by Jack Lee
One thing that keeps coming up is why hasn’t the news media given this much coverage? The stock answer is nobody wants to contribute to provoking or stereotyping Muslims.
This vicious attack makes Muslim men/Egyptians look really, really bad. There was just way too many men present and involved in some way. Hundreds of random men were inciting, some were watching and did nothing, some were pinching, some were punching or hitting with sticks so this can’t be taken as anything except what it was, a cultural thing. A mean, bigoted, blind hate for Jews and an acceptance of attacking and sexually humiliating white women for sport when the opportunity permitted it. It shows them to be primitive and barbaric and our Mainstream Media doesn’t want to expose this side of Islamic men in Arab countries. It’s not PC and they are afraid to do it. What media liberal wants to get a fatwah calling for their beheading? However, can you imagine the media discussions we would be having if that attack had happened at CPAC?
Before I let this go….where’s the outrage by our feminists who march on Washington at every perceived slight? Where are those pit bulls now? (Libby…are you reading this?)
The feminists seem to pick and choose who they will protest against. More about politics than the safety of women.
Where were they when former president Clinton was accused of rape, where were they when he was messing with Lewinski.
The Feminists were adamant that Office “flirting” was forbidden, A female employee could be intimidated into compliance for fear of losing her job, especially if the “aggressor” was in a superior position.
___________
Who was the congressman in the 1970s\1980s that was accused of bad behavior by Boxer, she was screaming untill he resigned, as it turns out the allegations by her were false.
best I can recall alledgedly the incident happened on a ship??
Boxer is a major player when it comes to harassment. She led the charge against Senator Packwood and was one of seven who marched on the Senate to demand hearings against Clarence Thomas. When chargers were brought against Bill Clinton this “warrior” for women’s rights suddenly lost her tongue, as did all of the leading feminists.
The thing that makes this act particularly distasteful to us, compared to a similar incident of gang rape in America, is the underlying cultural difference…man as beast regarding women. Instead of a single affront to our sensibilities we have three: 1. The second class status of women generally, 2. The attitude that such behaviors are acceptable, even honorable, and 3. The assault & rape.
I recall all that you mentioned but even before Packwood, there was an outrageous allegation, the incident was talked about for along time, just cannot recall details.
Boxer is on eof the most despicable females in the senate..
Harriet, assuming your talking about Monica L, please keep in mind that what Clinton did was consensual. He was in trouble for lying, and yes, that in itself was despicable. What should the feminist have gotten up in arms about? Lying? Tina, the thing with Thomas was that the liberals knew he was going to be a right wing yes man (which is exactly what he has been) so they were trying to stop his approval anyway they could. The right would have done the same thing if the shoe was on the other foot. And Jack, I completely agree with most of what you said here. We are a bunch of wimps when it comes to calling the mid east culture what it really is….evil! Can’t say I agree about the “liberal media” thing.
Thanks for weighing in on this one Joe, your comments are always appreciated. The MM comment was actually less subjective than you might think. I know conservatives always feel like the media is giving them less than a fair shake, but in a few independent studies it was actually shown to be true. I can’t recall those studies off hand, but they were collegiate level studies and yes, there really was a media bias. I found that interesting and vindicated my own feelings.
Harriet, assuming your talking about Monica L, please keep in mind that what Clinton did was consensual.
Hi Joe, actually the liberal women AKA feminists did not care if the act was consensual, They objected to any CEO anywhere, approaching a female employee, they “attacked” a few men in positions of authority who were having relationships with employees, usually the girl in question reported them when the relationship ended as he was more likely married.
Packwood as mentioned by Tina was “outed” as having an affair 25 years previous, The liberals did not like him as he was politically very conservative.
Good points Harriet.
Jack–“One thing that keeps coming up is why hasn’t the news media given this much coverage?”
What important news outlets do you know of that have not covered this story?
What would be the appropriate amount of coverage, in your opinion, given what little information we currently have about the situation?
“The stock answer is nobody wants to contribute to provoking or stereotyping Muslims.”
I suppose that could be the “stock answer,” for someone who is extremely lazy and doesn’t actually watch or read the news that much. Or if you’re high on a substance that is causing you to envision an alternate reality wherein Muslims are not consistently stereotyped in the media. Most Americans, on the other hand, know that whenever they see a Muslim on the teevee, they are usually going to see people blowing up shit. To be fair, a big part of that is that there ARE large and powerful groups of Muslims who are currently blowing up a lot of shit. But they are not the majority, nor are they anywhere close. So, yeah, “stereotyping Muslims” is something that people should avoid contributing to. There are plenty of ways to report on this story without stereotyping; your preferred angle is not one of them.
“This vicious gang rape makes Muslim men/Egyptians look really, really bad.”
No, it makes rapists look really, really bad. And if the rapists were Muslims (not sure if this information has been released yet), then it makes their particular brand of Islam look quite bad. But then, we all know already that the subset of Islam that condones rape and oppresses women is horrible, and must be stopped. This is not an un-PC opinion, and it’s not one that is somehow unrepresented by the mainstream media.
Also, given Logan’s views, it’s highly possible that at least some of the people involved in the attack were pro-Mubarak supporters, so this might not even be the work of radical Islamists. I’m not saying that because I <3 Radical Islam, it's just that for whatever reason, the details have been kept from the press for now. Given Logan's ordeal, there are many logical reasons for this other than "political correctness."
"Hundreds of random men were inciting, some were watching and did nothing, some were raping, some were punching or giving cover and so this can't be taken as anything except what it was, a cultural thing."
I agree that the extreme male chauvinist culture in many Middle East countries definitely contributes to the frequency and intensity of such horrendous acts of violence. Cultural change is definitely needed. However, stereotyping everyone within the culture is extremely counter-productive to enacting such change.
"It shows them to be primitive and barbaric and our Mainstream Media doesn't want to expose this side of Islamic men in Arab countries."
As I pointed out before, this statement is just ridiculous. You can see the barbaric side of radical Islam every single day, on every single news channel. If a reporter was afraid of talking about this subject, they wouldn't be assigned any stories about the Middle East whatsoever.
"However, can you imagine the media discussions we would be having if that rape had happened at CPAC?"
Good lord, Jack. No one but Quentin would ever think this would happen at a gathering of American politicians and pundits, but since you brought up the hypothetical...yes, people would be talking about this more if it happened at CPAC, because it would be more shocking. That may sound insensitive, as sexual assault should always be considered shocking no matter who it happens to or where. But the fact is, we hear about things like this happening in the Middle East all the time. We are almost desensitized to it. This event is more newsworthy to us because it happened to an American. But yeah, if in the highly unlikely event it were a bunch of American conservatives who did something like this, of course it would be reported on more, and we would need to have a huge national debate about how something like this could happen in our own culture.
"Before I let this go....where's the outrage by our feminists who march on Washington at every perceived slight? Where are those pit bulls now? (Libby...are you reading this?)"
Other than Libby, which feminists are you talking about? And where do you expect to see their views on this subject represented? The feminist blogosphere, which has pretty much replaced mainstream organizations such as NOW as far as relevance to the actual feminist movement, has been all over this story.
Joe: “Tina, the thing with Thomas was that the liberals knew he was going to be a right wing yes man (which is exactly what he has been) so they were trying to stop his approval anyway they could.”
Joe that’s the most lame excuse for what was a trumped up show trial, an egregious abuse of power.
The right has NEVER treated a liberal jurist with such contempt and disrespect, so no, they would not do the same thing.
Thomas is a brilliant man and a highly qualified jurist. He is no more “yes man” than any of the leftist judges. Were he a leftist judge, however you would now be accused of being racist…funny that didn’t matter at all in this case.
It is not the job of the Senators to stop approval “any way they can”. It is their job to make an appraisal and vote yea or nay.
Joe you didn’t adress this question to me but I’d like to respond to it anyway. You asked: “What should the feminist have gotten up in arms about? Lying?”
Bill Clinton was a serial abuser of women. Several women came forward to testify to his abuse of them and both the feminists and the press had nothing to say about it except to excuse and defend him. The record of their response to men in general on this issue makes it clear that they covered for him like cowards. Some even condoned his behavior thinking it fun and funny never considering that his was the face that represented America around the entire world. As a mature adult woman I find his behavior while President of the United States incredibly inappropriate and demneaning to the office. Harriet is exactly right. Feminists are not interested when the abuser is a democrat.
Tina, I’m not excusing what the liberals did to Thomas, I’m just saying that is why they did it (in my view of course). I think the term is “dirty politics”.
“Joe that’s the most lame excuse for what was a trumped up show trial, an egregious abuse of power.
The right has NEVER treated a liberal jurist with such contempt and disrespect, so no, they would not do the same thing.”
What about what the right did to the Clintons with the Whitewater investigation? Memory is, they found nothing. And Kenneth Star and his 125 million dollar investigation….that was not an egregious use of power?
Joe, The Clintons, along with their allies in Arkansas, brought the Whitewater investigation on themselves. Although there was evidence to suggest their involvement the conclusion was that they did not have enough evidence to convict “beyond a reasonble doubt”. That doesn’t mean there wasn’t evidence of their involvement of course. Destruction of records may have been a significant reason for that. (Just as it was with the documents that Sandy Burger stole from the National Archives and destroyed).
But there were convictions in the Whitewater probe:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E01E6DF103BF932A1575AC0A9669C8B63&pagewanted=all
List of convictions as a result of the Whitewater investigation (15):
1) Webster Hubbell: Bill Clinton friend and political ally; Hillary Clinton Rose Law Firm partner: embezzlement; fraud; two felony convictions (Wall Street Journal “Whither Whitewater?” October 18, 1995)
2) Jim Guy Tucker: fraud; three felony convictions (Wall Street Journal “Second-Term Stall” February 11, 1997; Associated Press “Tucker Pleads Guilty to Cable Fraud” February 20, 1998)
3) William J. Marks Sr.: Jim Guy Tucker business partner; one conspiracy conviction (Associated Press “Whitewater Defendant Pleads Guilty” August 28, 1997)
4) Jim McDougal: Bill and Hillary Clinton friend, banker, and political ally: eighteen felony convictions (Wall Street Journal “Immunize Hale” May 29, 1996)
5) Susan McDougal: Bill and Hillary Clinton friend; former wife of Jim McDougal: four felony convictions (Wall Street Journal “Immunize Hale” May 29, 1996)
6) David Hale: Bill and Hillary Clinton friend, banker, and political ally: two felony convictions of conspiracy and mail fraud (Wall Street Journal “The Arkansas Machine Strikes Back” March 19, 1996)
7) Chris Wade: Whitewater real estate broker; two felony convictions (Wall Street Journal “Hard Evidence From a Federal Investigator” August 10, 1995)
8) Stephen Smith: former Governor Clinton aide; one conviction (Wall Street Journal “Hard Evidence From a Federal Investigator” August 10, 1995)
9) Larry Kuca: Madison real estate agent; fraudulent loans (Wall Steet Journal “Hard Evidence From a Federal Investigator” August 10, 1995)
10) Robert Palmer: Madison appraiser; one conspiracy felony conviction (Wall Street Journal “Hale Predicts Hillary Conviction” October 21, 1996)
11) Neal Ainley: Perry County Bank president; embezzled bank funds for Clinton campaign; two misdemeanor convictions (Wall Street Journal “Arkansas Bank Shot” May 4, 1995)
12) John Latham: Madison Bank CEO; bank fraud conviction (Wall Street Journal “Smoke Without Fire” January 12, 1996)
13) John Haley: attorney for Jim Guy Tucker; misdemeanor guilty plea; tax fraud (Associated Press “Tucker Pleads Guilty to Cable Fraud” February 20, 1998)
14) Eugene Fitzhugh: Whitewater defendant, pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor count of trying to bribe David Hale; is appealing a ten month prison sentence (The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, “Whitewater Defendants” February 22, 1998)
15) Charles Matthews: Whitewater defendant, pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor counts of bribery, served fourteen months of a sixteen month prison sentence (The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, “Whitewater Defendants” February 22, 1998)
Kenneth Starr was doing his job, working on behalf of the American people. It might have cost a lot less if the Clintons had been more forthcoming in handing over documents and if Susan McDougal hadn’t played coy with all of her contempt of court shenanigans.
The Washington Post reported these key points about this investigation:
See also this article relating to destroyed records:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F00E3D81139F932A25754C0A960958260
I’m not saying that Republicans weren’t happy to fascilitate these investigations whenever and wherever they could. I am saying that the Clintons and their “friends” gave prosecutors plenty of reasons to investigate.
Asking whether it was worth the money is the wrong question. The question that would have mattered is, why was this man (this couple) not investigated prior to the election? I can only imagine what might have been the headlines had the press given the Clintons the same type of examination they gave Sarah Palin. I don’t think we have ever had another person in modern times rise to the President of the United States with such questionable past associations and blatant proclivities.
My apologies to Jack, you and our readers for veering so far off topic.