Happy Friday, y’all!
Jill Carroll – Future Battered Wife
UPDATED: See below*
Jill Carroll, doubtless delighted to be freed, made an interesting comment:
“I was treated well, but I don’t know why I was kidnapped,” Carroll said in a brief interview on Baghdad television.
If being treated well includes being kidnapped, seeing murder done in the course of that kidnapping, threats of beheading, guns pointed at you repeatedly, being held against your will, allowed to read a newspaper once and watch a TV once, and being made to beg for your life repeatedly before the camera, then I’d say Ms. Carroll is an excellent candidate to be a battered wife sometime in the future. It’s also rather amazing that she claims to not know why she was kidnapped. Her captors announced it repeatedly. Didn’t she believe them, and if not, why not?
Unless she’s got Stockholm Syndrome, then this woman is an idiot.
*Another alternative, h/t LGF:
Jill Carroll’s kidnappers reportedly warned her before her release that she might be killed if she cooperated with the Americans or went to the Green Zone… The [Christian Science] Monitor quoted her family as saying that her kidnappers had warned her against talking to the Americans or going to the Green Zone. They told her it was “infiltrated by the mujahedeen,” the newspaper said.
I guess we’ll see what she has to say when she returns to America.
** UPDATED AGAIN:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12120527/
Statements made ‘under duress’
In a video recorded before she was freed and posted by her captors on an Islamist Web site, Carroll spoke out against the U.S. military presence. On Saturday, she said the recording was made under duress.“During my last night in captivity, my captors forced me to participate in a propaganda video. They told me I would be released if I cooperated. I was living in a threatening environment, under their control, and wanted to go home alive. So I agreed,” she said in a statement.
“Things that I was forced to say while captive are now being taken by some as an accurate reflection of my personal views. They are not. The people who kidnapped me and murdered Alan Enwiya are criminals, at best.”
She also condemned her captors, although she did not address the war in Iraq. “I will not engage in polemics. But let me be clear: I abhor all who kidnap and murder civilians, and my captors are clearly guilty of both crimes,” she said.
She’s not an idiot, suffering from Stockholm syndrome, or in all liklihood a future battered wife. She’s a strong woman who did what she had to do to be freed. And boy, do I wish I hadn’t been so sarcastic! She’s probably anti-war, but not pulling a CPT and I’m sorry I wrote about her so sarcastically.
Black. White. Episode #4
Bruno and Carmen went to see black stand-up comics. Bruno hoped the comics would trash white people. Even though he’s been told that kind of overt racism is rare, he just can’t seem to absorb the information. Carmen noticed the persistent use of the N word. Bruno finally caught on to the fact that it’s a completely different culture, and was still disappointed at the lack of white jokes. It occurred to me that black people have a whole life which is not fixated on white people. Whites are not necessarily uppermost on black people’s minds all the time. Get over yourself, Bruno. Carmen explained why white people don’t have the right to use the N word, but black folks can say it all they want. Bruno doesn’t understand that, and frankly neither do I, although I do hate having something in common with Bruno, who annoys me.
Bruno meets with a successful black man to find out what makes him tick. Fernando is the African American teacher of the year. Bruno expressed frustration with complaints about slavery, reparations, affirmative action, lack of responsibility. He talked about the problems in the black community, hip-hop culture, fatherlessness. Fernando objects to the blanket statements, and ultimately says he feels Bruno is insensitive and wondered how his wife puts up with him. Not to worry, Fernando, they deserve each other.
I can understand about the desire for reparations – a formal apology, a tangible display that says, Yes, slavery was wrong. But I can’t see why anyone living today should have to pay it, or why anyone living today should receive it. Now, reparations for Jim Crow, I could understand. That was less than 40 years ago, and even after the laws were repealed, people’s hearts did not change overnight. Reparations for the Jim Crow laws to black people who are 40 years old and up make a lot of sense to me. I wouldn’t object to paying toward that. But how can you implement a tax for that? What about Yankees? They didn’t have Jim Crow in any official way, so why should they pay? What about people out west, and people who immigrated here since then? What about people my age who had no part in making those laws, should we be penalized for the fact they existed? It’s too impractical to implement a tax for reparations on white southerners who are 60+ years old, and all of them did not approve of segregation so it’s unfair to penalize them for it. So at the end of the day, I think we have to say that life is unfair but there’s no practical way to make amends for it. We would do better to work to free the people who are currently enslaved. And we would do better to have more education on the idea of white privilege and racism (for both whites and blacks) as it exists today.
The Etiquette class met at the group house. They rudely dug around Nick’s room and the rest of the house. When Nick told them he was black, they seemed to respond pretty well at first, but then they started trying to give him tips on how to act white. Later a white boy called another white boy the N word. A white girl objected and Nick defended the practice, saying “We use it all the time so it doesn’t matter.” But when the white boy said it again, Nick looked uncomfortable.
Brian and Renee were furious that Nick was not bothered that the other kids used the N word. They went back and forth, referring to the incident as if the kids had called him that word (they didn’t) and as if they just used it in his presence. Either way they were still furious. Brian said he was ashamed that even the white girl was offended and Nick wasn’t.
Brian takes Nick to a black barbershop for a lesson in racism. The barber agreed with Brian about the use of the N word, said it was a lack of respect, but he also said, “We kind of took the power out of that word by using it so much.” Yes! I was so glad he said that. The extreme outrage against any non-black who uses that word IS hypocritical when so much of the black community uses it early and often.
Carmen, Rose, and a black poetry classmate of Rose’s went to a white neighborhood Rose was familiar with to do some shopping. They were ignored and avoided. They were refused job applications. Carmen came back to a recurring theme for her – can you imagine this being your normal life? Carmen is a ditz but even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
Bruno’s middle aged white guy rap was frankly embarrassing. ‘Nuff said.
I’ve seen comments on other blogs that Rose is an actress, and that the Wurgels are not actually a family. Semi-true. Carmen and Bruno may not be married – I’ve read different reports about that – but they do have a relationship. Carmen is actually Rose’s mother. Rose is a college student and actress. She’s been appearing on Disney’s Movie Surfers for some time. Bruno identifies himself in the show as a teacher but has been acting since 1987. Substitute teacher, maybe? Why downplay the acting histories for both of them? And Carmen is involved with the industry as well. Was there no white family in the country who was not involved with show biz who could have been selected? This casts doubt on the whole show, especially since apparently a fair amount of the show is staged.
Disappointing, but I’m still glad that it’s opening up a discussion on race. Two more shows to go, and the big question is will Bruno at least get to the point that he acknowledges the issue?
Christian Carnival 115
Wow, it’s Wednesday already. Posting has been light (okay, pretty much nonexistent) because I’m swamped at work. How I’m going to have time to read all the great posts at the Carnival this week, I don’t know. But I intend to try. Here they are, check ‘em out at The Secret Life of Gary. (Pursuing Holiness does not have an entry this week.)
Disney VD educational video?!
I stumbled across this Disney – yes, Disney! venereal disease educational video in Google video. It’s rather creepy. There is a little, tiny, miniscule blurb about how not having sex protects you completely. And a much longer explanation on using condoms.
Walt Disney Studios Characters: General, Syphilis Germs, Gonorrhea Germs, Ignorance, Fear. Originally Released in 1973 A general addressing his troops, which happen to be syphilis and gonorrhea germs. There are also characters representing ignorance and fear. This is an educational short produced at the Walt Disney Studios.
Steyn on Abdul Rahman
Another must-read Mark Steyn article, this time on
Steyn: Will we stick our necks out for his faith?
Fate conspires to remind us what this war is really about: civilizational confidence. And so history repeats itself: first the farce of the
Danish cartoons , and now the tragedy – a man on trial for his life in post-Taliban Afghanistan because he has committed the crime of converting to Christianity.The cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad were deeply offensive to Muslims, and so thousands protested around the world in the usual restrained manner – rioting, torching, killing, etc.
The impending execution of Abdul Rahman for embracing Christianity is, of course, offensive to Westerners, and so around the world we reacted equally violently by issuing blood-curdling threats like that made by State Department spokesman Sean McCormack: “Freedom of worship is an important element of any democracy,” he said. “And these are issues as Afghan democracy matures that they are going to have to deal with increasingly.”
[...]
Unfortunately, what’s “precious and sacred” toIslam is its institutional contempt for others. In his book “Islam And The West,” Bernard Lewis writes, “The primary duty of the Muslim as set forth not once but many times in the Quran is ‘to command good and forbid evil.’ It is not enough to do good and refrain from evil as a personal choice. It is incumbent upon Muslims also to command and forbid.” Or as the Canadian columnist David Warren put it: “We take it for granted that it is wrong to kill someone for his religious beliefs. Whereas Islam holds it is wrong not to kill him.” In that sense, those imams are right, and Karzai’s attempts to finesse the issue are, sharia-wise, wrong.
[...]
In a more culturally confident age, the British in India were faced with the practice of “suttee ” – the tradition of burning widows on the funeral pyres of their husbands. Gen. Sir Charles Napier was impeccably multicultural:“You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: When men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks, and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.”
As always, read the whole thing.
Black.White. Episode #3
I never did get to see
Next, hapless Carmen decides she needs a black friend to help her learn about the black community. (Isn’t that why she’s living in the same house with Renee and Brian?) Enter Deanna, with whom for some reason Carmen assumes a hick accent. Deanna is interesting, and seems to be a good influence on Carmen, but she makes no visible headway with Bruno. Carmen and Bruno do experience racism when Carmen is not made up and Bruno is, and Deanna takes them through a black neighborhood and park.
Nicholas claims to not experience
Brian did try to explain
Reuters Revisionism
Another h/t to LGF.
The previous post, Drawing of Mohammed = Death Penalty for Christian Convert? referenced this
The rewritten article is as offensive as the original, which I was able to find a copy of on the Kaleej Times Online.
ROME (
Reuters ) – Western political leaders and the media have reacted with mounting indignation to the news that aKabul court threatened to impose the death sentence on an Afghan man who abandoned Islam and coverted to Christianity.Two months ago, political and religious leaders in the Muslim world were rounding on Western European media and governments for printing and defending caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad that they considered blasphemous.
The cases are clearly different. Western leaders from President George W. Bush down have spoken up to save the life of a man whose religious freedom is a universal human right which his judges say is secondary to Islamic law.
In the cartoons case, demonstrators sacked Western embassies in Damascus and Beirut, lives were lost in unrest and Muslim leaders demanded apologies and curbs on Western press freedom.
The cases are not clearly different. They are clearly the same. In both cases,
Amin Farhang, the Afghan economy minister who lived in exile in Germany for 22 years before returning in 2001, illustrated the gulf between Western and traditional Islamic views when he tried to make a link between the two controversies.
“Following the row about the cartoons, which has cost so many lives, we should look calmly at things and work for a fair solution,” he told the German daily Koelner Stadt-Anzeiger.
He said Kabul was trying to build democracy after a United States-led coalition drove the fundamentalist Taliban from power in 2001, but Afghanistan was a traditional Islamic society.
“Afghanistan cannot switch suddenly from one extreme to the other,” he said, presenting the right to convert as too much for a country that upholds the Islamic punishment for apostasy.
What fair solution? Mr. Heneghan passed up a chance to question Amin Farhang’s bizarre view not once but twice. What compromise is possible or advisable? We submit to Islamic law and censor our press and citizens accordingly? We sit quietly while this man is executed, and complain next time?
The whole multiculturalism cult which declares that all cultures are equal is quite simply wrong. A culture in which a person is executed for his faith, or where a woman has her fingernails ripped out because she applied polish to them, where a woman can be tried, convicted, and executed for having been the victim of a rape, or a man has such a warped definition of “honor” that he kills his daughter for marrying a man who was not his choice, is simply not equal to the west, which acknowledges basic human rights. It is not different yet equal. It is inferior. The version of Islam which not only denies those basic human rights but declares that it intends to dominate the entire world is inferior to the west and ought to be stamped out of existence. If there are truly moderate Muslims, they should be on our side.
If Islam is truly a religion of peace and tolerance, where are the moderate Muslim scholars with the verses from the Koran that show these radical Islamists that they are wrong? Where are the Islamic missionaries who will go into those countries with Wahabbis and other radicals, to promote a more correct version of Islam? Since physically going to those countries is not a practical option – it would likely result in their deaths – could those moderate Muslims at least start publishing articles to educate these poor confused Islamists? Can they get an ad campaign going? Something?


Recent Comments