CBS News reporter Lara Logan, moments before being sexually
assaulted
by a mob of about 200 men in Tahrir Square, Feb. 15.
Like
it or not, Logan has become a symbol of the shortcomings
of
what the West thought was Egypt's moderate form of Islam.
Diário de
Notícias, Portugal
'Confession of an Islamophobe'
"I confess: my name is Alberto and I'm a little 'Islamophobic.' I don’t really know why. … Perhaps it's because no one can say Sharia treats minorities worse than dogs, given that, not satisfied with soiling their own kind, Muslims also believe that dogs are an emanation of Satan and so subject the creatures to unspeakable cruelty. … Perhaps it's because a considerable number of Muslims are offended by the freedoms that the West took centuries to achieve."
By Alberto Gonçalves
Translated By Brandi Miller and Patrícia Viana de Lemos
Atop a barricade in Tahrir Square, Feb. 11: The world was entranced with Egypt's bloodless coup against Hosni Mubarak, but the sexual assault on Lara Logan has cast a dark light on what lies beneath the surface of Egyptian society, particularly its treatment of women.
In Tahrir Square, 200 citizens
celebrated Mubarak’s fall by violating or, to use the euphemism en vogue,
sexually assaulting, American journalist Lara Logan (from 60 Minutes). A
source from Logan’s station CBS confirms that these pacifists thirsty
for freedom (and women, apparently) yelled the word “Jew!” during the act, a
detail omitted from the vast majority of the news stories on the episode.
[Editorial Note: Originally
from South Africa, Lara Logan, the chief foreign affairs correspondent for CBS
News, is not in fact, Jewish].
One can understand the
omission. Optimism in the face of evolving developments in Egypt is such that
any dissonant note is liable to be misunderstood. I, for one, was about to
suggest to those who compare the Cairo uprising with that of April 25 [Portugal revolution of 1974] and the
end of Communism in Eastern Europe, to count the number of reporters who were
raped - excuse me - sexually assaulted, by crowds in Lisbon in 1974 or Budapest
in 1989. But I gave up the idea. The vaguest reticence to agree on the
intrinsic purity of ecstatic Muslims quickly raises insinuations of
“Islamophobia” and “racism.”
As a matter of fact, I
don’t see how a negative opinion of a particular religious belief could indicate
racism. As for the belief itself, it seems a bit of confusing to accuse those
who are skeptics of an aversion to Islam, while ensuring that the Egyptian
revolt remains completely secular. In parentheses, it should be noted that the
presence of a pervert of the theocratic kind leading a reform of the constitution
guarantees an unblemished secularization.
Outside the parentheses, I
confess: my name is Alberto and I'm a little “Islamophobic.” I don’t really
know why. Perhaps it's because in my lifetime, no other religion has inspired so
much killing (have you noticed that there are very few attacks claimed by
Catholics, Baptists, Jews, Buddhists or Hindus?) Perhaps it’s because no other
relevant religion punishes apostates with a death sentence. Maybe it’s because
countries subjected to the word of the Prophet devote their laws and customs to
disdaining (and worse) women, homosexuals, Niggas, Whites and people of other
faiths.
Perhaps it's because no one
can say Sharia law treats
minorities worse than dogs, given that, not satisfied with soiling their own
kind, Muslims also believe that dogs are an emanation of Satan and so subject
the creatures to unspeakable cruelty. Perhaps it's because some Islamic spiritual
leaders were convicted allies of Hitler at the time of the first Holocaust, and
some of their successors make a living demanding the second.
Perhaps it's because the presumed
“moderate” Muslim majority are discrete or missing in the condemnation of immoderate
Muslims. Perhaps it's because, in the few democratic opportunities available to them,
so-called “moderate” Muslims insist on voting for less moderate parties (as in
Algeria and Gaza, for example). Perhaps it's because a considerable number of
Muslims feel offended by the freedoms that the West took centuries to achieve,
including the critical but unappreciated fundamental right to mockery.
Perhaps it's because countless Muslim immigrants to the West
reject any attempt to integrate, and instead, seek to impose their respective
(admirable) traditions. Perhaps it's because, in the West, Islamic fervor has
won the sympathy of the totalitarian spirit of the right (I’ve seen skinheads
parading with Palestinian headscarves and demonstrating in favor of Iran) and, today in
particular, the left.
Posted by WORLDMEETS.US
That’s it. This
is the minutiae that determine my phobia, which, deep down, is a schism with little
foundation. A prejudice, almost. It happens that many of those who, on this
side of Byzantium, find such intolerance intolerable, are also lavish in our
unpunished display of anti-Christian and Anti-Jewish phobias (the popular
“anti-Zionism,” for example). And this masochistic, fearful and ecumenical
disparity of double standards constitutes, at bottom, recognition of the
confrontation that sets us against Islam - even the secular and courteous kind in
Tahrir Square - and the biggest sign that they [Muslims] are winning by forfeit. Guess
who's losing.
