| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Robert Spencer | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog |  |
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
Background here: Los Angeles: Hizballah apologist to get "human relations" award. Kudos to Steven Windmueller for showing some backbone.
Meanwhile, in a most telling admission, Commission President Adrian Dove says, "We were looking to find anybody from the Muslim community that was discouraging terrorism" -- and the best they could come up with was Maher Hathout.
"Firestorm grows; past recipient returns his own award," from the LA Daily News, with thanks to LGF:
The firestorm over the county Commission on Human Relations' decision to honor a local Muslim who has called Israel an "apartheid state" intensified Tuesday when a former recipient returned his award.Steven Windmueller, interim dean of Hebrew Union College and a 1995 honoree, said the commission's selection of Maher Hathout denigrated the legacy of the award's namesake, John Allen Buggs.
"Buggs understood the art of negotiation, the value of integrity and the need for transparency. These themes should, in my judgment, reflect those who are so honored to receive this recognition. Sadly, I return this piece of art as my statement that in this instance the Commission has not met the standards set for us by John Allen Buggs," Windmueller wrote in a letter included with the award, which he returned by mail Tuesday afternoon.
Hathout, a 70-year-old retired cardiologist, was known as a bridge builder locally. But last month, his sharp criticism of Israel was publicized, outraging many of L.A.'s largest Jewish organizations....
Commission President Adrian Dove said it was unfortunate Windmueller had decided to return his award, which he received for work with the Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles.
"We were looking to find anybody from the Muslim community that was discouraging terrorism, that was encouraging engagement in the dialogue and that was a potential bridge. While you may not have perfection, it is a starting point you can build upon," Dove said.
"I challenge you to find another party in Los Angeles who is a practicing Muslim leader who would be less controversial."
Well, what does that tell you, Dove? Must we be so desperate to find moderate Muslims that we'll settle for anything?
Posted by Robert at September 20, 2006 3:06 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
what an attitude: "since we are so desperate to give away a useless award, any not to shitty muslim will be enough"
are they so desperate? is it possible there's nothing else out there more deserving?
even a cat doing pet therapy to old people is more deserving.
Posted by: FedUp![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at September 20, 2006 3:33 PM
"I challenge you to find another party in Los Angeles who is a practicing Muslim leader who would be less controversial."
I challenge YOU to think about what you just said and the implications.
Posted by: poetcomic1 at September 20, 2006 3:52 PM
Mr. Windmueller is an honorable man. Just like Guiliani when he gave back the check to the muslims. These men have conscience and honor and stand up for American values. We need more men like them.
Posted by: freewoman at September 20, 2006 3:56 PM
Don't know if anyone noticed the dark haired fellow on the podium with Hathout during his videotaped 2000 rant:
Nihad Awad of CAIR.
Posted by: PRCS at September 20, 2006 4:41 PM
"We were looking to find anybody from the Muslim community that was discouraging terrorism, that was encouraging engagement in the dialogue and that was a potential bridge. While you may not have perfection, it is a starting point you can build upon," Dove said.
"I challenge you to find another party in Los Angeles who is a practicing Muslim leader who would be less controversial."
What utterly moronic statements. So they were going to give this award to any Muslim, wether or not he actually deserved that award? poetcomic1 is absolutely correct, the implications are very clear, they can't find a Muslim leader who stands up to terror! Doesn't that speak volumes? No wonder they call Los Angeles La-La Land!
Posted by: Proud Infidel at September 20, 2006 4:44 PM
I though awards were given for achievement, not because the recipient is the closest fit to an idealized characture. Oh well, wrong again.
Posted by: Tziona at September 20, 2006 5:39 PM
They don't win Pulitzers, they don't win Oscars, Emmys, Grammies, Noble Prizes, Olympic medals, or even spelling bees, as most can't even spell. How appropriate then, that the only award they are able to win is called a Bugg.
Posted by: August22 at September 20, 2006 8:44 PM
What's interesting to me is that they were specifically looking for a Muslim, not necessarily the individual who had the most success during the year. Do all the negociators of other faiths already have awards?
Posted by: radishthegreat at September 20, 2006 9:34 PM
Bravo for Steven Windmueller. He did exactly what Wiesel should have done when the peace prize was permanently sunk to the bottom of the cesspool with arafat.
Posted by: Infidel33 at September 21, 2006 10:56 AM
I would like for Ms. Dove to explain that really moronic statement. It proves that the liberal's mind is mush. And it is really disturbing that there was a 'mind'set set on 'must be a Muslim.' What is that all about? Just sweep everyone else away, goddammit, we MUST have a Muslim. Is that the mindset? That is really sad. What pathetic dhimmis.
Posted by: John Sobieski at September 22, 2006 11:30 PM
John Sobieski wrote:
"It proves that the liberal's mind is mush. "
I think that you can get an idea of the "liberal's mind by reading the following
http://shrinkwrapped.blogs.com/blog/2006/09/liberalism_and_.html#more
Shrinkwrapped writes:
".........
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this goal but when one's fear of one's own aggression is kept out of awareness, it exacts a terrible price in its drive for expression. Too many liberals have been willing to condemn youngsters to Math illiteracy in order to protect them from competition they might lose. Too many liberals have subverted sports in our schools to avoid having any child win or lose. Too many are willing to appease the violent in the hopes that they won't get mad at us. It all fits a pattern of discomfort with aggression and its overt expression, even in attenuated and sublimated ways (like normal competition) that has come dangerously close to disarming us as a people.
Managing and containing the aggressive drive is a prerequisite for civilization, yet when the civilized liberal becomes so frightened of his own aggression that he attempts to suppress every overt expression of aggression, even when it is appropriate and necessary for his survival, he invites greater and greater violence from those who are not similarly constrained. This is a lesson which tends to be forgotten during peace time and must be relearned periodically. "
Posted by: Cynic at September 23, 2006 12:58 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Dhimmi Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)