be free, own her body, dress as she likes and control her own sexuality.

It's taken us long enough to get this idea across in the west, and obviously it isn't across to everyone yet. Quite frankly, I'm not opposing islamism just so that some other cult can come along and control me and my gay friends!

Know your Enemy by the dress of their Women.

...'I'm not opposing islamism just so that some other cult can come along and control me and my gay friends!"

Ditto,

exactly, been talking about this all morning with a man and thats the irony,

two extremes, one one hand you have the misogynist sexualization of women in the west--where everything is about a woman's sexuality and whether she's desirable or not,

and then on the other extreme you have the misogynist sexualization of women in Islam--and in some other more archaic societies--where everything is about a woman's sexuality and whether she's forced to be one man's desire, etc. or not,

both extremes celebrate, prop up, perpetuate the rape and violence of women and girls,

both extremes punish women who resist the subjugation and slavery or who dare question male supremacy,

and both extremes have cleverly used religion, systems and legal codes to force the behavior and codes on women,

be it conservative or by rewarding the women who play into the demands of men [today via sexualiation everywhere--meaning, now we are seeing more jobs demanding women disrobe to mow yards or sell donuts---fastest growing good paying industry is the sex industry, and when its a choice of working for minimum wage or disrobing and debasing oneself for twenty an hour and there are kids to feed,

well, its obvious.

both extremes...

but the whole thing around the academia, is that for decades intellectual women have had to constantly combat this mentality that she has to prove her desirability to be deemed as worthy whereas a woman having any intellectual smarts--is always counted 'less than a man'.

How often do we hear references to women in politics--not about her views or positions,

about 'she's hot or she's a dog'?

seriously, the First thing that comes to the mind of most is her desirability, and its no wonder that we see more young women being sexualized at young ages,

and in reality this is where there is some commonality of views in regards to what women are.

In New York, 7 women are sentenced to prison for defending themselves against a man who by society and law felt he was entitled to sexually assault them--the minute they defended themselves, They were the ones put on trial. [the evidence of the man who came on the scene with a knife did not matter--it was how Dare a woman, a lesbian especially, turn down a man and say NO...]

recently a woman was sentenced to three years in prison for shooting the man who raped her daughter...

we see these cases every damn day--

a Native American man was acquitted in the Native American courts recently for rape--it wasn't a Native Indian woman so big deal--because he is Indian he can rape with impunity,

thats the message--

and we've tolerated the shit long enough. And where its really going to bite us in the ass--is when we see more cases of Muslims demanding their Sharia and polygamy and insistence that for them--its not rape, its not pedaphilia--

its just they're honoring their culture and religion and by golly others have done it and gotten away with it--

I bring this up because it is one area as far as legally and as far as where many neo-liberals will use, to solidify the tolerance for 'other's misogyny' because

we aren't even willing to confront and deal with our own in this nation...as this man told me this morning--women worldwide are nothing legally, socially, culturally, and religiously,

cumdumps.

and whats even worse--we have women playing right into that--and then we wonder why there is no outrage when women and girls, are brutally attacked in the most violent ways.

This is relevant, Extremely so because right now, there is a global Muslim feminist organization being set up called Shura, from Malaysia, to confront women's rights in Islam but also,

as in their own words, "to educate western women about their rights in Islam",

and you know the First thing they throw up is the sexualization and rape culture and porn culture and media culture that more and more we see movies where rape and torture of women is the lure of the dollar--for entertainment--recent film, "Captivity" good example--

the only difference is one is naked--she could just as well be fully veiled in sheets in the desert of Darfur--its the same thing though--

she's put here to be nothing but a hole and is less than so what if she's raped and enslaved.

This is the ONE area where Muslims have leverage [well several] but this is ONE of the major against the west--as far as accusing the west for hypocrisy,

and it may not seem like a big deal but it will be, when our court rooms begin to fill up with cases over honor killings and forced marriages and rapes of infidel women.

One of the tools the Islamists are using to lure western women into Islam or to play on the sympathies of feminists is this issue, and where yes, there are women, fed up with the rape culture who believe and are duped into the myth that Islam respects women--they aren't raped by all men--just property of one man,

you'd be surprised at how many women will think that is better than the other...

in other words, pointing out pedaphilia for example yet our own Supreme Court rules that child porn should not be illegal,

well--kind of leaves the door open. Bottom line--it won't just be the encroachment of Islam we will need to deal with, but the ever increasing tolerance of the rape culture and violence towards women tolerance and indifference to, in the West, that will need to be dealt with,

if not, then legally, it will be very difficult, to prosecute one and not the other.

Natasha

I went back to read the original article/poll and some of the comments,

the suggestion that the blonde woman looks cynical,

and the other bright eyed,

really???? where do you see that?

If anything, the Muslim woman comes across as sheepish, look at the height of her hand, like, peek a boo here I am, little mouse, timid and submissive,

the blonde woman has her arm straight up, if she is cynical is that a bad thing? Or is it that she's in a society where women are and have been thinking for themselves [generally speaking, comparison to other regions that is] for years and

has the confidence to be critical, cynical, disapproving, opinionated,

is That what disturbs many, that here is a woman, a young woman [it looks to be a high school] that is confident enough to be comfortable in her own skin and in her own views,

confident enough where she isn't peepishly peeking like little mouse but has jetted her hand straight up taller than the rest, because she is confident as any man would be, assertive enough, to voice what she thinks?

I think that is the issue and what disturbs many and why we see these comparisons, in media and in discussions because its the divide between the modernization of culture verses the archaic cultures along with of course the divide between totalitarianism, theorcracy and democracy, freedom, etc.

Even Mao said, you can tell the status of a country by the status of women,

how true. Look at every country where women are less than second class--the rates of HIV are high [some communities in Africa are being wiped out literally because the men refuse to wear condoms and like who cares if they give it to their chattel, I mean wives--then you see all these orphaned children],

or countries where women have no control over their bodies and maybe its religion or maybe its because the state wants mass armies or a combination of both--what is the result--mass poverty, children living in squalor, despotic regimes rising up and gangs,

but of course, to critisize that immediately its the 'white imperialism'

well--THEN STOP ASKING WHITES and/or the WEST, THOSE THEY TERM AS IMPERIALISTS AND YES I'M REFERRING TO THE WOC AND GROUPS OF COLOR WHO ARE LIKE ALL SO DAMN DETERMINED TO BLAME ALL THE ILLS ON WHITIE--WELL THEN STOP ASKING AND EXPECTING WHITIE AND THE WEST TO BAIL YOUR COUNTRIES AND CULTURES OUT, TO SUPPORT AND GIVE AID--WHEN YOUR LOW STATUS AND SUBJUGATION OF WOMEN PUTS YOUR COUNTRY AND/OR REGION INTO A HUGE MESS--

you want barbarism and dark ages then don't come demanding the west to save your stupid asses--

but thats what they do, or they come flood the borders and then demand that we support them via jobs or tolerance,

well--if the barbarism and medieval and chauvinist machismo ways are so great, then why aren't THEY WORKING?????

OBVIOUSLY THEY AREN'T, and that is why a lot of people get FED UP and yea--that is why you see RACISM increase too-

and nationalism. I bring this up because right now within the feminist woc groups there is all this complaining about the Australian government clamping down on child rape in the Aboriginal communities and its the 'oh its white imperialism' and they only want land and it should be the communities that deal--then DEAL with it, stop making excuses for it,

stop hiding behind the race card to abuse and rape and all the crap then when it becomes a huge problem expecting others to bail your asses out.

See this is a lot of the problem too, and a lot of it yes, is centered around the status of women, population demographics and control over women's bodies, why we see many wanting to revert back to the day where women are barefoot and pregnant and spitting out 13 kids because these other cultures are forcing their women to do just that--so you have an influx and overpopulation of a medieval sexist chauvinist-machismo culture taking over, even if in voting and women are caught in the middle,

its the bodies of women that become the battle ground, has been this way in every nationalist war. And we are seeing this crop up here in the west more and more, [one of the big resentments and why women have left the far left parties in high numbers, the whole betrayal to women's rights to decide their fate over their bodies in both Venezuala and recently Nicuaraga, great, so now women are forced to bear 16 children--question is, who feeds them when money and resources aren't there?]

and its not just 'oil' that is bad for the environment--its overpopulation,

meaning the subjugated status of women is NOT HEALTHY FOR ANY SOCIETY, especially in today's world. Medieval doesn't work, and they are seeing this in Islamic countries too--they just don't want to admit it and why we see the unrest in these countries because bottom line, we don't have the resources in the world to day to support medieval living,

unless you have mass genocides and mass population decreases.

Both extremes, detrimental to the survival of humanity, and thats from a left perspective, global warming, last thing that helps is the increase in population and more children--not that I'm anti-big families, I'm not,

but I do think, when you have mass populations and this medieval mindset and forcing girls at the age of nine to marry so they can pop out five kids before they are 25 is STUPID,

literally suicidal and stupid because THEN YOU HAVE MASS POVERTY,

oh sure not for the Sheiks, hell no--they live in the palaces with their sex slaves and worker slaves,

its the rest of the society, those fuedal serfs who sweat and slave and pay tax so the Sheiks and Mullahs and Priests and Robber barons can lavish in their pools and fur rugs and feasts,

while the women spitting out ten kids have to watch their kids die slow agonizing deaths by disease, famine, and war over resources and power once one side gets fed up...[like we see in Africa]

and we have IDIOTS in the west who say--oh we should respect multi-culturalism--I concur to a point-hate racism too--but lets use common sense, just because its 'culture' doesn't mean its healthy, or good not only to us but to them,

so why support it?

and why support the subjugation and machismo chauvinism and tolerance of all sorts of rape and barbarism for the sake of culture?

Maybe, those who want to support that--THEY SHOULD BE THE ONES TO WORK AND SUPPORT IT--FINANCIALLY when it all goes to hell.

so to the woman, who is cycnical--GOOD. WE NEED MORE CYNICISM--IT MEANS SHE HAS THE ABILITY TO THINK,

RATHER THAN, ME LITTLE MOUSE TOO TIMID BECAUSE I'M NOT SUPPOSED TO THINK--OTHER THAN WHAT MR MAN/MULLAH/MAN TELLS ME--

SCREW THAT.

too many masses of children starving and dying with thin racked bodies because of that machismo chauvinist b.s. time for it to go back into the scrap pile where it belongs--back to the dark ages--and KEEP IT THERE.

Natasha

The blond girl looks jaded?

I don't agree with your judgment and beg to differ.

Because the blond wears a tank top and is slouched a wee bit doesn't mean that she is a jaded woman.

Marisol, I am surprised that you made this kind of judgment of her- especially when you don't even know her.

Yes, Bonniea, the poor thing with her head covered is "downright homely".
Plus the blonde looks extremely confident!

Lots of very thought-provoking comments here on this topic/thread. Natasha, do please stay and contribute more. Your feminist critique is not often heard on this anti-jihad front.

Only a wide coalition of all who would be subjugated by supremacist Islam can decisively repel its looming, threatening hegemony.

Christ, people! All the criticism of Marisol's analysis is completely off base. Many of you have insinuated that Marisol has somehow judged or attacked the woman in red. This isn't about the actual women in the picture. Ms. Goofus could be a straight A student of the highest virtue. But that's not the point. The point is the subtle impression that the photo seems to be trying to create. The photo is selected/edited in such a way that it creates an immediate comparison between the two, and as someone who grew up reading Highlights magazine, I must say that the Goofus and Gallant analogy is very apt.

I would like to add an additional observation. I don't know to what extent the photo was edited, but it seems to me that lighting and coloring certainly play a part in the contrast as well. Notice the strength of the lighting around the Muslim woman. She stands out brightly in virginal white with the lighting around her almost evocative of a painting of Jesus or the Virgin Mary. Contrast this with the red garb of 'Ms. Goofus,' (evocative, perhapse, of a Satanic Halloween costume) and notice the shadows especially around her arm and face.

I don't think that photos for stories like this are just chosen at random, and it seems unlikely to me that the editor could have failed to notice the contrast it creates between the two students.

Abu, the point those of us criticising Marisol's analysis was making was this: we don't see the young woman in red as representing western decadence. We see her as representing western confidence and freedom.

Thus for many viewers that moral 'contrast' you refer to just isn't there.

I think Marisol is trying to make the point that Ms. Gallant being virtuous and Ms. Goofus being decadent is the picture that is being painted by the drive by media. I see nothing in her commentary that leads me to believe she actually thinks that the girl in the red tank top is a slut. But I will disagree with one thing: as far as the Muslim girl being a well dressed young lady I can't think of anything that makes a woman look more unattractive than when she wears a hijab. Anyone wearing one, in my opinion, should not be considered well dressed.

We see this type of disingenuous behaviour all the time. The BBC was recently shown to be totally biased. One of the examples that stuck in my mind was BBC news reporting from Dewsbury, Yorkshire (where some of the 7/7 homicide bombers came from). The BBC were trying to show that the fact that this particular town was almost totally muslim was a good thing that caused no problems. They interviewd many muslims who said everything was fine and one non-muslim who said he saw no problem with muslims being in the majority. HOWEVER, it was later revealed by the reporters and the camera crew that they had interviewd hundreds of non-muslims who told them about the violence etc. caused by the majority muslims and that they (the BBC) had to interview so many until they finally found one non-muslim to say everything was fine. Needliess to say, the BBC showed only the one non-muslim who agreed with the BBC.

When your national broadcaster is hiding violence against non-muslims and purposefully pulling the wool over the eyes of the people who pay the licence fee it is time to question how deeply the terrorists have infiltrated that organisation (not to mention the government, NHS etc,). The BBC has become the equivalent of the Nazi propoganda machine in world war 2. Oh, they also don't like jews, or Christians. I wonder why?