Please Help New English Review
For our donors from the UK:
New English Review
New English Review Facebook Group
Follow New English Review On Twitter
Recent Publications by New English Review Authors
The Oil Cringe of the West: The Collected Essays and Reviews of J.B. Kelly Vol. 2
edited by S.B. Kelly
The Impact of Islam
by Emmet Scott
Sir Walter Scott's Crusades and Other Fantasies
by Ibn Warraq
Fighting the Retreat from Arabia and the Gulf: The Collected Essays and Reviews of J.B. Kelly. Vol. 1
edited by S.B. Kelly
The Literary Culture of France
by J. E. G. Dixon
Hamlet Made Simple and Other Essays
by David P. Gontar
Farewell Fear
by Theodore Dalrymple
The Eagle and The Bible: Lessons in Liberty from Holy Writ
by Kenneth Hanson
The West Speaks
interviews by Jerry Gordon
Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited: The History of a Controversy
Emmet Scott
Why the West is Best: A Muslim Apostate's Defense of Liberal Democracy
Ibn Warraq
Anything Goes
by Theodore Dalrymple
Karimi Hotel
De Nidra Poller
The Left is Seldom Right
by Norman Berdichevsky
Allah is Dead: Why Islam is Not a Religion
by Rebecca Bynum
Virgins? What Virgins?: And Other Essays
by Ibn Warraq
An Introduction to Danish Culture
by Norman Berdichevsky
The New Vichy Syndrome:
by Theodore Dalrymple
Jihad and Genocide
by Richard L. Rubenstein
Spanish Vignettes: An Offbeat Look Into Spain's Culture, Society & History
by Norman Berdichevsky

These are all the Blogs posted on Monday, 28, 2011.
Monday, 28 March 2011
Unwelcome: The Muslims Next Door

I watched the Soledad O'Brien's CNN production last night about the Murfreesboro mosque controversy and although O'Brien did her best to portray the Muslim community as victims of unthinking bigotry,  I was very pleased with the performance of our local folks on camera. Kevin Fisher was gracious and relaxed, Sally and Howard Wall were passionate and articulate and Joe Brandon was forceful and correct in his central argument that Islam is not a religion

The one word that seemed to be a stumbling block is “worship.” We automatically think that people have the right to worship as they see fit because the Western definition of worship means spiritual communion with a loving God. In Islam, worship is defined as obedience to Islam (which acts as a substitute for God) and therefore even the most heinous acts of jihad are seen as “worship.”  In fact, fighting in the way of Allah is the highest form of worship in Islam. Hence, the yelling of “Allahu Akbar!” just before the act is committed.

So, do people have the right to worship as they see fit? The answer is NO.

Posted on 03/28/2011 5:15 AM by Rebecca Bynum
Monday, 28 March 2011
Sadat On The Muslim Brotherhood

Watch the clip, from the Coptic Association, here.

Posted on 03/28/2011 7:40 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
Monday, 28 March 2011
So That's Why They Call It The Cavendish Laboratory

At Today I Found Out:

Bananas Are Naturally Radioactive

Today I found out bananas are naturally radioactive.  This comes from the fact that they contain relatively high amounts of potassium.  Specifically, they contain Potassium-40, which is a radioactive isotope of potassium.

The fact that bananas are radioactive has actually given rise to the radiation unit: “banana equivalent dose” (BED); this is the average amount of radiation you are exposed to by eating one banana.  The banana equivalent dose is occasionally used to help conceptualize the relative danger of various radiation sources and amounts; for instance, the amount of radiation typically leaked by a modern nuclear fission reactor.  This leaked radiation is typically extremely small, typically in the realm of a picocurie, which is a millionth of a millionth of a curie.  This latter measurement doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to most people, thus the banana equivalent dose was introduced to give an easy way to understand whether X amount of radiation is harmful or not, given that you know bananas aren’t harmful.  For instance, living within 10 miles of a typical nuclear power plant will expose you on a daily basis to just a bit more radiation than you’d get from eating one banana a day.

Now before you start boycotting bananas because of the above association with nuclear reactor radiation leakage, consider that, to cause illness in a person, it takes about 100 rems. (Roentgen Equivalent Man: 1 rem = the quantity of ionizing radiation whose biological effect is equal to that produced by one roentgen of x-rays; basically, a measurement of how much radiation a person is exposed to.)  So given eating one banana a day for a year only exposes you to 3.6 millirems, you’d need to eat about 10,000,000 bananas in order to reach that amount [100 rems * (1000 millirems / rem) * (365 bananas / 3.6 millirems)].

Not only should you not worry about eating bananas because of the radiation, but barring some major reactor meltdown, you shouldn’t really worry about living near a nuclear reactor either.  In fact, recent research has even begun to indicate that these extreme low level amounts of radiation you experience from the cosmos, bananas, and the like, may actually be beneficial to your body.  And as far as major reactor problems that might come up go, if you camped out at the plant at Three Mile Island during the accident that happened there in 1979, you’d have received only an additional 80 millirems of exposure during the duration of the accident.  Granted, you’d need to eat about 8000 bananas to reach that level from bananas, but if you’ve ever had your spine x-rayed, you’d have received about double that just during the few seconds of the x-ray.  If you were around ten miles away from the reactor during the accident, you’d have received about 8 millirems or about the equivalent of 800 bananas.  There are no known deaths/cancers/etc that resulted from this event.

Public reaction to Three Mile Island was way overboard from what the actual event warranted as you can see from the banana equivalent dose.  This was largely due to misinformation in the press; misunderstanding of radiation among the general public; and the fact that, not 12 days before it happened, the movie The China Syndrome was released.  The plot of the movie was basically how unsafe nuclear reactors were and that just about everyone in the movie but one of the main characters was trying to cover it up. ï¿½ The China Syndrome movie title’s concept comes from the premise that if an American nuclear reactor core were to melt down, it would melt through the center of the Earth to China.  Getting around the fact that it is actually the Indian Ocean that is on the opposite side of the Earth from the U.S. and the obvious problems with the “melt through the Earth” premise, it couldn’t have been a better timed movie as far as free advertisement through the press due to the Three Mile Island incident. The movie was nominated for several academy awards, including best actress by Jane Fonda.

So in essence, the banana equivalent dose is basically a  measurement used  to help quell the media hysteria that always surrounds nuclear reactors and other potential radiation sources like cell phones and the like.  Basically, trying to show people that radiation is everywhere (literally) and most of it isn’t harmful at the levels we are typically exposed to, despite what you might read in the news.

On that note, for your reference:

  • If you live at high elevations, like Denver, Colorado, you are naturally exposed to about 50-70 more millirems per year than living in, say, Seattle, Washington (sea level).
  • Being next to the Rocky Mountains will net you exposure to about 40 extra millirems per year, due to the uranium in the soil.
  • If you live near the Atlantic Coast, you’ll get exposed to an extra 55 millirems a year from the air you breathe.
  • Every U.S. coast to coast round trip flight will expose you to about 5 extra millirems per trip.
  • A chest x-ray will expose you to about 8 millirems; a head/neck x-ray will expose you to about 20 millirems; a lumbar spine x-ray will expose you to about 130 millirems.
  • On average, a person living in the United States will naturally be exposed to somewhere around 360 millirems (36,500 bananas) of radiation per year, with the vast majority of that (300 millirems or so) coming from the sun, soil, rocks, and other natural sources.
  • If you sat about 1 inch away from your tv-set, you’d receive about .5 millirems per hour.
  • If you work with concrete a lot or live or work in a concrete building, you receive an extra 3 millirems or so a year.
  • At around 100 rems (about ten million bananas), you’ll contract mild radiation sickness.  Early symptoms of this are very similar to the flu.  This will also leave you more susceptible to infections, leukemia, and lymphoma.
  • At around 200 rems, you’ll start having damage to your gastrointestinal tract, which will cause nausea, bloody vomiting, bloody diarrhea, and abdominal pain.  You’ll also start having damage to cells that multiply quickly, such as blood cells, reproductive cells, hair cells, etc.  At this point, you’ll typically lose your hair, possibly permanently.
  • At around 300 rems, your body’s immune system will likely be permanently damaged.
  • At around 400 rems, you have a 50/50 chance of dying within 60 days if you don’t get immediate treatment.

Bonus Factoids:

  • Other common foods that are naturally radioactive include potatoes, sunflower seeds, many nuts, and kidney beans, among others.  Among these, Brazil nuts are the most radioactive by far at 6600 picocuries per kg or about 1.875 BED (banana equivalent dose). The radium in Brazil nuts does not come from especially high levels of radium in the soil where the trees grow, but rather the very extensive root systems the trees develop, which cover a much larger area of the soil than most trees.
  • The Brazil nut tree is among the largest trees in the Amazon rainforest at around 100-150 feet tall and around 5 feet in diameter at the trunk.  The tree can live up to around 500-1000 years.
  • Despite the name, the primary exporter of “Brazil” “nuts” is Bolivia, who account for about 50% of Brazil nuts exported world-wide.  They are also not nuts, but rather seeds.  So the whole name is a lie.
  • Brazil nuts are radioactive due to containing radium; your body doesn’t need radium, unlike the case with bananas and potassium.
  • Although bananas contain very little radiation, they are radioactive enough to trigger false alarms in some radiation sensors used to detect illegal smuggling of nuclear materials.
  • About 89% of the time Potassium-40 will decay into calcium-40 and  11% of the time it will decay to argon-40.  This latter fact is important when dating rocks as the time elapsed since a rock last cooled from a molten state can be measured by looking at the levels of Potassium-40 and Argon-40 contained in the rock.  This is because, when the rock is in a molten state, it releases the argon contained within itself.  Once it is solid, it contains no argon initially.  When the potassium-40 breaks down into argon-40, the argon cannot escape.  This makes for a nice way to measure the age of a rock since it was in a molten state.
  • After the nuclear accident at Three Mile Island, local milk contained radiation levels of about 20 picocuries/liter.  This is about 1/75th the banana equivalent dose (BED) in a 12 ounce glass of the milk.
  • Now the Chernobyl disaster was a whole different story, but that was a result of a lot of idiocy more than anything.  It was a case where one of the reactors was intentionally put in about the worst possible state it could be in, all the while the operators ignoring all the warnings and overriding many of the automated safety systems.  It was actually a testament to the safety systems that the reactor they were messing with lasted as long as it did with what they were doing with it.  Even after the explosions, the workers who were managing the reactor next to the exploded one were told to keep the other reactors online and continue to work.  It wasn’t until a few hours later that one of the engineers, Yuri Bagdasarov, made the decision to override his superior, Nikolai Fomin, and shut down the reactor adjacent to the exploded one and have everyone who wasn’t absolutely necessary for emergency cooling systems leave.
  • The mistakes didn’t stop there though, the exploded reactor crew chief, Alexander Akimov, assumed the reactor was still intact, despite all the graphite and reactor fuel lying around the building after the explosions.  So he kept everyone working throughout the night on the exploded reactor core which cost many workers, including Akimov, their lives.
  • One of the problems was that, of the two dosimeters capable of measuring the radiation levels they were experiencing, one was inaccessible and the other failed to turn on.   All the other meters couldn’t read that high; indeed, they didn’t read very high at all, so they only knew the radiation levels were somewhere above 3.6 rems per hour, which is a relatively high rate, but certainly not going to kill anyone working there for a shift.  When they eventually brought a meter in that could read the correct levels, Akimov assumed it must be malfunctioning because of the extreme high readings they were getting.  Once again, you’d think the nuclear fuel and graphite lying around the building and the two explosions would have tipped him off, but here we are.  In his defense, at around 5000 rems, the brain begins to be damaged with the radiation killing nerves and small blood vessels.  He wasn’t likely experiencing these levels where he was working, but lower high levels, while not causing brain damage, will cause memory problems; confusion; information processing ability problems; and decline in cognition.  So that may have played a role in his poor decisions after the explosions.
  • The next mistake was with the rescue crews that arrived on scene.  Many of them knew nothing of radiation and some even directly handled some of the radioactive debris lying around that was emitting as much as 15,000 rems per hour.   The mistakes didn’t end there and, in the end, an estimated 60,000 people were exposed to high levels of radiation; of which, about 5,000 people died within five years of the explosion from problems stemming from radiation exposure.  Note to self: when working at a nuclear reactor and there are a bagillion warning lights going off over the course of a few hours telling you to stop doing what you are doing, maybe you should think about not overriding said warnings and maybe, instead, stop what you are doing.  I’m just throwing that out there.
  • Firefighters on scene at Chernobyl described the radiation as “tasting like metal” and feeling sensations of “pins and needles” all over their skin.
Posted on 03/28/2011 9:52 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
Monday, 28 March 2011
A Musical interlude: Yes! We Have No Bananas (Sam Lanin Orch., voc. Irving Kaufman)

Listen here.

Posted on 03/28/2011 10:08 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
Monday, 28 March 2011
Syrian Regime Tries To Decide Whether To Do What Syrian Regimes Usually Do

From CNN:

Witness: Daraa tense as troops, security forces flood city

(CNN) -- Syrian security forces flooded the restive cities of Daraa and Latakia on Monday, patrolling the streets, protecting government buildings and in at least one case clashing with protesters, according to witnesses.

Both cities have been the scene of violent clashes between protesters and security forces in recent days, with at least 37 deaths since last week, according to the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

In Daraa on Monday, forces filed into the city's main square before dawn, tearing down the tents and anti-government signs of about 100 protesters who were staying there overnight, according to one eyewitness. The forces fired shots into the air and turned water cannons on the protesters, the witness said, leading to a clash with hundreds of nearby residents who rushed to the square to defend the demonstrators.

The resulting confrontation lasted about 30 minutes, reportedly without injuries or arrests, according to the witness.

Another witness said the army was blocking the city on three sides and that security forces, surrounding government buildings and the Al-Omari mosque where some protesters remained, had opened fire. The witness was not aware of any injuries.

Syria's state-run news agency said the government denied firing on protesters, calling the allegations "completely false."

Political dissident Aman Aswad, who is in Daraa, said the city is extremely tense. "People are sitting at home scared, watching the updates on TV," he said.

In Latakia, another eyewitness said mysterious men in black shirts carrying sophisticated weapons terrorized residents overnight, firing into the air and banging on the doors of homes.

"We do not understand who these men are but government officials say they are members of a 'foreign group,'" the witness said. "We all think they are lying about this because every time one of them is captured and handed over to the police he is released."

Hundreds of government troops have also filtered into the Latakia and are guarding public buildings and other important sites, the witness said.

CNN could not independently confirm the accounts because the Syrian government has yet to grant access to the network.

Syria is the latest in a string of Arabic-speaking nations beset with discontent over economic and human rights issues. Syria's discontent is centered Daraa, a southern city in the impoverished country's agricultural region, where security forces and anti-government protesters have sporadically clashed for nearly two weeks.

Thousands of protesters marched Friday to the governor's building in Daraa, where they burned pictures of President Bashar al-Assad and toppled a statue of his father, the late President Hafez al-Assad, according to a witness who identified himself only as Adbullah.

Aswad, a political dissident, said dozens of people appeared to have been killed or wounded in clashes with security forces during those protests.

In Latakia, government blamed "armed gangs" who seized police weapons on the violence last week that led to the deaths there of 10 security force members and civilians and two gunmen, according to the Syrian state-run news agency, SANA. The agency reported that 200 people, most of them security forces, were wounded by the gangs.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized Syria's government over the violence on the CBS Sunday morning news show "Face the Nation."

"Certainly we deplore the violence in Syria," she said. "We call as we have on all of these governments during this period of the Arab awakening, as some have called it, to be responding to their people's needs, not to engage in violence, permit peaceful protests and begin a process of economic and political reform."

Posted on 03/28/2011 11:39 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
Monday, 28 March 2011
But Don't Worry -- America Is Spending Trillions To Bring "Democracy" And To Ensure That China's Oil Supply Is Safe

China's new economic power fans fear, BBC poll finds

Yuan notes
The value of China's currency is a major source of concern for many nations

Public concern is growing about China's economic power, according to a poll conducted for the BBC World Service.

The survey was carried out by the international polling firm GlobeScan/PIPA among more than 28,000 people in 27 countries.

It reveals that the respondees who say that China becoming more powerful economically is a bad thing have increased substantially.

The concerns are found across a number of China's key trading partners.

They are especially prominent among wealthier nations.

Compared to BBC World Service polling in 2005, negative views of China's growing economic power rose - and are now in the majority - in the US, France, Canada, Germany and Italy.

Negative views also grew significantly in countries such as the UK and Mexico but remain outnumbered by positive views in those countries.

But across the survey as a whole, China was still viewed positively.

Across all countries polled, an average of 50% expressed a positive view of China's economic power, while 33% were negative.

The two nations with the most positive views of China's economic growth were in Africa - Nigeria (82%) and Kenya (77%).

Indeed positive views were in the majority in all five African countries surveyed.

Across the developing nations polled, positive views of China were more numerous than negative ones - with the exception of just one country, Mexico.

'Psychologically unsettling'

Watch Eric Schmidt, chairman of China Entrepreneurs in Beijing, talks about China's growing economic might.

So what is behind these feelings about China's growing economic weight?

The survey does not tell us for sure, but there are some obvious candidate explanations.

In the period since the earlier poll - in 2005 - the world has been through an episode called the great recession, a result of the financial crisis.

The developed world was hard hit. The rebound now underway in the global economy is led by developing countries, notably China.

The recovery in the rich nations by contrast is more sluggish. The rise in unemployment caused by the recession is likely to take years to reverse.

Tom Friedman, the influential New York Times columnist and Pullitzer Prize winner, told the BBC: "there's no question that China's rise, coinciding with a sense of stagnation and paralysis among many of the leading western democracies, is psychologically unsettling".

End Quote Tom Friedman New York Times

There is also a very specific economic issue, and that does emerge in the BBC survey.

People were asked if they think China trades fairly with other countries.

Those saying China is unfair were above 50% in Japan, South Korea, Germany and Italy. In the US, the figure was 45%, compared with 24% saying that it was fair.

The particular policy that has attracted so much attention, in the media and in business, is China's approach to its currency, holding its value down by intervening in the foreign exchange market.

Critics, and there are many of them, say that gives Chinese industry an unfair competitive advantage.

Tom Friedman is particularly caustic about this policy: "That's part of a broader concern of people which is that China is still in many ways a freeloader on the international system. It's not a stakeholder."

Regional view

Watch Victor Wang from Macquarie Bank talk about China's banking sector.

And what about the more positive view in the developing world?

In some countries especially in Africa, China has been investing heavily.

That brings jobs and infrastructure, though critics do see it as a grab for African resources, especially its energy and metals.

Perhaps some also welcome the sight of a developing nation emerging as an increasingly serious challenger to the rich world.

In some business circles, even among those who criticise China's policies, many nonetheless see the country as an opportunity.

More than a billion consumers are going to buy more goods and services as their living standards rise and Chinese firms will not be able to supply everything.

Posted on 03/28/2011 12:07 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
Monday, 28 March 2011
“Too Sympathetic and Biased� - CNN’s Unwelcome: The Muslims Next Door

After the first viewing of "Unwelcome: The Muslims Next Door," on Sunday night, March 27th, NER held a focus group discussion with several of the activists and opponents of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro (ICM) expansion project - the prop for this emotional video production by Soledad O’Brien’s “In America” Series.

In one of the opening stanzas of “Unwelcome,” Imam Ossama Bahloul of the ICM shows the Grand Mosque plot plan for the ICM expansion project and claims the mosque raised $320,000 locally to purchase the 15.3 acre plot.  The prior Todd family owner is then shown ruing this prospect on his ancestral farm land that was sold at auction. The documentary then segues into the graphic evidence of community angst about the project, the defacing of the ICM job site notice with the words “Not Welcome” – the send up for the documentary title.

Among those in the focus group conference call were: Kevin Fisher, Lou Ann Zelenik, Elizabeth Coker, and Pete Doughtie, who were all seen in the CNN production. The CNN “Unwelcome” documentary used Kevin Fisher, a plaintiff in the lawsuit against the Planning Commission and Sally and Howard Wall, a prominent couple in Murfreesboro who also backed the Chancery Court matter brought against the Rutherford County authorities for their summary approval of the ICM Project.

Egyptian born Imam Osaama Bahloul, his American convert wife, Middle Tennessee State University engineering professor Saleh Sbenaty, a Syrian Muslim immigrant and, his Americanized daughter Lena,  are the Muslim community spokespersons portrayed as victims of the community’s “bigotry.”   

The message that CNN conveyed in “Unwelcome” was that Muslims were being discriminated against “from Manhattanto Murfreesboro.” Video of other protests bolstered the victimhood motif that threaded throughout O’Brien’s interviews along with the impression that the Murfreesboro Muslim community were as American as apple pie..

While better than portrayed in the CNN trailer, “Unwelcome” had flaws.

When asked to rate CNN’s program, the consensus of the focus group was a score of 2.5 on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being poorest and 5 being the best. 

When the focus group was queried about their bottom line assessment, they found “Unwelcome” overly sympathetic to the Muslim side of the controversy. They felt too little attention was paid to  the community outrage over the lack of due process in the flawed approval process - the original basis of the Chancery court law suit brought by Fisher and the other plaintiffs.

Joe Brandon, counsel for the Mosque opponents articulated correctly the issues about Islam that he raised in his courtroom presentations and interview in the CNN Unwelcome production. The central issue is the difference between Western notions of worship and our Judeo Christian values versus what is at the core of Islam. My colleague Rebecca Bynum posted on this issue and the measured performance of the loyal opposition:

 I was very pleased with the performance of our local folks on camera. Kevin Fisher was gracious and relaxed, Sally and Howard Wall were passionate and articulate and Joe Brandon was forceful and correct in his central argument that Islam is not a religion

The one word that seemed to be a stumbling block is “worship.” We automatically think that people have the right to worship as they see fit because the Western definition of worship means spiritual communion with a loving God. In Islam, worship is defined as obedience to Islam (which acts as a substitute for God) and therefore even the most heinous acts of jihad are seen as “worship.”  In fact, fighting in the way of Allah is the highest form of worship in Islam. Hence, the yelling of “Allahu Akbar!” just before the act is committed.

So, do people have the right to worship as they see fit? The answer is NO.

Kevin Fisher noted during the call what he had said during his interview with O’Brien that reflected this issue but was left out of the CNN "Unwelcome" production. To paraphrase his comment conveyed to the focus group: “No President over the past two centuries has intervened in matters of religious worship.” He asked O’Brien why we now have this President defining what is an official religion vis a vis US Attorney General Holder's filing an amicus briefin the Chancery Court proceeding (stating Islam is “plainly a religion”) when religion was permitted under our Constitution to define itself.

Liz Coker is shown briefly in “Unwelcome” during her testimony at the Chancery Court hearing discussing screen shots from ICM board member Mosaad Rawash’s Facebook page with glorified pictures of late Hamas leaders Dr. Rantisi and Sheik Yassin. The CNN producers chose this over a more telling one showing in both Arabic and English translation a pledge for support for Hamas. Nor was there any showing of brief segments of the January 9, 2009 You Tube Video of a protest organized by the ICM at the Rutherford County Courthouse in support of Hamas with shouts of “Allahu Akbar.” Rawash was suspended from the ICM board and took a powder for several months, but he is still listed as a member of the board on the ICM website. In the “Unwelcome” production he is erroneously described as simply “a member” of the mosque.  Nor were there any references to the  Muslim Brotherhood pamphlets  obtained during an ICM open house by local activist, Sue Redmond, that were included in Coker’s Power Point presentation.

There is a sequence in “Unwelcome” involving Imam Bahloul and his American convert wife, a former Methodist whom he met while serving at an Irving, Texas Mosque. The CNN team did not check out his prior postings at Islamic Centers in Belgium, Germany and Holland following his graduation from Al-Azhar University in Cairo with advanced degrees in Da’wa –proselytizing. Imam Bahloul also implied that even his four year daughter felt threatened by the controversy which is a bit disingenuous for what looked to be a happy child going off to pre-school.

Imam Bahloul and  Lena Sbenaty (daughter of Saleh Sbenaty)are shown separately stating that Muslim women are not oppressed or abused, which flies in the face of Islamic doctrine and practise. Even locally, there was a sign posted in the Islamic Center of Nashville advising members that the Qur’an mandates that wives may be beaten for disobedience and that a man may take another wife without the first wife’s consent. Nor was there any CNN investigation into reports by local public health professionals about evidence of female genital mutilation of Muslim women in the vicinity making child birth difficult and dangerous.

Moreover, neither Imam Bahloul nor members of the ICM board responded to a letter from Former Muslims United requesting them to sign a pledge abjuring death penalty under Islamic doctrine against those who leave Islam by personal choice.

One of the more egregious episodes in “Unwelcome” is a sequence about shots being heard coming from the woods near the ICM job site and the Imam, Professor Sbenaty and the Muslim womenexpressing fear that they were targets. While the Rutherford County Sheriff officerexplained they would investigate, there was no suggestion that it may have been simply dove hunters in the vicinity.

On the matter of the arson on the  heavy equipment at the ICM job site which occurred on the night of August 28th, is conveyed as evidence of a “hate crime” – something that Kevin Fisher stated was unlikely to be the case in articles we posted at the time of the incident. The FBI and BATF officials were shown with the Imam and mosque leaders offering a $20,000 reward for information leading to the perpetrators.

Sally Wall noted in an O’Brien exchange that there have been incidents of Muslim agent provocateurs perpetrating similar acts in order to emphasize their victim status. “Unwelcome” showed video segments of another Tennessee mosque which may have been torched by opponents. We simply don’t know anything further other than the federal investigators did forensic analysis and decreed the ICM job site incident, arson.  The investigation has been notably silent since that September 3rd, 2010 press conference.

While “Unwelcome” shows the early burial on the ICM project site that preceded the controversial County approval for the project in May, 2010, Kevin Fisher is seen briefly voicing health concerns about the burial. "The body was buried in a leather bag, without a vault, which gives cause to worry about contamination of ground water." O’Brien scoffed at this.

Nothing was presented about the allegations that County Planning Director Doug Demosi exceeded his executive authority in allowing this burial when the plans for a cemetery were not yet approved - a matter referred to the Rutherford County District attorney for investigation.

“Unwelcome” tries to graphically underline the ICM’s necessity for expansion by showing pictures of a spillover crowd at the current mosque location in warehouse district that should have raised local concerns about breaching facility capacity limitations mandated under Tennessee statutes and fire marshal inspection. Moreover, the impression is given that there are 250 Muslim families in the greater Murfreesboro vicinity, a claim we have questioned n the past, since there are only 45 registered members of the mosque. The CNN location shots were done during Ramadan, when the mosque had advance notice of filming. When I filmed exterior shots of a Friday Jummah prayer at the ICM in June, 2010, there was no evidence of the ‘overflow’ problem.

Professor Sbenaty and his American daughter clearly have different opinions about whether Sharia exists at all and what it is. Lena Sbenaty is shown saying she doesn’t know what Sharia is, while her father correctly says it is 'the way' you should live by under Islam. She also noisily challenges Lou Ann Zelenik in the filmed sequence that occurred one evening at the Rutherford County Court House. Sbenaty is shown yelling over Zelenik as she attempted to voice concern about the treatment of Muslim women during a filmed news interview.

Imam Bahloul is shown in a sequence playing a hateful, but not really threatening, voice message for O’Brien. However, there was nothing in “Unwelcome” about death threats to both Zelenik and Fisher.

Casting Rutherford County Mayor Ernest Burgess as a “cattle farmer” was misleading. He's a developer and a Director of National Health Care a NYSE-listed company headquartered in Mufreesboro engaged in development and management of extended and assisted living care facilities where coincidentally, Essam Fathy, the co-founder of the ICM works as an evaluator of assisted living candidates.

Having Noah Feldman, Harvard University Law Professor discuss Sharia was supposed to be an indication of scholarly support for Islam as one of the “three great religions.” Feldman’s contribution was to say, “As a general matter, the Sharia is what you make of it.” Whatever that means.We note that both Feldman and Kanan Makiyaof Brandeis University were retained by the US government as consultants on the drafting of the Iraqi Constitution that mandates Sharia as the ultimate source of law.

We could cite more defects in the CNN “Unwelcome” production. However, without a public airing of these, it would be fruitless. The producers at CNN and O’Brien had already made up their minds as to the central message: Muslims are being discriminated against by mindless bigots in Middle Tennessee and across the US. It is left to Kevin Fisher, the thoughtful and articulate spokesperson for the opposition to conclude at the end of “Unwelcome” that, “I would rather you and I sit here 20 years from now and you interview me and I say, you know what? I was wrong. I was completely wrong about them. They've been wonderful and peaceful, but you know what? What if I'm right?”

Meanwhile the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro’s new mosque remains unfinished as they await funding for their Grand Mosque complex in the buckle of the Bible belt.


Posted on 03/28/2011 12:30 PM by Jerry Gordon
Monday, 28 March 2011
Maintaining the Veil of Silence

Paul-Gordon Chandler, an Anglican priest working in Cairo, has apparently become the lead correspondent in Egypt for the Christian Century, the house organ for mainline Protestantism in the U.S. In two articles about events in post-Mubarak Egypt, Chandler has worked to portray relations between Coptic Christians and their Muslim neighbors in Egypt in sympathetic and hopeful terms.

While this is in keeping with his need to maintain good relations with the inhabitants of a Muslim-majority society where anti-Christian hostility is a force to be reckoned with, it contradicts his obligation as a Christian Century correspondent to offer his readers a comprehensive view of events as they take place. In short, Chandler's impulse to put a positive spin on events so as not to offend Muslims in Egypt undermines his ability to show readers exactly what is going on in Egypt.

Chandler's first article, “Muslims and Copts together: Egypt's interfaith revolution,” appeared on the magazine's website on March 4, 2011. The article describes how Muslims and Copts came together in the aftermath of the New Year's Day bombing of a church in Alexandria.

Chandler accurately reports that Muslims formed human chains around Coptic Churches during Christmas Eve masses throughout the country and that millions of Egyptians “replaced their Facebook profile photos with the image of a cross within a crescent” and put bumper sticks on their cars with a similar image.

Chandler then describes how Muslims and Copts both held religious services at Tahrir Square “to honor those killed” in the January 25 Uprising and how Muslim and Christian neighbors protected one another's lives and property as chaos descended on the streets of Cairo.

Chandler reports that his own apartment building “was assaulted nine times by mobs of armed looters, and each time we were protected by Muslim neighbors.” Chandler writes:

During the uncertain days of the protest, not a single church or synagogue (which are normally protected by machine-gun bearing police) in the country was targeted. Christians were in no way threatened. In contrast, remarkable accounts emerged of Muslims protecting the churches from the possibility of looting. A Muslim friend of mine takes great pride in saying he helped guard the historic fifth-century Hanging Church in Old Cairo, a site sacred to Coptic Christians.”
Chandler's assertion that “Christians were in no way threatened” during the uncertain days of protest”
is false. In early February, weeks before Chandler's article was published in the Christian Century, The Assyrian International News Agency, reported that two families of Coptic Christians were murdered in Upper Egypt five days after the uprising began. According to AINA, Coptic activist Dr. Hanna Hanna said the Islamists responsible for the murders chose Coptic Christians – and not Muslims – as their victims “because they know that with Copts they can literally get away with murder.”

Here are some details of the attack:

"The two families were staying in their homes with their doors locked when suddenly the Islamists descended on them," said Bishop Agathon, "killing eleven and leaving for dead four other family members. In addition, they looted everything that was in the two Coptic houses, including money, furniture and electrical equipment. They also looted livestock and grain."
Rev. Chandler, a prominent cleric and author with a following in the United States, enjoyed the protection from his neighbors in Cairo during the January 25 Uprising before returning to the U.S. for a brief respite at the insistence of the Episcopal Church. The Copts who suffered the attack described above had no such protection, nor could they leave the country to avoid the violence they endured. Neither Chandler nor his readers should mistake the safety he enjoyed during the uprising as being operative for Coptic Christians living in Egypt.

Muslim Brotherhood

Chandler's depiction of Yusuf Qaradawi in the March 4, 2011 article is an egregious whitewash. Chandler writes that during a Friday sermon, Qaradawi, a leader from the Muslim Brotherhood, “struck themes of democracy and pluralism, long hallmarks of his writing” and that the “pluralistic emphasis in his sermon highlighted the new interfaith worldview of the young audience standing before him.” [Please see note at the bottom of this article.]

The notion that Yusuf Qaradawi is committed to democracy and pluralism is insupportable. As previous CAMERA analysis reveals, the man is a vicious anti-Semite who hopes that Muslim believers will achieve the destruction of the Jewish people. In addition to supporting the Iranian fatwa calling for the assassination of Salman Rushdie, he has also called for the murder of people who leave Islam and subsequently criticize the religion. And if that is not enough to demonstrate his anti-democratic credentials, he encouraged, with some qualifications, the practice of female genital mutilation and wife beating.

Again, it's necessary to consider the role Chandler's status as a privileged Westerner plays in his sanguine coverage of Qaradawi's ideology. If Chandler were the target of an Islamic fatwa, a Muslim apostate, a Muslim woman, or a Jew, he might have a different view of Qaradawi's putative support for democracy and pluralism.

Mugged by Reality

As it turned out, the sanguine and optimistic narrative offered in Chandler's March 4 article was overtaken by events. Soon after it was posted on Christian Century's website on March 4, news reports indicated that a church in the village of Sool located in the province of Helwan, was set on fire and Christians living nearby hid in the homes of their Muslim neighbors homes to seek protection from rioters. After the church was destroyed, Muslims prayed on the site of the destroyed church in an apparent effort to prevent the church from being rebuilt.

After the attack, the military officials initially promised to rebuild the church on its original site, but once it became apparent that Muslim extremists were intent on building a mosque on the site of the burnt church, officials then attempted to convince the local Coptic community to agree to build the church elsewhere, presumably out of a fear of challenging the protesters head-on.

The military's apparent unwillingness to rebuild on the original site and failure to protect the church in the first place prompted Copts to protest in the streets of Cairo days after the attack. Several were killed, as were some Muslims. Details of the events can be found here, here and here.

After these events took place, Chandler was forced to acknowledge in a second article, “Clashes and coalitions” published on March 16, 2011, that they contradicted the vision of interfaith unity seen during the January 25 Uprising in Tahrir square. “What is going on?” he asked. “How could Egyptian Christians be attacked and a church burnt after Muslims and Christians stood, fought and died together in Tahrir Square, when images of solidarity between both faiths stirred the whole world?”

Copts Preparing to Burn a Mosque? Really?

Chandler's story includes a rumor “that the Copts had already burned down a small mosque and were coming to burn down the iconic Sayyida Aisha mosque.”

Chandler does not tell the reader whether there was any substance to these rumors. This is crucial because during times of sectarian strife and ethnic cleansing, false accusations are themselves weapons. Prior to the January 25 Uprising, Muslim extremists accused Coptic Christians of storing weapons in their churches, being in league with Israel, and of kidnapping Muslim women and keeping them hostage. This last rumor was used, by the way, to incite hostility toward Christians in Iraq prior to the Halloween 2010 attack on a church in Baghdad that killed almost 70 people.

Chandler's story also includes testimony from a Coptic priest that the clash that took place after the church bombing was “not a clash between Muslims and Christians. ‘The attack was organized and [involved] guns,” he said. “Muslim residents [here] don't have weapons.”
Given the status of Coptic Christians in Egypt, is this testimony reliable? What would happen to the Coptic priest were to say unequivocally that in fact, there was a component of religious hostility behind the violence?

This is an important question. Recently, a Coptic Christian had his ear cut off by a group of Muslim men in Egypt. (For details of the attack, click here.) AINA reports that initially, the victim of the attack wanted compensation and revenge but then changed his mind:

At first Mr. Mitri said he wanted full compensation for his losses and even wanted revenge by cutting off the ear of the Muslim who cut his ear off. However, it was reported that a "reconciliation" meeting was made in the presence of Colonel Ahmed Masood, Vice military ruler of Qena, whereby Ayman Mitri and the Muslims came to an "agreement." Mr. Mitri had to withdraw the police report he filed against the Muslims.

Mr. Mitri appeared on the Coptic TV channel CTV, where he was asked about the reason he agreed to reconcile and forfeit his rights. Mitri said while sobbing "I was threatened, they threatened to kidnap the female children in our family."

Under these circumstances is it reasonable to think that just maybe the priest that Chandler quoted was downplaying the religious component of the violence endured by his community to prevent further attacks? It doesn't take a huge amount of moral imagination to ask this question, but for some reason, Chandler seems unable to muster it.

Merely A Government Plot?

Chandler also reports that there are indications that the attacks against Coptic Christians were orchestrated by “pro-Mubarak supporters intent perpetrating a counter revolution.” There is ample evidence that the Mubarak regime did incite violence against Coptic Christians in Egypt and bears some measure of responsibility for the ongoing hostility toward Christians in Egypt.

Interfaith relations deteriorated under the Mubarak regime reports Nelly van Doorn-Harder, reports Professor of Islamic Studies at Wake Forest University in North Carolina who writes “The regime allowed generations of young Muslims to study biased text books in schools and hear radicalized rhetoric about Coptic "others." Mubarak allowed inter-religious tensions to escalate; by the year 2000, random acts of violence against the Copts had become normative.”

Clearly, anti-Coptic hostility is part of Egyptian culture, and if it weren't, the use of anti-Coptic hostility as a tool to maintain power would not work as a strategy. But the responsibility cannot be placed solely on the Mubarak regime. Muslim religious leaders in Egypt also bear large measure of responsibility for anti-Coptic attitudes in that country, a point van Doorn-Harder makes in the piece mentioned previously.

This hostility has real consequences that Chandler fails to address in his piece in a responsible way. These consequences are detailed in a November 2009 report published by Christian Solidarity International and the Coptic Foundation for Human Rights. The report titled “The Disappearance, Forced Conversions, and Forced Marriages of Coptic Christian Women in Egypt,” documents the depredations endured by Copts in Egypt at the hands of Muslim extremists in that country. It also documents the failure of government officials to prosecute these crimes and the failure of the international community to respond forcefully to the mistreatment of the Coptic community in Egypt.

One crucial passage of the report states the following:The Islamic world does not readily acknowledge its own discrimination and violence against non-Muslims. Such abuse remains covered in a cloak of silence and tacit acceptance, even though it is against the constitutional affirmations of civil rights. When non-Muslims call public attention to such violations of human rights, they are often branded as Islamophobes.

With his distorted coverage of events in Egypt, Paul-Gordon Chandler is helping to maintain the cloak of silence over the mistreatment of Coptic Christians in Egypt.

NOTE: CAMERA previously drew attention to unusual similarities between Chandler's article and one published by the New York Times in mid-February and stated that it appeared the Christian Century was following the New York Times' coverage of Qaradawi on a word-for-word basis. Christian Century responded by stating that it appears the New York Times coverage was based on an email Chandler sent to “friends and churches” to prior the publication of his March 4, 2011 article.

CAMERA subsequently contacted the New York Times and inquired about the similarities and Christian Century's statement.

The paper is investigating the issue.

Originally published at Camera.

Posted on 03/28/2011 3:21 PM by Dexter Van Zile
Monday, 28 March 2011
Yulia Latynina On Liberal Fundamentalists (In Russian)

From Novaya Gazeta:

Защита прав людоеда, или Либеральный фундаментализм

перейти к об�уждению ...

Ð�екоторые замечательные принципы в реальноÑ�ти обарачиваютÑ�Ñ� Ñ�воей противоположноÑ�тью. Принцип «Ð½Ð°Ð´Ð¾ защищать права каждого человека» — один из них

11 �нвар� 2008 г. По�оль�тво СШ� в Лондоне. �кци� Amnesty International � требованием закрыть тюрьму в Гуантанамо
Лори БеренÑ�он, оÑ�вобождениÑ� которой требовало террориÑ�тичеÑ�кое «Ð”вижене им. Тупака Ð�мару». Признана политичеÑ�кой заключенной
Петр Саруханов — «�ова�»
Моаззам Бегг, член «Ð�ль-Каиды» и бывший узник Гуантанамо. Ездил по Европе Ñ� лекциÑ�ми о том, как его пытали американÑ�кие палачи

Юли� Леонидовна Латынина напи�ала человеконенави�тниче�кий тек�т.

В принципе, �то уже тренд: �вержение моральных табу. То �. �иконов позовет уничтожать больных младенцев, то Ямполь�ка� & Михалков интерпретируют ката�трофу в Японии как боже�твенное возда�ние.

ЮлиÑ� Леонидовна иÑ�чадием и врагом человечеÑ�тва объÑ�вила вÑ�е правозащитные организации. Ð’ том чиÑ�ле и давних партнеров «Ð�овой газеты».

Мы тем не менее печатаем тек�т �воего обозревател�. Тому три причины:

Обозреватель имеет право на точку зрени�, отличающую�� от редакционной.

Правозащитные организации, которые размазала Латынина, в�туп�т�� за Латынину, е�ли мы ее не опубликуем. Будет вой!

Ð�аконец-то в «Ð�овой газете» поÑ�витÑ�Ñ� материал, который понравитÑ�Ñ� Ð’.Ð’. Путину.

Дмитрий Муратов

Волкодав — прав.
Людоед — нет.

Ð�оваÑ� идеологиÑ� гоÑ�подÑ�твует в мире, и имÑ� Ñ�той идеологии — либеральный фундаментализм. Либеральный фундаментализм отрицает за гоÑ�ударÑ�твом право веÑ�ти войны и ареÑ�товывать людей, зато Ñ�читает, что гоÑ�ударÑ�тво должно обеÑ�печить вÑ�ех деньгами, жильем и образованием. Либеральный фундаментализм называет любое западное гоÑ�ударÑ�тво — диктатурой, а любого террориÑ�та — жертвой западного гоÑ�ударÑ�тва.

 Ð›Ð¸Ð±ÐµÑ€Ð°Ð»ÑŒÐ½Ñ‹Ð¹ фундаментализм отрицает право на наÑ�илие за Израилем и признает его за палеÑ�тинцами. Либеральный фундаменталиÑ�Ñ‚ громко обличает СШÐ�, убивающие мирное наÑ�еление в Ираке, но еÑ�ли Ñ‚Ñ‹ напомнишь ему, что в Ираке мирное наÑ�еление убивают прежде вÑ�его боевики, он поÑ�мотрит на тебÑ� так, Ñ�ловно Ñ‚Ñ‹ Ñ�делал что-то неприличное или пукнул.

 Ð›Ð¸Ð±ÐµÑ€Ð°Ð»ÑŒÐ½Ñ‹Ð¹ фундаменталиÑ�Ñ‚ не верит ни одному Ñ�лову гоÑ�ударÑ�тва и верит любому Ñ�лову террориÑ�та.

Как получилоÑ�ÑŒ, что монополию на «Ð·Ð°Ð¿Ð°Ð´Ð½Ñ‹Ðµ ценноÑ�ти» приÑ�воили Ñ�ебе те, кто ненавидит открытое общеÑ�тво и потворÑ�твует террориÑ�там? Как получилоÑ�ÑŒ, что под «ÐµÐ²Ñ€Ð¾Ð¿ÐµÐ¹Ñ�кими ценноÑ�Ñ‚Ñ�ми» подразумеваетÑ�Ñ� нечто, что показалоÑ�ÑŒ бы Европе в XVIII–XIX веков глупоÑ�тью и демагогией? И чем Ñ�то кончитÑ�Ñ�  длÑ� открытого общеÑ�тва?

Лори Берен�он

В 1998 году Amnesty International признала некую Лори Берен�он политиче�кой заключенной.

Лори БеренÑ�он была американÑ�кой левой активиÑ�ткой, котораÑ� в 1995 году приехала в Перу и там Ñ�тала ходить в парламент и брать у депутатов интервью. Интервью Ñ�ти, по Ñ�транному Ñ�овпадению, нигде так и не поÑ�вилиÑ�ÑŒ. Ð’ парламент Лори БеренÑ�он ходила вмеÑ�те Ñ� фотографом Ð�Ñ�нÑ�и Гильвонио, котораÑ�, опÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ-таки по Ñ�транному Ñ�овпадению, была женой Ð�еÑ�тора Карпы — второго по Ñ�таршинÑ�тву лидера террориÑ�тичеÑ�кой группировки «Ð”вижение имени Тупака Ð�мару».

ВмеÑ�те Ñ� Ð�Ñ�нÑ�и она и была ареÑ�тована. Дом американки оказалÑ�Ñ� штаб-квартирой террориÑ�тов, готовивших захват парламента. Ð’ нем нашли планы парламента, полицейÑ�кую форму и целый арÑ�енал оружиÑ�, в том чиÑ�ле 3 Ñ‚Ñ‹Ñ�Ñ�чи бруÑ�ков динамита. При штурме были убиты трое террориÑ�тов, а четырнадцать были захвачены живьем. Когда БеренÑ�он предъÑ�вили публике, она громко закричала, Ñ�жав кулаки: «Ð¢ÑƒÐ¿Ð°Ðº Ð�мару» не террориÑ�Ñ‚Ñ‹ — они революционеры».

Судил Лори БеренÑ�он Ñ�удьÑ� в капюшоне, потому что у «Ð”вижениÑ� Тупака Ð�мару» в Ñ�то времÑ� была привычка раÑ�Ñ�треливать Ñ�удей, которые выноÑ�Ñ�Ñ‚ им обвинительные приговоры. Ð�а Ñ�уде Лори БеренÑ�он заÑ�вила, что она ничего не знала. Как, ее фотограф — жена Карпы? Да она понÑ�тиÑ� не имела! Как, ее дом — штаб-квартира террориÑ�тов? Что вы говорите, она не в курÑ�е! Ð� где же ее репортажи? Так она их готовила-готовила, но кровавый перуанÑ�кий режим украл вÑ�е ее заметки.

УверениÑ� Лори БеренÑ�он не показалиÑ�ÑŒ убедительными ни перуанÑ�кому Ñ�уду, ни американÑ�кому конгреÑ�Ñ�у, который не Ñ�тал вÑ�тупатьÑ�Ñ� за Ñ�оотечеÑ�твенницу. Однако они показалиÑ�ÑŒ, видимо, убедительными Amnesty International. Борцов за права человека не оÑ�тановило даже то, что когда в декабре 1996-го «Ð”вижение им. Тупака Ð�мару» захватило Ñ�понÑ�кое поÑ�ольÑ�тво, то в Ñ�пиÑ�ке членов движениÑ�, оÑ�вобождениÑ� которых требовали террориÑ�Ñ‚Ñ‹, имÑ� Лори БеренÑ�он Ñ�тоÑ�ло на третьем меÑ�те.

Moazzam Begg

Моаззам Бегг, англичанин пакиÑ�танÑ�кого проиÑ�хождениÑ�, член «Ð�ль-Каиды», переехал в Ð�фганиÑ�тан в 2001 году. Как пиÑ�ал Ñ�ам Бегг, «Ñ� хотел жить в иÑ�ламÑ�ком гоÑ�ударÑ�тве, Ñ�вободном от коррупции и деÑ�потизма». Ð�фганиÑ�тан под влаÑ�тью талибов показалÑ�Ñ� Беггу именно таким, иÑ�тинно Ñ�вободным и прекраÑ�ным меÑ�том.

До Ñ�воего переезда в Ð�фганиÑ�тан Бегг, по его Ñ�обÑ�твенному признанию, прошел подготовку по крайней мере в трех террориÑ�тичеÑ�ких лагерÑ�Ñ…. Он также побывал в БоÑ�нии и Ñ�одержал в Лондоне книжный магазин, где продавалиÑ�ÑŒ книжки о джихаде. Самой популÑ�рной книжкой в магазине была «Ð—ащита иÑ�ламÑ�кой земли», напиÑ�аннаÑ� одним из оÑ�нователей «Ð�ль-Каиды» Ð�бдуллой Ð�ззамом.

ПоÑ�ле того как американцы вошли в Ð�фганиÑ�тан, Бегг Ñ�крылÑ�Ñ� вмеÑ�те Ñ� бен Ладеном в Торо-Боро, а затем переехал в ПакиÑ�тан. Ð�реÑ�товали его потому, что в тренировочном лагере «Ð�ль-Каиды» в Дерунте был найден банковÑ�кий перевод на имÑ� Моаззама Бегга.

Бегг провел не�колько лет в Гуантанамо и в 2005-м вышел на �вободу. По�ле �того он �тал одной из �уперзвезд Amnesty International. �а деньги Amnesty он ездил по Европе � лекци�ми о том, как его пытали кровавые американ�кие палачи.

Amnesty International не Ñ�мутило то, что одновременно Ñ� правозащитной деÑ�тельноÑ�тью Бегг продолжал заниматьÑ�Ñ� прÑ�мой пропагандой терроризма. Ð’ качеÑ�тве президента «Ð˜Ñ�ламÑ�кого общеÑ�тва» (вÑ�е предыдущие президенты которого Ñ�ели за терроризм) он организовывал в Великобритании лекции Ð�нвара аль-Ð�влаки (по видеотранÑ�лÑ�ции, еÑ�теÑ�твенно, ибо в Ñ�лучае физичеÑ�кого поÑ�влениÑ� на территории Соединенного КоролевÑ�тва аль-Ð�влаки был бы ареÑ�тован).

Amnesty International не Ñ�мутило и то, что раÑ�Ñ�казы Бегга о невыноÑ�имых пытках в Гуантанамо в точноÑ�ти Ñ�овпадают Ñ� инÑ�трукциÑ�ми Ñ‚.н. Manchester Manual «Ð�ль-Каиды» и отвечают практике «Ñ‚аккийи», — то еÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ умышленной лжи неверным, к которой иÑ�ламÑ�кий фундаменталиÑ�Ñ‚ не может, а обÑ�зан прибегать.

�е �мутило Amnesty и то, что ра��казы �ти противоречат здравому �мы�лу. Е�ли бы человека � биографией Бегга дей�твительно подвергали пыткам, то он наговорил бы на три пожизненных �рока.

Зато когда Ñ�отрудница Amnesty International Гита Сангал публично напомнила, что вообще-то Бегг — член «Ð�ль-Каиды», она была уволена. Правозащитное Ñ�ообщеÑ�тво объÑ�вило Гиту Сангал перÑ�оной нон грата, и в отличие от Моаззама Бегга, она не Ñ�могла найти поддержку ни у одного адвоката, защищающего права человека.


В 2002 году президентом Колумбии был избран �льваро Урибе.

К Ñ�тому времени КолумбиÑ� предÑ�тавлÑ�ла из Ñ�ебÑ� failed state («Ð½ÐµÐ´ÐµÐµÑ�поÑ�обное гоÑ�ударÑ�тво». — Прим. ред.). Ð�е меньше 10% Ñ�траны контролировалоÑ�ÑŒ левыми повÑ�танцами, за которыми Ñ�тоÑ�ли деÑ�Ñ�тилетиÑ� инÑ�титуционализированного наÑ�илиÑ�. Пабло ЭÑ�кобар, будущий оÑ�нователь МедельинÑ�кого картелÑ�, в Ñ�емилетнем возраÑ�те чуть не Ñ�тал жертвой повÑ�танцев, вырезавших его родной город Титириби.

Именно левые повÑ�танцы, Chusmeros, завели привычку под названием «ÐºÐ¾Ð»ÑƒÐ¼Ð±Ð¸Ð¹Ñ�кий галÑ�тук» — Ñ�то когда у человека разрезали шею и через горло вытаÑ�кивали Ñ�зык. Еще было популÑ�рно Corte de Florero, или ЦветочнаÑ� ваза, — Ñ�то когда отрубленные руки-ноги человека втыкали в его разрезанный живот. Ð’ 50-Ñ… годах Chusmeros убили 300 Ñ‚Ñ‹Ñ� человек.

Ответом на левый террор при беÑ�Ñ�илии правительÑ�тва Ñ�тал террор правый; в разных провинциÑ�Ñ… люди объединÑ�лиÑ�ÑŒ в полуавтономные отрÑ�ды Ñ�амообороны. К началу XXI века в Autodefencas Unidas de Colombia Ñ�оÑ�тоÑ�ло более 20 Ñ‚Ñ‹Ñ� бойцов. Левые финанÑ�ировалиÑ�ÑŒ из наркотрафика. Правые — тоже. Когда Пабло ЭÑ�кобару понадобилоÑ�ÑŒ уничтожить Ñ�вои Ñ�удебные дела, хранившиеÑ�Ñ� в Верховном Ñ�уде, он проÑ�то заплатил повÑ�танцам из Ðœ-19, и те в 1985-м захватили, а потом Ñ�ожгли здание Ñ�уда Ñ� 300 заложниками.

Еще были наркокартели. Еще были похитители людей, которые крали �амых богатых, в т.ч. прежде в�его наркоторговцев.

ХаризматичеÑ�кий трудоголик и аÑ�кет, Урибе Ñ�делал невозможное: он воÑ�креÑ�ил разрушенное гоÑ�ударÑ�тво. За два года, Ñ� 2002-го по 2004-й, количеÑ�тво террориÑ�тичеÑ�ких актов и похищений людей в Колумбии упало вдвое, количеÑ�тво убийÑ�тв — на 27%.

К началу президентÑ�тва Урибе в Колумбии дейÑ�твовало 1300 гуманитарных и некоммерчеÑ�ких организаций. Многие из них оказывали помощь левым повÑ�танцам; в 2003 году президент Урибе впервые позволил Ñ�ебе назвать кошку кошкой и призвал «Ð·Ð°Ñ‰Ð¸Ñ‚ников терроризма» «Ð¿ÐµÑ€ÐµÑ�тать труÑ�ливо прÑ�тать Ñ�вои идеи за правами человека».

Что тут началоÑ�ÑŒ! Amnesty International и Human Rights Watch заÑ�ыпали СШÐ� и Европу петициÑ�ми, которые требовали бойкотировать Колумбию и ее «Ð¿Ð¾Ð»Ð¸Ñ‚ику, котораÑ� ведет к углублению кризиÑ�а Ñ� правами человека в Ñ�тране» (Amnesty International), а также «Ð²Ð¾Ð·Ð´ÐµÑ€Ð¶Ð°Ñ‚ÑŒÑ�Ñ� от поддержки законодательÑ�тва, которое позволит военным проводить беззаконные ареÑ�Ñ‚Ñ‹ и обыÑ�ки» (HRW).

Ð’ мае 2004 года президент Урибе конкретно обвинил иноÑ�транных правозащитников из Peace Brigades International и Fellowship Of Reconciliation, поддерживавших «ÐœÐ¸Ñ€Ð½ÑƒÑŽ коммуну» в Сан Хозе де Ð�партадо в поÑ�обничеÑ�тве наркотеррориÑ�там из FARC.

Визг правозащитных организаций по �тому поводу побил в�е рекорды; когда �пу�т� ме��ц та же FARC вырезала 34 кре�ть�нина в Ла Габарра, Amnesty International �кромно промолчала.

Прошло шеÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ лет; второй по Ñ�таршинÑ�тву террориÑ�Ñ‚ из FARC, ДаниÑ�л Сьерра Мартинез по кличке Самир, перешел на Ñ�торону правительÑ�тва и раÑ�Ñ�казал ÐœÑ�ри О’Греди из Wall Street Journal, какую неоценимую уÑ�лугу оказывали наркотеррориÑ�там «ÐœÐ¸Ñ€Ð½Ð°Ñ� коммуна» в Сан Жозе де Ð�партадо вкупе Ñ� Peace Brigades International и Fellowship Of Reconciliation.

По Ñ�ловам Мартинеза, дело Ñ� пропагандой в «ÐœÐ¸Ñ€Ð½Ð¾Ð¹ коммуне» было поÑ�тавлено так же хорошо, как у Ð¥Ð�ÐœÐ�С: под предлогом «Ð¼Ð¸Ñ€Ð½Ð¾Ñ�ти» коммуна отказывалаÑ�ÑŒ допуÑ�кать на Ñ�вою территорию правительÑ�твенные войÑ�ка, но вÑ�егда предоÑ�тавлÑ�ла убежище FARC, в Ñ�лучае еÑ�ли террориÑ�та убивали, его вÑ�егда выÑ�тавлÑ�ли мирным жителем.


Ð’ 2009 году оÑ�нователь Wikileaks, Ñ�кÑ�центричный авÑ�тралийÑ�кий компьютерный гений Джулиан Ð�Ñ�Ñ�анж получил премию Amnesty International за Ñ�вое учаÑ�тие в раÑ�Ñ�ледовании внеÑ�удебных раÑ�прав в Кении: в 2008-м «Ñ�Ñ�кадроны Ñ�мерти» убили там около 500 человек.

ПолучаÑ� премию, Ð�Ñ�Ñ�анж назвал доклад об Ñ�тих раÑ�правах «Ð¿Ñ€Ð¸Ð·Ð½Ð°ÐºÐ¾Ð¼ Ñ�илы и роÑ�та кенийÑ�кого гражданÑ�кого общеÑ�тва». «Ð Ð°Ð·Ð¾Ð±Ð»Ð°Ñ‡ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ðµ Ñ�тих убийÑ�тв, — Ñ�казал Ð�Ñ�Ñ�анж, — Ñ�тало возможно благодарÑ� грандиозной работе таких организаций, как Oscar Foundation».

К Ñ�ожалению, г-н Ð�Ñ�Ñ�анж забыл упомÑ�нуть об одной важной детали. Убитые были членами «ÐœÑƒÐ½Ð³Ð¸ÐºÐ¸». Это Ñ�атаниÑ�Ñ‚Ñ�каÑ� Ñ�екта, к которой могут принадлежать только предÑ�тавители племени кикуйю.

 Ð¡ÐµÐºÑ‚а отрицает хриÑ�тианÑ�тво и требует возврата к традиционным африканÑ�ким ценноÑ�Ñ‚Ñ�м. Во что именно верÑ�Ñ‚ члены Ñ�екты, Ñ�казать Ñ�ложно, потому что наказание за разглашение тайны — Ñ�мерть. Во вÑ�Ñ�ком Ñ�лучае, извеÑ�тно, что они пьют человечеÑ�кую кровь и приноÑ�Ñ�Ñ‚ в жертву двухлетних детей. «ÐœÑƒÐ½Ð³Ð¸ÐºÐ¸» занималаÑ�ÑŒ беÑ�пощадным Ñ€Ñ�кетом и Ñ�плошным террором — только в июне 2007-го в рамках Ñ�воей кампании террора Ñ�екта убила Ñ�выше 100 человек.

Джулиан Ð�Ñ�Ñ�анж провел в Кении неÑ�колько лет и не мог не знать, что влаÑ�ти Кении прÑ�мо обвинÑ�ли Oscar Foundation в том, что она Ñ�влÑ�етÑ�Ñ� ширмой длÑ� «ÐœÑƒÐ½Ð³Ð¸ÐºÐ¸».

Что в�е �то значит?

Как вÑ�е Ñ�то понÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ? Может быть, в Amnesty International на Ñ�амом деле Ñ�идÑ�Ñ‚ Ñ�крытые Ñ�торонники «ÐœÑƒÐ½Ð³Ð¸ÐºÐ¸» и по ночам приноÑ�Ñ�Ñ‚ в жертву двухлетних детей?

Ð’Ñ€Ñ�д ли. Во-первых, в «ÐœÑƒÐ½Ð³Ð¸ÐºÐ¸» Ñ�оÑ�тоÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ могут только кикуйю. Во-вторых, члены Ñ�атаниÑ�Ñ‚Ñ�кого культа не могут быть одновременно членами «Ð�ль-Каиды».

Может быть, Amnesty International и другие правозащитные организации — Ñ�то проÑ�то блаженные, которые не могут перенеÑ�ти даже малейшего наÑ�илиÑ�? Ð’Ñ€Ñ�д ли. Потому что хотÑ� правозащитники активно критикуют тех, кто иÑ�треблÑ�ет людоедов и террориÑ�тов, они не торопÑ�Ñ‚Ñ�Ñ� прийти в тренировочный лагерь «Ð�ль-Каиды» и проповедовать ненаÑ�илие там.

Откуда берет�� �та интеллектуальна� тру�о�ть, необыкновенна� не�по�обно�ть к нрав�твенной арифметике?


Франци�к ���из�кий дал обет вечной нищеты и проповедовал птичкам. �о уже при его преемнике франци�кан�кий орден �тал одним из богатейших и вов�е не бе�коры�тных ин�титутов Европы. С правозащитным движением к концу XX века произошло то же, что � франци�кан�ким орденом.

Старейша� и изве�тнейша� из правозащитных организаций, Human Rights Watchs, была �оздана Робертом Берн�тайном в 1978-м, чтобы �ледить за тем, как СССР выполн�ет Хель�инк�кие �оглашени�. �о в 1992 году СССР развалил��, а HRW о�тала�ь жива. Более того, она только выро�ла; бюджет ее �о�тавл�ет де��тки миллионов долларов, пред�тавитель�тва наход�т�� в 90 �транах.

Ð� 19 октÑ�брÑ� 2009 года произошел грандиозный Ñ�кандал: воÑ�ьмидеÑ�Ñ�тилетний оÑ�нователь HRW выÑ�тупил в The New York Times Ñ�о Ñ�татьей, в которой упрекал HRW в измене принципам и поÑ�ледовательной поддержке Ð¥Ð�ÐœÐ�С и «Ð¥ÐµÐ·Ð±Ð¾Ð»Ð»Ñ‹», при поÑ�тоÑ�нно приÑ�траÑ�тном и неÑ�праведливом отношении к Израилю.

Два приема, которые HRW иÑ�пользует длÑ� поÑ�тоÑ�нной критики ИзраилÑ�, очень проÑ�Ñ‚Ñ‹. Первый — Ñ�то отказ от изучениÑ� причин конфликта. «ÐœÑ‹ не изучаем причины конфликта, — говорит HRW, — мы изучаем, как Ñ�тороны конфликта Ñ�облюдают права человека».

Здорово! ПредÑ�тавьте Ñ�ебе, что вы — женщина, на которую в леÑ�у напал маньÑ�к, а вы Ñ�умели его заÑ�трелить. С точки зрениÑ� правозащитников из HRW, вы и будете виноваты.

ПозициÑ� «Ð¼Ñ‹ не изучаем причину» заведомо Ñ�тавит агреÑ�Ñ�ора-террориÑ�та, раÑ�полагающего меньшими реÑ�урÑ�ами, в выгодное положение по Ñ�равнению Ñ� гоÑ�ударÑ�твом, которое отвечает на террор.

Второй прием еще проще — Ñ�то передергивание, умолчание и ложь. Так, в отчете 2007 года HRW заÑ�вила, что у «Ð¥ÐµÐ·Ð±Ð¾Ð»Ð»Ñ‹» нет привычки «Ð¸Ñ�пользовать наÑ�еление как живой щит», и одновременно заÑ�вила, что у нее еÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ Ñ�видетельÑ�тва о том, что израильÑ�каÑ� армиÑ� «Ð½Ð°Ð¼ÐµÑ€ÐµÐ½Ð½Ð¾ делала Ñ�воей мишенью мирное наÑ�еление». Когда в 2002 году Ñ�пидемиÑ� взрывов палеÑ�тинÑ�ких Ñ�мертников доÑ�тигла пика, HRW публиковала преÑ�Ñ�-релизы о нарушениÑ�Ñ… прав человека Израилем. HRW понадобилоÑ�ÑŒ еще 5 меÑ�Ñ�цев, чтобы выпуÑ�тить отчет по террориÑ�там-Ñ�мертникам, и 5 лет, чтобы выпуÑ�тить отчет о обÑ�трелах ИзраилÑ� Ñ� территории Газы.

В 2009 году HRW отправила�ь в Саудов�кую �равию, где �обирала деньги на антиизраиль�кие отчеты. Дело � правами человека в Саудов�кой �равии об�тоит не�колько хуже, чем в Израиле. К тому же Саудов�ка� �рави� �вл�ет�� крупнейшим �пон�ором терроризма. �о HRW �то не �мутило.

Точно такую же позицию занимает HRW на Шри-Ланке, где правительÑ�твенные войÑ�ка борютÑ�Ñ� против «Ð¢Ð¸Ð³Ñ€Ð¾Ð² оÑ�вобождениÑ� Тамил-Илама», жеÑ�точайшей террориÑ�тичеÑ�кой организации, убившей деÑ�Ñ�тки Ñ‚Ñ‹Ñ�Ñ�ч людей и иÑ�пользующей тамилов в качеÑ�тве живого щита. При любой попытке наÑ�туплениÑ� правительÑ�твенных войÑ�к HRW немедленно заÑ�влÑ�ет о том, что правительÑ�твенные войÑ�ка наноÑ�Ñ�Ñ‚ удары по мирным жителÑ�м.

Amnesty International

ВтораÑ� Ñ�тарейшаÑ� и извеÑ�тнейшаÑ� правозащитнаÑ� организациÑ� — Ñ�то Amnesty International. Ее оÑ�новал в 1961 году адвокат Петер БененÑ�он; причиной оÑ�нованиÑ� поÑ�лужила Ñ�татьÑ� о двух португальÑ�ких Ñ�тудентах, которых броÑ�или в тюрьму на Ñ�емь лет за то, что они «Ð²Ñ‹Ð¿Ð¸Ð»Ð¸ тоÑ�Ñ‚ за Ñ�вободу». Amnesty Ñ�ледила за тем, чтобы узники Ñ�овеÑ�ти в Европе были оÑ�вобождены, а политичеÑ�кие заключенные получали Ñ�праведливый Ñ�уд.

�о к началу 90-х узники �ове�ти в Европе перевели�ь, а между тем размеры Amnesty (как и франци�кан�кого ордена) только возро�ли: 2,2 млн членов в 150 �транах. Возник вопро�: где вз�ть узников �ове�ти, права которых надо защищать? Конечно, Amnesty вела кампании и за права женщин, и против глобального потеплени�, но в�е-таки, �огла�ите�ь, �то не то: главный �про� у людей �ове�тливых в�егда будет на узников �ове�ти, причем желательно в Европе или в �мерике: в Конго �то как-то далеко и неинтере�но.

И Amnesty отыÑ�кала Ñ�воих узников Ñ�овеÑ�ти: в Гуантанамо. Уже Ñ� 1986 по 2000 год Ñ�траной, которой было поÑ�вÑ�щено наибольшее количеÑ�тво отчетов Amnesty, были СШÐ� — 136 отчетов, на втором меÑ�те был Израиль. Такие милые гоÑ�ударÑ�тва, как Уганда или Конго, вовÑ�е не входили в деÑ�Ñ�тку Ñ�амых главных нарушителей прав человека.

Ð� поÑ�ле того как СШÐ� объÑ�вили «Ð²Ð¾Ð¹Ð½Ñƒ террору», Amnesty тоже объÑ�вила Ñ�вою кампанию: Counter terror with justice («ÐŸÑ€Ð¾Ñ‚ивоÑ�тоÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ терроризму по закону». — Прим. ред.). И как вы понимаете, главным злодеем в Ñ�той кампании оказалиÑ�ÑŒ не террориÑ�Ñ‚Ñ‹. Ð� те, кто Ñ� терроризмом боретÑ�Ñ�. Кто больше боретÑ�Ñ� — тот и больший злодей.

Из двадцати новоÑ�тей Ñ�того раздела (по Ñ�оÑ�тоÑ�нию на 20 декабрÑ� 2010 года) одна каÑ�аетÑ�Ñ� Турции, одна — Ливии, одна — Йемена (Amnesty требует от Йемена stop sacrificing human rights as they confront Al-Qa’ida), еще одна — ПакиÑ�тана (Amnesty возмущена тем, что пакиÑ�танÑ�кие влаÑ�ти не защищают права человека в районах, занÑ�Ñ‚Ñ‹Ñ… талибами, хотÑ� очень трудно понÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ, как они могут Ñ�то Ñ�делать. Ведь еÑ�ли пакиÑ�танÑ�кие военные поведут наÑ�тупление на талибов, то от них потребуют stop sacrificing human rights as they confront Al-Qa’ida). Еще две поÑ�вÑ�щены Великобритании, а оÑ�тальные 14 — Гуантанамо, ЦРУ и СШÐ�.

Трудно боротьÑ�Ñ� против террора. ДлÑ� Ñ�того надо ползать на брюхе по горам, прыгать Ñ� парашютом, риÑ�ковать жизнью. Хорошо и проÑ�то боротьÑ�Ñ� за Ñ�праведливоÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ длÑ� террориÑ�тов: длÑ� Ñ�того доÑ�таточно раÑ�Ñ�ылать преÑ�Ñ�-релизы о том, что в Гуантанамо творитÑ�Ñ� «daily injustice» («ÐµÐ¶ÐµÐ´Ð½ÐµÐ²Ð½Ð¾Ðµ беззаконие») и что «president Obama’s administration has failed to match its words with concrete action when it comes to accountability and remedy for human rights violations committed in the name of «countering terrorism» («Ð°Ð´Ð¼Ð¸Ð½Ð¸Ñ�трациÑ� президента Обамы оказалаÑ�ÑŒ не в Ñ�оÑ�тоÑ�нии подкрепить Ñ�вои Ñ�лова конкретными дейÑ�твиÑ�ми, когда дело доходит до отчета о нарушениÑ�Ñ… прав человека, Ñ�овершенных во имÑ� «Ð±Ð¾Ñ€ÑŒÐ±Ñ‹ Ñ� терроризмом»).

Amnesty объ��н�ет �вою политику так: мы, мол, чаще пишем о развитых го�удар�твах, потому что положение дел в них �вл�ет�� ориентиром дл� в�его человече�тва. Бою�ь, что реальное объ��нение тут другое. Критиковать СШ� куда безопа�ней, чем критиковать на�то�щих людоедов. Да и �пон�оров дл� критики СШ� найти гораздо легче.

ЕÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ проÑ�таÑ� человечеÑ�каÑ� логика: волкодав — прав, людоед — нет. ЕÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ логика правозащитников: волкодав не прав, потому что он нарушил права людоеда. Ð� Ñ� людоеда мы Ñ�прашивать не будем.

Идеологи� международной бюрократии

Такое критичеÑ�кое отношение к Ñ�обÑ�твенной цивилизации в иÑ�тории Запада Ñ�ущеÑ�твовало не вÑ�егда. Ð’ XVII–XIX веках Европа завоевывала мир и вовÑ�е не переживала из-за нарушенных ею прав народов. Когда КортеÑ� увидел кровавые жертвоприношениÑ� ацтеков, он не впал в умиление по поводу «ÑƒÐ½Ð¸ÐºÐ°Ð»ÑŒÐ½Ñ‹Ñ… меÑ�тных обычаев», которые надо Ñ�охранить. Когда англичане отменили в Индии обычай Ñ�ожжениÑ� вдов, им не пришло в голову, что они нарушают права Ñ�тих вдов, желающих поÑ�ледовать за мужьÑ�ми.

ВремÑ�, когда Ñ�то отношение поÑ�вилоÑ�ÑŒ и, более того, Ñ�тало почти общепринÑ�тым диÑ�курÑ�ом длÑ� интеллектуальной Ñ�литы Запада, можно назвать Ñ�овершенно точно: Ñ�то 30-е годы, времÑ�, когда Сталин финанÑ�ировал Коминтерн и Ñ�троил планы завоеваниÑ� вÑ�его мира. Вот тогда-то в большом количеÑ�тве на Западе поÑ�вилиÑ�ÑŒ «Ð¿Ð¾Ð»ÐµÐ·Ð½Ñ‹Ðµ идиоты» (по выражению Ленина), которые обладали одним Ñ�транным качеÑ�твом: уÑ�ердно критикуÑ� «ÐºÑ€Ð¾Ð²Ð°Ð²Ñ‹Ð¹ буржуазный режим», они почему-то в упор не замечали ГулÐ�Га.

Это Ñ�транное интеллектуальное поветрие продолжилоÑ�ÑŒ и дальше, например, во времÑ� войны во Вьетнаме. ЛеваÑ� Ñ�лита изо вÑ�ех Ñ�ил обличала «Ð·Ð²ÐµÑ€Ñ�тва американÑ�кой военщины». Тот мелкий факт, что войну начали не американцы, а коммуниÑ�Ñ‚Ñ‹ и что длÑ� вьетконговцев Ñ�плошной террор был проÑ�то тактичеÑ�ким приемом, — левые как-то не замечали.

КлаÑ�Ñ�ичеÑ�ким примером тому может Ñ�лужить знаменитаÑ� фотографиÑ�, Ñ�деланнаÑ� фотографом Эдди Ð�дамÑ�ом. Ð�а ней вьетнамÑ�кий генерал Ð�гуен Ð�гок Лон пуÑ�кает пулю в Ñ�вÑ�занного вьетконговца Ð�гуен Ван Лема. ФотографиÑ� облетела веÑ�ÑŒ мир как Ñ�имвол жеÑ�токоÑ�ти империалиÑ�тов. Правда, Эдди Ð�дамÑ� потом раÑ�Ñ�казал, что вьетконговца убили, вытащив из дома, где он буквально за минуты перед Ñ�тим вырезал целую Ñ�емью, — но Ñ�то длÑ� левых было уже неважно.

Современное правозащитное движение на Западе идеологиче�ки выро�ло из крайних левых.

И е�ли и�ториче�ки крайние левые были пешками в руках тоталитарных режимов, то теперь либеральный фундаментализм �тал пешкой в руках террори�тов и людоедов.

Идеалы FARC, «Ð�ль-Каиды» или африканÑ�ких каннибалов очень отличаютÑ�Ñ� друг от друга. Одни хотÑ�Ñ‚ поÑ�троить коммунизм, другие — царÑ�тво Ð�ллаха, третьи хотÑ�Ñ‚ вернутьÑ�Ñ� к традиционным ценноÑ�Ñ‚Ñ�м в виде колдовÑ�тва и каннибализма. У них еÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ только одно общее: ненавиÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ к нормальному западному гоÑ�ударÑ�тву. Эту ненавиÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ значительнаÑ� чаÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ либеральных фундаменталиÑ�тов разделÑ�ет Ñ� террориÑ�тами.

«Ð¢Ð°Ðº, Ñ�обÑ�твенно, чего беÑ�покоитьÑ�Ñ�? — Ñ�проÑ�ите вы. — ЕÑ�ли «Ð±Ð¾Ñ€Ñ†Ñ‹ за мир» и «Ð¿Ð¾Ð»ÐµÐ·Ð½Ñ‹Ðµ идиоты» не Ñ�могли одолеть Запад, когда за их Ñ�пиной Ñ�тоÑ�ли могучие тоталитарные Ñ�пецÑ�лужбы, под Ñ�илу ли им Ñ�то Ñ�ейчаÑ�?»

 ÐŸÑ€Ð¾Ð±Ð»ÐµÐ¼Ð° заключаетÑ�Ñ� в том, что еще полвека назад «Ð±Ð¾Ñ€Ñ†Ñ‹ за мир» были в оÑ�новном идеалиÑ�тами, которых по мере надобноÑ�ти иÑ�пользовали тоталитарные режимы. СейчаÑ� «Ð±Ð¾Ñ€ÑŒÐ±Ð° за права человека» превратилаÑ�ÑŒ в филоÑ�офию целого клаÑ�Ñ�а — клаÑ�Ñ�а международной бюрократии.

«Ð�ефть в обмен на продовольÑ�твие»

Вот, знакомьтеÑ�ÑŒ, знатный борец за права человека ДÑ�ниÑ� Холидей, глава гуманитарной миÑ�Ñ�ии ООÐ� в Ираке, а потом — учаÑ�тник «Ñ„лотилии Свободы», пытавшейÑ�Ñ� прорвать израильÑ�кую блокаду Ñ�ектора Газа. ПоÑ�ле того как ООÐ� отменила программу «Ð�ефть в обмен на продовольÑ�твие», г-н Холидей Ñ�ложил Ñ� Ñ�ебÑ� полномочиÑ�, публично заÑ�вив, что ООÐ� и Джордж Буш занимаютÑ�Ñ� геноцидом против «Ð½ÐµÐ²Ð¸Ð½Ð½Ð¾Ð³Ð¾ наÑ�елениÑ� Ирака».

ПоÑ�ле Ñ�того г-н Холидей Ñ�нÑ�л фильм о 500 Ñ‚Ñ‹Ñ�Ñ�чах иракÑ�ких детей, которые умерли из-за нациÑ�та Буша. Когда журналиÑ�Ñ‚ ДÑ�вид ЭдвардÑ� Ñ�проÑ�ил борца за права человека ДÑ�ниÑ�а ХолидеÑ�, а не воровали ли лекарÑ�тва иракÑ�кие чиновники, Холидей даже возмутилÑ�Ñ�: «there’s no basis for that assertion at all» («Ð�ет никаких оÑ�нований длÑ� такого утверждениÑ�»).

 ÐšÐ¾Ð³Ð´Ð° журналиÑ�Ñ‚ ДÑ�вид ЭдвардÑ� Ñ�проÑ�ил, почему в то времÑ� когда иракÑ�кие дети умирают без лекарÑ�тв, на курируемых Холидеем Ñ�кладах ООÐ� Ñ�копилиÑ�ÑŒ деÑ�Ñ�тки Ñ‚Ñ‹Ñ�Ñ�ч тонн не розданных лекарÑ�тв, Холидей, не моргнув глазом, ответил, что Ñ�ти лекарÑ�тва надо давать в комплекÑ�е: «The warehouses have stores that cannot be used because they are waiting for other components that are blocked by the Sanctions Committee» («Ð�а Ñ�кладах еÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ запаÑ�Ñ‹, которые не могут быть иÑ�пользованы, потому что ждут компонентов, заблокированных Комитетом по Ñ�анкциÑ�м»).

Холидей был не единÑ�твенным бюрократом в ООÐ�, недовольным отменой программы «Ð�ефть в обмен на продовольÑ�твие». Его преемник, ХанÑ� фон Спронек, тоже ушел в отÑ�тавку, публично воÑ�кликнув: «ÐšÐ°Ðº долго еще гражданÑ�кое наÑ�еление Ирака будет подвергатьÑ�Ñ� наказанию за нечто, чего оно не Ñ�овершало?» Через два днÑ� поÑ�ле отÑ�тавки фон Спронека его примеру поÑ�ледовала глава World Food Programmе in Iran.

Странное дело. С точки зрениÑ� здравого Ñ�мыÑ�ла ответÑ�твенноÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ за наÑ�илие и нищету неÑ�ут те, кто Ñ�влÑ�етÑ�Ñ� причиной наÑ�илиÑ� и нищеты. Ð’ Ираке Ñ�то был Саддам ХуÑ�ейн. Ð�о гуманитарные бюрократы из ООÐ� поÑ�тупали другим образом: ответÑ�твенноÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ за проиÑ�ходÑ�щее в Ираке они возлагали на веÑ�ÑŒ мир, а не на кровавого диктатора, а Ñ�ами в Ñ�то времÑ� вмеÑ�те Ñ� кровавым диктатором пилили деньги в рамках программы «Ð�ефть в обмен на продовольÑ�твие».

И тут така� маленька� проблема: чтобы деньги можно было пилить, народ должен �традать.

Голод в Эфиопии

Голод в Эфиопии в �ередине 80-х вызвал необыкновенную активно�ть гуманитарных организаций. Только в 1985 году концерт Live Aid, в котором уча�твовали Боб Дилан, Мадонна, Queen, Led Zeppelin, �обрал в помощь голодающей Эфиопии 249 млн долларов. Концерт был организован Бобом Гелдофом, бывшим рок-певцом, �тавшим еще более изве�тным антрепренером, �пециализирующим�� на помощи голодающей �фрике. Еще �отни миллионов �обрала организаци� Christian Aid.

�ичему миллионы не помогли: от голода умерло �выше миллиона человек. � в марте 2010 года разразил�� �кандал: бывший �фиоп�кий м�тежник �регави Берхе, по��оривши�ь � бывшим главой м�тежников, а ныне главой Эфиопии Меле�ом Зенави, за�вил BBC, что 95% гуманитарной помощи пошло на закупку оружи�.

Его заÑ�вление вызвало бурю возмущениÑ�. Боб Гелдоф заÑ�вил, что в Ñ�ловах Берхе «Ð½ÐµÑ‚ ни грана правды». МакÑ� Пеберди, предÑ�тавитель Christian Aid, заÑ�вил, что помощь никак не могла быть украдена, и даже в краÑ�ках живопиÑ�ал, как он за наличные покупал зерно у торговцев.

В ответ один из боевиков, продававших у Пеберди зерно, ра��казал, как он притвор�л�� му�ульман�ким торговцем. Звали боевика Гебремедин �рай�. По �ловам �райи, под мешками � зерном лежали мешки � пе�ком, и наличные, которые �рай� получил за зерно, тут же были переданы на закупку оружи�.

Проблема голода в Эфиопии заключала�ь не только в том, что от него умерло �выше миллиона человек. �о в том, что и правитель�тво, и м�тежники намеренно пере�ел�ли людей, чтобы под предлогом их �траданий выжать больше денег из �КО. Получение денег от �КО было не �лед�твием, а целью �того намеренно у�троенного голода.

То же Ñ�амое проиÑ�ходит и в Ñ�екторе Газа. Ð¥Ð�ÐœÐ�С (а до него ООП — ОрганизациÑ� оÑ�вобождениÑ� ПалеÑ�тины) держит наÑ�еление в нищете, чтобы пользуÑ�Ñ�ÑŒ Ñ�той нищетой как моральным рычагом выбивать деньги у гуманитарных и бюрократичеÑ�ких организаций. Ð’ результате Ð¥Ð�ÐœÐ�С и Ð�КО Ñ�тановÑ�Ñ‚Ñ�Ñ� тем наÑ�оÑ�ом, которым накачивают деньги из мира в Ñ�ектор Газа, а нищета его наÑ�елениÑ� — атмоÑ�ферным давлением, благодарÑ� которому наÑ�оÑ� работает.

Пон�тно, что при таком положении дел HRW и другие �КО будут в�егда на �тороне Х�М�С.

Ведь е�ли го�подин Холидей и Ко предложат гуманитарную помощь народу Израил�, то их у�луги не примут. Защиту народа Израил� обе�печивает го�удар�тво Израиль, а не борцы за права человека. � го�удар�тво Израиль не заинтере�овано в том, чтобы превратить �вой народ в бомжей, � помощью не�ча�тий которых политиче�ка� �лита будет вымогать и пилить деньги.

Ча�ть и�теблишмента

Вот Ñ�то, пожалуй, Ñ�амое опаÑ�ное. Либеральные фундаменталиÑ�Ñ‚Ñ‹, точно так же как климатичеÑ�кие алармиÑ�Ñ‚Ñ‹, позиционируют Ñ�ебÑ� как противники иÑ�теблишмента. Ð�а Ñ�амом деле они давно Ñ�влÑ�ÑŽÑ‚Ñ�Ñ� интегрированной чаÑ�тью иÑ�теблишмента, при Ñ�том Ñ�амой злокачеÑ�твенной его чаÑ�тью — международной бюрократией.

Мы ча�то ругаем го�удар�тво и бюрократию. �о го�удар�тво, какое ни е�ть, заинтере�овано в защите �воих граждан и решении их проблем. Международна� бюрократи� не не�ет ответ�твенно�ти ни перед кем.

�ам говор�т, что гуманитарные организации помогают там, где е�ть голод и на�илие. �о на практике прои�ходит ровно обратное: там, куда приход�т гуманитарные организации, голод и на�илие дл�т�� вечно.

По�тому правитель�тва, пытающие�� �править�� � террори�тами, как в Колумбии, неизменно оказывают�� главным объектом критики защитников прав человека.

И, наоборот, Ñ�оюзниками Ð�КО Ñ�тановÑ�Ñ‚Ñ�Ñ� Ñ�амые Ñ�трашные режимы — такие как в Ñ�екторе Газа или в Эфиопии — не Ñ�поÑ�обные организовать в Ñ�воей Ñ�тране Ñ�кономику, но Ñ�поÑ�обные на организацию наÑ�илиÑ� и голода Ñ� целью получениÑ� денег от международного Ñ�ообщеÑ�тва.

Борьба за права человека привела к поÑ�влению нового вида терроризма: Ñ�то террориÑ�Ñ‚Ñ‹, которые, как Ð¥Ð�ÐœÐ�С, не Ñ�только Ñ�тремÑ�Ñ‚Ñ�Ñ� уничтожить чужих детей, Ñ�колько Ñ�тремÑ�Ñ‚Ñ�Ñ� Ñ�делать так, чтобы ответный израильÑ�кий удар уничтожил гораздо больше палеÑ�тинÑ�ких детей. Борьба за права человека привела к новому виду пÑ�евдогоÑ�ударÑ�тва: Ñ�то жуткие анклавы, управлÑ�емые чудовищными режимами, которые не выжили бы в нормальном мире и были бы завоеваны или уничтожены. Ð�о деньги от Ð�КО и запрет на войну против таких анклавов позволÑ�ÑŽÑ‚ держать их наÑ�еление в нечеловечеÑ�ких уÑ�ловиÑ�Ñ…, а их Ñ�лите — пользоватьÑ�Ñ� абÑ�олютной влаÑ�тью.


О�новной тези� human rights movement очень про�т. �адо защищать права человека, кем бы он ни был. Я должна �казать, что �тот тези� порочен по �воей �ути. Он противоречит о�новной ак�иоме человече�кого поведени�: зло должно быть наказано. Человек должен делать выбор.

Он противоречит в�ему, чему на� учат о герое, добре и зле мифы и литература. С точки зрени� прав человека Геракл не герой, а военный пре�тупник. Он не �облюдал права Лерней�кой гидры и права цар� Диомеда, �кармливавшего людей �воим лошад�м.

С точки зрениÑ� прав человека ОдиÑ�Ñ�ей — военный преÑ�тупник; без Ñ�уда убил Полифема, причем вторгшиÑ�ÑŒ на его, Полифема, территорию. Тезей, ПерÑ�ей, Зигфрид, Ð�Ñ�ицунÑ� — вÑ�е они преÑ�тупники. Гильгамеша надо Ñ�удить в Гааге, а принца Гамлета, убившего без Ñ�уда Ñ�воего отчима, внеÑ�ти в черные Ñ�пиÑ�ки Amnesty International.

В�ех, кого человече�тво называет геро�ми, правозащитники должны �читать военными пре�тупниками.

Защита прав человека Ñ�тавит креÑ�Ñ‚ на Ñ�амом понÑ�тии войны, ибо война — Ñ�то когда убивают без Ñ�уда. Это, конечно, хорошо, отказатьÑ�Ñ� от войны, но что делать, еÑ�ли от нее не отказываетÑ�Ñ� ваш противник? ЕÑ�ли мне не изменÑ�ет памÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ, Ñ�то не американÑ�кие шахиды на арабÑ�ких «Ð‘оингах» врезалиÑ�ÑŒ в Каабу, дело было немного наоборот.

ЕÑ�ли бы во времена Второй мировой Ñ�ущеÑ�твовал CNN, то Ñ�оюзники никогда бы не выиграли у Гитлера. «ÐŸÐ¾Ñ�ле дрезденÑ�ких бомбардировок Ñ� Ñ�кранов не Ñ�ходил бы ГеббельÑ� Ñ� трупами дрезденÑ�ких детей на руках», — заметил мне ехидно Гарри КаÑ�паров в чаÑ�тном разговоре.

Е�ли в��кую войну признавать нарушением прав человека, �то приводит к удивительному �лед�твию: виноватой �тановит�� защищающа��� �торона. Ведь, �огла�ите�ь, �то логично: е�ли не отвечать на нападение, то и войны не будет. Значит, виноваты не те, кто напал, а те, кто вздумал защищать��.

У либеральных фундаменталиÑ�тов благие намерениÑ�. Ð�о благими намерениÑ�ми вымощена дорога в ад. Мы 70 лет жили в Ñ�тране, у которой тоже были благие намерениÑ�. Эта Ñ�трана Ñ�троила коммунизм и обещала вÑ�ем беÑ�платное образование и беÑ�платную медицину. Ð�о в реальноÑ�ти беÑ�платнаÑ� медицина оборачивалаÑ�ÑŒ хлевом вмеÑ�то больницы. Ð�екоторые замечательные принципы в реальноÑ�ти оборачиваютÑ�Ñ� Ñ�воей противоположноÑ�тью. Принцип «Ð½Ð°Ð´Ð¾ защищать права каждого человека» — один из них.

�о �того мало. Очевидно, что е�ли �уда над тем или иным человеком не было, или нам кажет��, что права его были не �облюдены должным образом, то в отношении �того человека мы должны руковод�твовать�� здравым �мы�лом.

Ð�е тут-то было. Защита прав человека на деле превращаетÑ�Ñ� в защиту прав террориÑ�та. Правозащитники не руководÑ�твуютÑ�Ñ� ни здравым Ñ�мыÑ�лом, ни реальноÑ�тью. С их точки зрениÑ�, вÑ�е, что говорит террориÑ�Ñ‚, — Ñ�то заведомаÑ� правда, а вÑ�е, что говорит гоÑ�ударÑ�тво, — Ñ�то ложь.

В результате террори�ты �оздают целые подразделени� дл� врань� правозащитникам. Более того, они мен�ют тактику. Е�ли раньше террори�ты и�пользовали �об�твенных женщин и детей в каче�тве живого щита, то теперь они намеренно вызывают на них огонь. Теперь целью Х�М�С, размещающего �вои ракеты на крышах школ и многоквартирных домов, �вл�ет�� �делать так, чтобы израильт�не ответным ударом по огневой точке уничтожили как можно больше граждан�ких лиц.

Почему правозащитные Ð�КО верÑ�Ñ‚ любому утверждению террориÑ�та? Почему они верÑ�Ñ‚ члену «Ð�ль-Каиды» Моаззаму Беггу, хотÑ� он заведомо врет?

Потому что правозащитное движение Ñ�тало идеологией международной бюрократии. Ð’ Ñ�екторе Газа пÑ�тилетние дети учатÑ�Ñ� маршировать Ñ� автоматами; им показывают мультфильмы о том, как надо убивать евреев. Ð¥Ð�ÐœÐ�С держит наÑ�еление Ñ�ектора в полной завиÑ�имоÑ�ти; любой бизнеÑ� обложен данью в пользу Ð¥Ð�ÐœÐ�С, во времÑ� операции «Ð›Ð¸Ñ‚ой Ñ�винец» члены Ð¥Ð�ÐœÐ�С не подбили ни одного израильÑ�кого танка, не Ñ�били ни одного вертолета, но они иÑ�пользовали Ñ�то времÑ� длÑ� того, чтобы ареÑ�товать и казнить Ñ�выше Ñ�та членов ФÐ�ТХ. Они нашли времÑ� длÑ� того, чтобы пытать Ñ�тих людей в Ñ�воей штаб-квартире, уÑ�троенной в гоÑ�питале в Рафахе, откуда выгнали больных и раненых.

Х�М�С требует уничтожени� го�удар�тва Израиль и в�ех евреев и говорит, что е�ли Израиль не �огла�ен, �то означает, что он не �клонен к компроми��ам. Почему же защитники прав человека обыкновенно �то�т на �тороне Х�М�С, а не на �тороне Израил�?

Потому что они вме�те � Х�М�С о�ваивают деньги.

Защита прав человека, Ñ�тав общеупотребительным диÑ�курÑ�ом, вошла в удивительное противоречие Ñ�о здравым Ñ�мыÑ�лом. Книги и фильмы учат наÑ� одному, новоÑ�ти — другому. Ð’ новоÑ�Ñ‚Ñ�Ñ… нам Ñ�ообщают, что «Ð“арри Поттер убил лорда Вольдеморта без Ñ�уда и Ñ�ледÑ�твиÑ�» и что «Ð² ходе войны Поттера Ñ� Вольдемортом погибли Ñ‚Ñ‹Ñ�Ñ�чи людей и произошли деÑ�Ñ�тки Ñ�амоубийÑ�тв и катаÑ�троф». Ð�е Ñ�читаÑ� нужным упоминать, что за катаÑ�трофы-то отвечает Вольдеморт.

Терроризм — Ñ�то новаÑ� разновидноÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ варварÑ�тва. Варвар уважает только Ñ�илу, поÑ�тому цивилизациÑ� должна быть Ñ�ильнее варвара. ЕÑ�ли она будет проÑ�то богаче или безопаÑ�ней — Ñ�то ничего не значит. ЦивилизациÑ� должна быть Ñ�ильней.

Ð�ам говорÑ�Ñ‚: «ÐœÑ‹ должны защищать права любого человека, потому что еÑ�ли Ñ�егоднÑ� правительÑ�тво нарушит права Ð�нвара аль-Ð�влаки, то завтра оно нарушит ваши права».

Ð�о, гоÑ�пода, Ñ�то демагогиÑ�! «Ð¡ÐµÐ³Ð¾Ð´Ð½Ñ� он танцует джаз, а завтра родину продаÑ�Ñ‚». ЕÑ�ли Гарри Поттер уничтожил без Ñ�удебного процеÑ�Ñ�а лорда Вольдеморта, Ñ�то не значит, что завтра он иÑ�пепелит без Ñ�уда и Ñ�ледÑ�твиÑ� Гермиону Грейнджер.

Ð�ам говорÑ�Ñ‚: «ÐšÐ°Ð¶Ð´Ñ‹Ð¹ человек, даже очень плохой, имеет право на Ñ�уд». Ð�о в Ñ�итуации, когда Ñ�уд невозможен, Ñ�то оборачиваетÑ�Ñ� безнаказанноÑ�тью террориÑ�тов.

Горе миру, в котором вме�то героев, борющих�� �о злом, о�танут�� одни правозащитники, борющие�� � геро�ми.

«ÐšÐ¾Ð¼Ð¿Ñ€Ð¾Ð¼Ð¸Ñ�Ñ� по отношению к злу еÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ преÑ�тупление», — Ñ�казал ТомаÑ� Манн по поводу фашизма. Добавлю: защита прав лорда Вольдеморта еÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ нонÑ�енÑ�.

Волкодав — прав. Людоед — нет.

Ждем откликов

Юли� Латынина

Posted on 03/28/2011 8:09 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
Monday, 28 March 2011
A Musical Interlude: Washboard Blues (Paul Whiteman Orch., voc. Hoagy Carmichael)

Listen here.

Posted on 03/28/2011 8:54 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
Monday, 28 March 2011
New APT film: "Our Lost Sons" - The Carlos Bledsoe Nashville Radicalization Connections

Charles Jacobs and the team at Americans for Peace and Tolerance have produced a stunning film of Melvin Bledsoe's important story about the tragic outcome of his son's Islamization while at Tennessee State University - the murder of Army recruiter, Pvt. William Long at a Little Rock mall in July, 2009. The film is entitled, "Losing our sons- The Nashville Connection".  The film portrays the riveting and important story of his son's conversion to radical Islam via the Nashville connections  -Tennessee State University, the Islamic Center of Nashville, and the Al Farooq Mosque - that sent Carlos to terrorist training in Yemen. The APT film team captures the transformation of a son who grew up in Memphis in a happy American Baptist home that venerated Martin Luther King only to be transformed into a Jihadi who venerated death as a Jihad for Allah following the barbaric  example of his Messenger Mohammed.   

This APT film comes after the intial Peter King hearings on radicali Islamic recruitment of home grown terrorist was dismissed  by ranking minority members of his Homeland Security Committee as insensitive to American Muslims. Melvin Bledsoe's testimony at Congressman King's Homeland Security Committee Hearing illustrated graphically Carlos' descent into barbarity and hatred of Infidels, Christians and Jews. After his son's conversion to Islam, he took the name of Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad. These same Congressional Democrats trivialized Melvin Bledsoe's testimony as anecdotal, of little relevence, but, interesting. One Congresswoman on the panel had the effrontery to call Bledsoe's testimony and the conduct of Rep. King's hearing as giving aide and comfort to Al Qaeda. In our opinion Melvin Bledsoe's testimony is an important lesson and cautionary tale about how youths can be ensnared into a death cult that transforms them into savage, insensitive killers.

Watch this APT trailer and ponder why the liberal media in Memphis and Nashville and elsewhere in the country gave this Bledsoe story short shrift. Meanwhile they adulate documentaries like CNN's Unwelcome: Muslims Next Door about alleged bigotry by Middle Tennesseans against local Muslims and tomorrow's US Senate hearing on alleged Muslim hatred chaired by Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois -see this report from Investigative Project report on Terrorism.

Posted on 03/28/2011 9:46 PM by Jerry Gordon

Most Recent Posts at The Iconoclast
Search The Iconoclast
Enter text, Go to search:
The Iconoclast Posts by Author
The Iconoclast Archives
sun mon tue wed thu fri sat
   1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31   

Via: email  RSS