By Diogenes (articles ) | Sep 16, 2006
When does a New York Times rush out an editorial supporting the demands of militant Muslims?
- When they demand Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon.
- When they demand apologies for cartoons mocking their faith.
- When they demand retraction of a statement made in a scholarly address by the head of the universal Catholic Church.
You don't even have to read the text, do you. You already know.
Oddly enough the London Times, in its own editorial, gets the story exactly right. Well worth reading.
And if you read the (London) Times Online piece, perhaps you'll understand why the New York Times sees Pope Benedict as an intellectual adversary.
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: -
Sep. 18, 2006 12:33 PM ET USA
Anti-Catholicism is so unremitting and deep for some of these liberal (read: nihilistic) groups that they are even willing to defend Muslim culture despite its "homophobia" and misogyny. Do they really want to see the hegemony of a culture where women are subjugated in the extreme, where the love that dare not speak its name dare not show its face? In which the ideal afterlife is conceived of as a place to superindulge one's earthly desires with heavenly sanction? Oh, maybe that's it.
Posted by: Ignacio177 -
Sep. 16, 2006 3:30 PM ET USA
The Times does get it right. I see B16's mention of Islam as a calculated invitation to Muslim theologians to come "run with the big dogs". But if you can't run with the big dogs stay on the porch.
Posted by: Gino -
Sep. 16, 2006 1:28 PM ET USA
If it's God, Christianity, Catholic, Conservative, Evangelical, Jewish or America the NY Times (DAILY TASS) will be against it. Like the Marx Brothers sang; "Whatever it is; we are against it!"
Posted by: Laity1 -
Sep. 16, 2006 11:32 AM ET USA
I demand that the NYT apologize for their editorial.