January 25, 2003
Here and There, Jan. 25

Christos Cotsakos, the delusional, self-aggrandizing, self-serving and money-losing CEO of E*Trade, has abruptly resigned.

Claire Berlinski has a terrific piece in the Weekly Standard on Israel's friends in France (seriously); and another piece on Israel's appalling foes in the Netherlands

Tom Friedman has some very good reasons why liberals should support the ouster of Saddam Hussein

Robert Collier of the San Francisco Chronicle, on the other hand, believes that women's rights in Iraq "may even get worse" if there is a war. Collier seems to blame the United States for Saddam's curtailment of women's rights in Iraq since the 1991 Gulf War (which Saddam started by invading Kuwait). He also argues that Iraqi women have more freedom than women in other Arab countries, mentioning that "There are 19 women in the 250-seat National Assembly" (all of whom are Saddam's rubber stamps), and that Kuwaiti and Saudi women cannot vote, while Iraqi woman can. (He forgets to mention that their vote doesn't count for much, anyway). With the Chronicle publishing this sort of idiotic reportage that whitewashes Saddam's horrific regime, is it any wonder that my city is often called ... "Baghdad by the Bay"?

If anybody still needs to be convinced that New Jersey Poet Laureate Amiri Baraka is a bleeding-brained nutcase, go read this transcript of his recent interview with Fox News' Bill O'Reilly (thanks for the link to ... my mother!)

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 25, 2003 04:34 PM
Comments

Yes, he's nutty. Still, he did have the best line of the interview:

"If I was insane, I'd have a television program"

Posted by: Joe Katzman on January 25, 2003 08:57 PM

Stefan, I blogged on the Berlinksi article, since I had noted the Paris university motion a few weeks ago. But the post won't show up till Monday. (I did a stupid cute thing with French accents.) Also, I pointed out how this university council used the same tactics as Concordia. (Is passing motions against Jews when half the council isn't there a French thing?)

Posted by: Yehudit on January 26, 2003 01:17 AM

While I support President Bush's actions in Iraq, the knee-jerk wailing about the status of women in the Arab world leaves me dead cold.

My wife is Filipino. It is axiomatic that liberals greet her with this phrase: "Isn't it awful how women are treated in the Philippines?" My wife's answer is: "What in the hell do you think happened to the men?"

Her father was impressed into the infantry at the age of 13.

I am so fed up with this constantly reflexive weeping over women that I could vomit. No matter where you point in the world, men suffer and thrive equally with women. Why in the hell do you obsess so with women's rights, and forget that men also suffer?

Using feminism as an excuse for invading Iraq is cultural imperialism at its worst. Leave other cultures alone to deal with the relationship of the sexes as they see fit.

If you want my opinion, the status of women in the West is as wacky as the status of women in the Arab countries. It is now common in the West for men to be jailed, deprived of their children and their possessions merely on an allegation of abuse. The West has suffered through a 30 year period of hysteria. For Christ's sake, a 17 year old boy in California recently went to prison because a girl asked him to pull out and he didn't do it fast enough.

And, fuck it all, women were never treated any worse than men in the U.S.

Chuck the stupid, Marxist feminist lies and your site would almost start to make sense. You have been brainwashed so thoroughly that you can't even see what is directly in front of you.

I am sure that, whatever women are suffering in the Arab world, men are suffering equally. Ditch the Perils of Pauline language, please, and you might start to make sense. We know that you are a very chivalrous guy. Please stop convincing us of it.

Feminism is a lie. Feminist history is a lie.

Posted by: Stephen on January 28, 2003 09:17 AM

Stephen, I'm amused that anybody would label me a "Marxist feminist". The reason I posted the above entry was to ridicule the specious appeal to "women's rights" as an excuse to avoid doing the right thing in Iraq.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on January 28, 2003 10:03 AM

Stefan:

I have not labeled you a "Marxist feminist."

It is a curious part of today's political discourse that even conservative Republicans resort to the weeping about women in order to justify U.S. involvement in the war against Iraq.

I think that this is the weakest argument thjat can be brought to bear. And, once again, I have to state that the U.S. has no business intervening in Iraq (or anywhere for that matter) to effect its domestic policy of support for feminism. Other cultures have the right to determine their own religious and social cultures.

You have rather consistently fallen into this trap of weeping over the plight of Arab women. This arena, I think, is absolutely none of our business.

Posted by: Stephen on January 28, 2003 11:23 AM
New comments may be posted only from the 'Comments' links at the bottom of each entry on the blog home page