New York Times EQUATES Islamism with 1960s Hippie Values

I already blogged this in the previous post just below, but I've decided that it's momentous enough to merit its own heading.

This is only the latest in a series of articles called "GENERATION FAITHFUL." Merry Christmas from the New York Times, via writer Michael Slackman:

Jordanian Students Rebel, Embracing Conservative Islam

".... Across the Middle East, young people like Mr. Fawaz, angry, alienated and deprived of opportunity, have accepted Islam as an agent of change and rebellion.

It is their rock 'n' roll,

their long hair

and love beads.

Through Islam, they defy the status quo and challenge governments seen as corrupt and incompetent.

These young people — 60 percent of those in the region are under 25 — are propelling a worldwide Islamic revival, driven by a thirst for political change and social justice."

I rather preferred the previous lefty notion that Pres. Bush was causing the "Islamic revival" -- by opposing it. That didn't make any sense, but it was less dangerous, I think, than this.

Not only does this new idea whitewash the jihad -- we're used to seeing that, Dhimmedia's been doing it for years -- it goes even further, by proclaiming an appalling lefty affinity for it, a new compatibility with it...

I swear, this piece will stand as a marker of the beginning of similitude, sympatico, and a very dangerous rapport and potentially -Gd forbid- a very powerful political alliance.

If you do not object to this trend in its very beginnings, then you become complicit in it. I urge you to send a message to the writer HERE, with copies to the Editor and the lame "ombudsman," Clark Hoyt.

I should tell you from past experience that I don't think our letters will change anything. What they will do, however, is help us to live with ourselves in the years to come.

Comments

[scp]

No Ma'am, it's worse than that. By saying that it's "their rock-n-roll, their long hair, their love beads," and that they "have accepted Islam as an agent of *change*" (as though they have not been disciples of that false prophet for 1300 years already), THE NYT IS ACTIVELY *PREACHING* mOHAMMEDEANISM, *HERE* IN THE UNITED STATES. Don't they say that being a rebel, and working for some unspecified "change" is a good thing? Hasn't that theme been crammed down everybody's throats during this last election cycle for the last year--in the United States? And so, very subtily, that religion being touted as somehow "rebellious," and an "agent of change," in a manner that is intended for an American audience. How do you spell "barack HUSSEIN obama" as in, "we need to repair our image with the islamic world?" And well lo-and-behold, the grey harlot (a.k.a., the new york times) has also began to come out against coal, which is yet *another* point in al-barack obama's agenda.