CBS reporter raped and beaten by Muslim men.

[Sukerkin]

Thanks EH - partially you speak of things I already knew i.e. the general background of the Near and Middle East and the tales of the humane religion of peace (I'd take my supply of salt with me on that particular journey). After all, I was a historian .

What I do not know about is the various threads and schisms of Islam and when the revisionist messages of 'death to the infidel' began to flame. That latter is, as I thought, very recent.

Thank you for taking the trouble to dig that up for me.

 

[chrispillertkd]

What I do not know about is the various threads and schisms of Islam and when the revisionist messages of 'death to the infidel' began to flame. That latter is, as I thought, very recent.

Well, kind of. But since the beginning Islam has viewed the world as divided into the dar-al Harb and the dar-al Islam, the House of War and the House of Submission. Interestingly, the dar-al Harb is also referred to as the dar-al Garb, that is, the House of the West. Probably not exactly a coincidence.

The dar-al Harb are those lands that are not under Shari'ah, have not had some kind of non aggression treaty with Islam and/or are not part of the dar-al Islam. In the dar-al Islam non Muslims are considered dhimmis and are second class citizens who are forced to abide by several rules which are often designed to humiliate them. Wearing distinctive clothing that identifies one as a non-Muslim, not being able to wear other clothing that is usually associated with the Muslim inhabitants of a certain country, not being able to build a house taller than those of Muslims in the same community, not being able to build a church taller than a local mosque, not being able to do even normal upkeep on churches or other houses of worship, having to hang identifying pictures or signs on their house so others knew non-Muslims lived there, and, of course, being forced to pay the jizya (the special tax that was levied for the privilege of not abandoning one's own faith).

Not being able to carry weapons for one's own self-protection is a very common prohibition that dhimmis must face, as well. That means relying totally on the local Muslim authorities for their personal safety. This protection was known to fail at times and there have been several slaughters of dhimmis throughout history. Likewise, the murder of a dhimmis by a non-Muslim carries no death penalty according to many (though not all; I can think of one off hand) Muslim schools of jurisprudence.

Bernard Lewis points out that the development of what we face now with regards to Islam began after the defeat of the Muslims at the battle of Lepanto in 1571. It was at this turning point that Muslim culture and learning began a steady decline and the Western way of warfare, learning, and culture came to ascendency even over traditional Muslim methods. The culmination came when Turkey was founded as a secular state by Ataturk with its laws based not on Shari'ah but the Swiss Constitution (and its laws governing religion having more in common with those in post-Revolutionary France than any Muslim country). Ataturk himself was the one who abolished the Caliphate in 1922. This was to have unforeseen consequences which we are dealing with now.

The Caliphate was an icon of the glory of Islam and reached back to the earliest days of the religion being founded in the days after Muhammad's death. Its abolishment ended the Muslim ideal of a single leader who wielded both political and religious authority at the head of a single Muslim community. Indeed, any attemtp to view Islam solely as a religious institution ignores not only its own teachings but its history, as well. Islam has always seen itself as a political community as well as a religious one. There is no separation of Church and State in Islam because there is no Church in Islam.

With the abolishment of the Caliphate the normal means of waging jihad changed. The normal means of doing so was under the authority of the legitimate ruler, in the case of Sunni Islam that is the Caliph (for the Shi'as it's the Imam, but that's a whole different matter). In the normal order of things, Jihad was a collective responsibility. Some Muslims would directly take part in combat, others would engage in support roles, still others would engage in jihad by somply going about their lives and being the best Muslims they could be.

With no Caliph jihad must take place under the emergency conditions that Islamic Jurispridence schools have developed over the centuries. Under these conditions jihad is an individual responsibility with each Muslim in the immediate area of conflict being required to fight. This emergency jihad also does away with the required rules and regulations that govern combat including how combat was carried out, by whom, who was considered a non-combatant, etc. and most importantly for this conversation who had the authority to call for jihad in the first place. The emergency form of jihad does away with all of the traditional distinctions the jurists made. Not just able bodied men but the sick, women and even children are responsible for jihad. Not just the members of the invading army were to be attacked but every non-Muslim was a potential target. What is more, it is no impossible for the normal method of jihad to be called since there no longer is a central authority figure in Islam since the Caliphate has been abolished.

What we are dealing with with much of the Muslim terrorists is a conception of jihad that has developed in the last 100-125 years or so. It views the dar-al Islam as any area where there is a majority of Muslims and/or which was once a part of the historic dar al-Islam. Any non Muslim countries within these historic confines, as well as any other states that support them, are seen as aggressors. With the erasing of the usual lines of distinction because of the "emergency state" of jihad (which has existed much longer) is that any and all non-Muslims from a country that supports or is an allay with a country in a "traditionally Muslim" area are now legitimate targets and may be attacked in any way possible. Which should shed some light on why the U.S. and Israel aren't exactly popular in the Mid-East. (The whole oil thing is really secondary, IMNSHO.)

This view of jihad and the dar al-Islam leaves little room for a more historical view of how jihad was carried out or of tolerance for "people of the book," that is Christians and Jews (although, truth be told, some of the praising for Islamic tolerance of non-Muslims is a bit on the exaggerated side). Additionally, with no Caliph anyone in a position of authority in Islam can issue a fatwah calling for jihad, as long as such a war can be described in defensive terms (which is why Bin Laden always paints the U.S. as the aggressor). Fortunately, since there is no Caliph, anyone is also free to ignore such a fatwah. But that situation is definitely a two-edged sword.

Pax,

Chris

 

[Empty Hands]

...the tales of the humane religion of peace (I'd take my supply of salt with me on that particular journey). After all, I was a historian .

It's comparative, of course. Laws that governed non-Muslims, as Chris has pointed out, would be intolerable today. Of course, during that same time period, the Church in Spain was forcibly converting Jews and Muslims, and eventually made those converts and their descendants (conversos) the primary target of the Inquisition. The Muslims come out better by comparison, not by modern sensibilities.

 

[Flea]

To address the question posed in the original link, I think CBS buried the story out of respect for Logan. She probably asked them to. Who in their right mind would want their employer to literally tell the world that they had been brutally beaten and gangraped by an angry mob?

When you have a very public job like hers you know that having a very public personal life is a risk you take. But nobody should be forced to go public with something like that. I applaud CBS for their tact and discretion. It's a shame the other networks couldn't have that kind of decency.

 

[granfire]

To address the question posed in the original link, I think CBS buried the story out of respect for Logan. She probably asked them to. Who in their right mind would want their employer to literally tell the world that they had been brutally beaten and gangraped by an angry mob?

When you have a very public job like hers you know that having a very public personal life is a risk you take. But nobody should be forced to go public with something like that. I applaud CBS for their tact and discretion. It's a shame the other networks couldn't have that kind of decency.

Well, it's news.

I am not sure of the merit of it. Or value, or importance, however you want to call it. maybe it's an important reminder that life isn't all happy-happy-joy-joy during a revolution.

Then again, does it have any importance in the bigger picture?

 

[yorkshirelad]

Until you walked a mile in high heels or under the burka...

I'll try 10 feet in high heels, before a snap my ankles. The burkha's a different story, maybe we can ask some of our Ninjutsu friends what their experiences are.

 

[granfire]

I'll try 10 feet in high heels, before a snap my ankles. The burkha's a different story, maybe we can ask some of our Ninjutsu friends what their experiences are.

A for effort!

 

[Flea]

Then again, does it have any importance in the bigger picture?

In general, no, not enough to justify publicly humiliating Logan in one of the most intimate ways by disclosing that. But it's well worth pointing out journalism can suddenly morph into an "action profession" with as much risk and stress as what LEOs and firefighters go through. When the protest got ugly, they knew what they were walking into and a few of them paid the ultimate price. Yet they kept on walking into the Square for the full 18 days because the world needed to know what was going on. For that, they truly are heroes.

 

[granfire]

In general, no, not enough to justify publicly humiliating Logan in one of the most intimate ways by disclosing that. But it's well worth pointing out journalism can suddenly morph into an "action profession" with as much risk and stress as what LEOs and firefighters go through. When the protest got ugly, they knew what they were walking into and a few of them paid the ultimate price. Yet they kept on walking into the Square for the full 18 days because the world needed to know what was going on. For that, they truly are heroes.

I also think that it is often not made clear that journalists have become targets in the recent past, as the story of Danial Pearl so drastically shows.
But you are right: they are heroes when they take their role serious and go above and beyond to gather the truth. Sadly, too many don't and wait for the 'news' to reach them via ticker.

 

[ATACX GYM]

Before everyone jumps on the "blame all Muslims" bandwagon, a few points:

1) Everyone knows that the "pro-Mubarak protestors" were government thugs sent out with orders to disrupt and harass, including reporters - a number of reporters have been threatened, detained, or assaulted to date by these people.

2) She was saved by a group of Egyptian women and 20 soldiers. If all Muslims are to blame for the assault, then all Muslims are also responsible for saving her.

3) **** like this happens here all the damn time. We just had a thread about a bunch of kids gang-raping a classmate.

Dead on target and right.

 

[ATACX GYM]

Well, it's news.

I am not sure of the merit of it. Or value, or importance, however you want to call it. maybe it's an important reminder that life isn't all happy-happy-joy-joy during a revolution.

Then again, does it have any importance in the bigger picture?

Imo the "bigger picture" is composed of lotsa "smaller pictures".So YES to me? This is absolutely crucial.

 

[Twin Fist]

it bears repeting

Fair points there EH, aye.

Degradation and objectification of women is proceeding apace back to earlier era's right now and it is happening in a great many places and cultural niches.

However, having a religious faith that gives it legitimacy is not going to help matters. As I've said before, usually defending it, the Islamic faith is a relatively young one and is going through all the same excesses and mistakes that Christianity did. The problem is that this is the 21st century and we cannot just stand about and wait for that faith to 'grow up'.

 

[ATACX GYM]

it bears repeting

Hmmm...I think that the "inference" which can be gleaned from this post is applicable to behaviour as a whole,and not specifically to what we Westerners misunderstand about the development of and practitioners of Eastern Orthodox Islam.

In the vein of egregious religious excesses? I wholeheartedly agree with you.However that area is not at all the sole or dominant province of Islam.I might remind you of the gang raping of teens and preteens by their peers,the shootings that became daily occurences in this nation since the 80's,Katrina and the horrific blatant racism and institutionalized ineptitude demonstrated thereby,Jenna 6,loony tune nut jobs like Birthers and Deathers,the Bush Administration's gigantically preposterous and shameful attempts to exploit the deaths of former NFL star Pat Tillman and spin a heroic story about the rescue of the young military POW Jessica Lynch, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Lynch the courage of Gabrielle Gibbons,and literally thousands of other stories that shame this great nation of the USA; and in so doing? Caution ourselves--all of us--about the language and stance we use when judging others and realize that much of the judgement that we levy upon others is equally applicable to ourselves. So YES,fight egregious violations in whatever form they exist...but realize that we ALL have to "grow up"; just because one teen is bigger taller hairier and older than another teen doesn't obviate the fact that they're both teens and they have that hellacious puberty and the subsequent decade to go through.That is essentially what human civilization as a global whole has to do.Imho at any rate.

 

[yorkshirelad]

Hmmm...I think that the "inference" which can be gleaned from this post is applicable to behaviour as a whole,and not specifically to what we Westerners misunderstand about the development of and practitioners of Eastern Orthodox Islam.

In the vein of egregious religious excesses? I wholeheartedly agree with you.However that area is not at all the sole or dominant province of Islam.I might remind you of the gang raping of teens and preteens by their peers,the shootings that became daily occurences in this nation since the 80's,Katrina and the horrific blatant racism and institutionalized ineptitude demonstrated thereby,Jenna 6,loony tune nut jobs like Birthers and Deathers,the Bush Administration's gigantically preposterous and shameful attempts to exploit the deaths of former NFL star Pat Tillman and spin a heroic story about the rescue of the young military POW Jessica Lynch, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Lynch the courage of Gabrielle Gibbons,and literally thousands of other stories that shame this great nation of the USA; and in so doing? Caution ourselves--all of us--about the language and stance we use when judging others and realize that much of the judgement that we levy upon others is equally applicable to ourselves. So YES,fight egregious violations in whatever form they exist...but realize that we ALL have to "grow up"; just because one teen is bigger taller hairier and older than another teen doesn't obviate the fact that they're both teens and they have that hellacious puberty and the subsequent decade to go through.That is essentially what human civilization as a global whole has to do.Imho at any rate.

Yes, I know, I've heard it all before; the US is a place of great evil and therefore we cannot call any religion that uses terror to further it's agenda on it's ********. Let me ask you a few questions mate;When was the last time a man was executed is the US for being gay?When was the last time a woman was stoned to death for being an adulterer in the US?When was the last time that someone was sentenced to death for witchcraft in the US?When was the last time an author was publically marked for death by the powers that be in the US?When was the last time the US President publically expressed his desire to destory another race or country?By the way, in your rant, you failed to list nut jobs like Bill Ayers, a good friend of our president, whose mandate was death to all who disagreed with his rhetoric in the 60s and 70s. The rampant racism of organisations tike the new Black panthers who tried to intimidate votrs in polling stations in the last election. You fail to mention the attorney general, who gave these racists a pass, even though there was more than enough evidence to prosecute. You fail to mention organisations, funded by the taxpayer to the tune of 2 thirds of a billion dollars, who are pleased to offer pimps advise on how to take care of their underage sex worker's unwanted pregnancies.Just a few more examples for you to ad to your diatribe. You seem to have missed them.

 

[LawDog]

Acting like animals, no matter by who and for what reason means that they are still animals and should be treated as such.

 

[Bruno@MT]

To address the question posed in the original link, I think CBS buried the story out of respect for Logan. She probably asked them to. Who in their right mind would want their employer to literally tell the world that they had been brutally beaten and gangraped by an angry mob?

When you have a very public job like hers you know that having a very public personal life is a risk you take. But nobody should be forced to go public with something like that. I applaud CBS for their tact and discretion. It's a shame the other networks couldn't have that kind of decency.

If true, I would consider it hypocrisy.

They're perfectly comfortable throwing other peoples lives in front of the camera, pestering their subjects for emotional reactions at a time when they're vulnerable. All for some drama they can stick their name on. And suddenly something happens to them and they realize 'oh man I really don't want this splattered on national tv'.

What's good for the goose....

 

[LuckyKBoxer]

But you are right: they are heroes when they take their role serious and go above and beyond to gather the truth. Sadly, too many don't and wait for the 'news' to reach them via ticker.

No I would not say she is a Hero in any way shape or form.
I would say the opposite actually.
I think it is revolting that she placed herself in the situation to begin with.
I am horrified by her experience, and regret that she was in the position and that animals attacked and assaulted her, and grateful that true heros in the women and men that saved her and prevented further harm from happening stepped up in the crowd.
lets get it right here...
She left her family, her kids to do a story and put herself in harms way unnecessarily..
She was not the only one who could do this job, and she selfishly chose her job over her family and her obligations to her kids. Thats not heroic thats selfish.

The women and soldiers who crossed their own people to save her and prevent further harm to her when she meant nothing to them, and who purposely put themselves in harms way to do the right thing because noone else was, thats heroic.

I get a bit tired of hearing the term hero thrown around so loosely now days...
I do not consider her a hero at all, I consider her a victim of a horrible tragedy.

 

[Big Don]

If you go willingly into an area where you KNOW people may want to harm you and aren't adequately prepared to defend yourself, you are a fool. Having bodyguards just doesn't count as being prepared to defend yourself.

 

[granfire]

No I would not say she is a Hero in any way shape or form.
I would say the opposite actually.
I think it is revolting that she placed herself in the situation to begin with.
I am horrified by her experience, and regret that she was in the position and that animals attacked and assaulted her, and grateful that true heros in the women and men that saved her and prevented further harm from happening stepped up in the crowd.
lets get it right here...
She left her family, her kids to do a story and put herself in harms way unnecessarily..
She was not the only one who could do this job, and she selfishly chose her job over her family and her obligations to her kids. Thats not heroic thats selfish.

would you say the same thing about a guy? Like Daniel Pearl...

The women and soldiers who crossed their own people to save her and prevent further harm to her when she meant nothing to them, and who purposely put themselves in harms way to do the right thing because noone else was, thats heroic.

I don't know where you come from, but folks who violate other people are not 'my people', I think the people stepped up didn't consider them to be 'their' people either.
But yes, stepping up against a mob is heroic.

I get a bit tired of hearing the term hero thrown around so loosely now days...
I do not consider her a hero at all, I consider her a victim of a horrible tragedy.

I don't think I said she was a hero. A champion for her profession, maybe...
The point is, the news does not come to you, you have to go out and find it, be you man or woman.
I have no idea how prepared she was or how she ended up in the situation. Do I think it was the wised move on her side to go there? Probably not, even though Egypt had a reputation of being open to the West and accustomed to such things as working women.

Then again human nature is still close to the primate that once inhabited caves: It takes little to unlease that animal, much less still when bad behavior is condoned and supported by law, or those in power.

 

[LuckyKBoxer]

would you say the same thing about a guy? Like Daniel Pearl...

Sex doesn't matter, obligation to kids goes to both parents.

I don't know where you come from, but folks who violate other people are not 'my people', I think the people stepped up didn't consider them to be 'their' people either.
But yes, stepping up against a mob is heroic.

cute play on words, but you know exactly what it means.

You may not have called her a hero directly, but Flea did, and you were tossing the Hero term in association with her as well in your comment.