Sunday, October 22, 2006

Fuck The Washington Post!

This morning my friend Always On Watch sent me a link to an editorial in the Washington Post called "How I Came To Love The Veil". The article written by one Yvonne Ridley was a defense of the practice of wearing the burqa or niqab, from the perspective of a Western woman, converted to Islam.

I didn't choose to post on the subject, however, because across the page the Washington Post also ran an editorial, called "Clothes Aren't The Issue", discussing why Muslims believe it is ok to beat one's wife. I thought to myself, "Ok, so they are, at least, making an attempt to get the word out about the dangers of Islam."Man, was I wrong. I knew that I knew that name Yvonne Ridley from somewhere. It was so familiar.Thank God for Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs:

For a special article on “Islam and Women,” the Washington Post today gives column space to an utterly deranged, hard-core Islamofascist sympathizer, Yvonne Ridley—without identifying her as anything but the “political editor of Islam TV.”

Ridley’s premise is that Islam respects women much more than the Western world.I think the mainstream media can’t possibly surprise me any more. Then they do something like this.

Yvonne Ridley is a member of George Galloway’s RESPECT party, and has written numerous essays defending Islamic terrorism. She described those murdered in last year’s terrorist attacks in Jordan as “collaborators.” She wrote, “I think I’d rather put up with a brother like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi any day than have a traitor or sell-out for a father, son or grandfather.”

She described Shamil Basaev, the mastermind of the massacre of Russian school children at Beslan, as “a Shaheed,” or martyr.

Contact the ombudsman of the Washington Post at 202-334-7582 or at

This is actually a perfect example of something the mainstream media does all the time, and that is attempt to deal with an issue by splitting the difference with evil. What they have done in the case of referring to a woman such as Ridley as some sort of expert is the equivalent setting up a debate on the policies of a Democratic Republic by referring to Thomas Jefferson on one side and Adolf Hitler on the other.

Yvonne Ridley does not deserve to be given a part in the national debate at all. If you think that is an extreme thing to say (after all, don't all human beings deserve to have their voice heard), then tell me if you think David Duke deserves to be a part of our national dialogue. Should the Washington Post runs editorials from him, and refer to him as a former candidate for the Senate?No, that would be dishonest, right? In fact, in this case, the Washington Post has moved beyond dishonesty, and into the territory of aiding and abetting evil.

I wonder how the people at the Washington Post would feel if they had to be confronted by the mothers and fathers of the dead children from the Beslan Massacre. Would they feel compfortable knowing that they had printed the words of such a woman as if she were to be treated as some sort of authority, rather than the insanely evil person she is?