Posted on 06/02/2008 4:14:02 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
Now that it's June, it's officially summer reading time. Those who have the luxury curl up by the beach engrossed in the latest faddish novel.
This summer, publisher W.W. Norton is pushing "The Garden of Last Days," by Andre Dubus III, an Oprah Book Club fave. The book sympathizes with the 9/11 terrorists.
As I've written before, Dubus' "House of Sand and Fog"--an Oprah selection--was a hideously anti-American tale, where the Americans are losers and evil-doers, and Iranian Muslim immigrants are the good, hard-working people, done wrong and caused to lose everything including their lives, thanks to these loser and evil Americans.
Do We Really Need to Sympathize with Those Who Did This?!
Well, with "The Garden of Last Days" is even more hideous. It tells the story of the 9/11 attacks and the Islamic hijackers last days from the point of view of the terrorists and the strippers some of them, um, patronized.
And it's very sympathetic. The Wall Street Journal, which, sadly, is recommending this book for its summer reading list, calls it
a fact-based novel in which a terrorist behind the Setp. 11 attacks goes to Florida strip clubs, grappling with his mission and American temptations.
Being a hypocrite doesn't make you anymore sympathetic or indicate any form of "grappling" or struggle with the mass murder of 3,000 Americans.
How many people truly think any of these 19 cold-hearted Muslims "grappled" with anything relating to the murder of thousands of Americans? You saw the video last will and testament of several of them, including Mohammed Atta. They were smiling and laughing. This was something they were focused on for well over a year and something they were quite proud of. They shouted Allahu Akbar [Allah is the Greatest, ie., greater than that of the Christians
(Excerpt) Read more at debbieschlussel.com ...
How would Oprah feel about a sympathetic portrait of lynching Klans members, many of whom were no doubt hardworking folks whose manners were otherwise excellent?
Good Point!!
What is wrong with this woman? Does she really think these cold-blooded murderers of civilians are entitled to sympathy? Doesn’t she realize that they would kill her with as little remorse as they killed the 3,000 on September 11th? Perhaps she thinks she can buy immunity because she is black?
is it that hard to overthrow a nation of freaking imbecils?
That question is not allowed.
Amazing. Just another reason I abhor Oprah. If she wants to make money and give away stuff, power to her. But she doesn’t stop with that. She is absolutely as socialist and left as they come.
After she began supporting Obama, Oprah’s magazine circulation dropped by 10% and her TV show has continued to decline in viewership for the past three years. This will just accelerate the downfall.
ping
Warning! This is a high-volume ping list.
Oprah didn’t recommend the 9/11 book. She selected a book, House of Sand and Fog, from the same author in 2000. This was prior to the 9/11 attacks. Schlussel, as per usual, is playing the distortion game.
Sympathy for the devils.
We need to remember that these scoundrels are the enemy, and anyone who sympathizes with them is the enemy too. I hereby coin a new term for them — “terrsymps.”
Some “grappling”. They BRAGGED about the attacks they were about to launch.
Heck, some of them may have even "grappled with" strippers. That would certainly make them more human in her eyes!
Without even asking, I will bet money that Oprah is one of those people who says “I don’t mind paying taxes...they should raise them”.
Obviously Oprah has way too much money.. its addled her brain.. Harpocrats flock to her like the Mad Hatter celebrating a happy UNbirthday..
I agree that it's an excellent point, and I always wish that more people on our side would make it. Anytime terrorists of the quote unquote "right" such as the Klan or Timothy McVeigh or the killers of Matthew Shepherd or James Byrd, are depicted in the culture, they are invariably drooling, one-dimensional, singleminded hate machines who need to be put down like rabid dogs. (as in John Grisham's widely praised A Time to Kill, for example).
Fair enough. People who commit lynchings really do need to be put down like rabid dogs. The problem I have is that the same liberals who create these portraits can't look at terrorists of the "left" the same way. No, we must understand "why they hate us," we must treat them as human beings, we must learn to understand them.
The double standard really begs the question of how sympathetic liberals really are to the terrorists of the left.
Hello?? Oprah has nothing to do with this book whatsoever. Anyone? Anyone?
There was a line in Blood Diamonds that covered that. It was "just another n***** in Africa."
Has anyone read this post?
The article above does not claim Oprah recommends this book.
Fair enough. People who commit lynchings really do need to be put down like rabid dogs. The problem I have is that the same liberals who create these portraits can't look at terrorists of the "left" the same way. No, we must understand "why they hate us," we must treat them as human beings, we must learn to understand them.
The really telling thing is that the fact that liberals excuse the things in "the left" that they condemn in "the right" shows plainly that all the reasons they give for hating "the right" are phony--else they would hate "the left" as well!
There was an article on Front Page Magazine the other day (it may have been posted on FR for all I know) about some WCC get-together in Cuba. The assembled liberal clergy condemned "fundamentalism" but simultaneously expressed sympathy for moslems and "indigenous pipples." Hello!--What do these people think moslems and "indigenous pipples" are, eighteenth century French rationalists? Do they think that Australian aborigines really don't believe in the "dreamtime" but consider it some profound mythological expression of post-modern leftism? The "indigenous pipples" are probably the most fundamentalist people in the entire world, yet they are granted "honorary non-fundamentalist status" by liberal haters of "fundamentalism."
I read a while back that the old Fabian Socialist Society actually supported the British government during the (very unpopular) Boer War because they thought the "natives" would be better off under "enlightened" British rule than that of those "religious fanatics" the Boers. And just what did Shaw and company think the "natives" were? Just because the religion is different doesn't mean it isn't "fundamentalist."
Something tells me that just as Michael Moore refuses to condemn Black racism (because he's "a white guy" and has not right to judge "the other"), he'd take the exact same position with chr*stian fundamentalism held by Blacks (be "saved" or be damned, six day creation, Biblical inerrancy, etc.). Again, this illustrates that it isn't so much the beliefs (or actions) that liberals condemn as the wrong people holding or committing them (a form of "racial Calvinism").
Jim Goad (in The Redneck Manifesto) pointed out the interesting fact that it's all right for non-whites to be primitive, screaming religious fanatics, but if white people start acting like religious non-whites everybody panics. Could it be liberals think that whites are "too good" to be religious and thus only condemn religiosity in them?
The terrorists committed a mini-Holocaust right in the middle of NYC and the fashionable leftists can't say enough nice things about the killers and our oh so sensitive sophisticates spit on the graves of the victims (and many victims never even had graves). So what is next? How about a book that shows the "human" side of a Nazi war criminal? Liberalism (in the American sense of the word) is a mental illness.
I never watch OPRAH, the show nauseated me. I think she tries too hard to influence from her throne on the stage. She is a racist as well. I guess all racists are chumming around with the Muslims these days, because the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
I said back in 1997 Oprah was a racist and was bad for the country.
So true. She is a racist and has done nothing for women or this country but set them back.
Has anyone actually read the article? OPRAH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS BOOK!
So what. Oprah is who she is and that is a stinker.
And the only place where Oprah has anything to do with this book is in Debbie Schlussel’s twisted mind. No need to follow along blindly.
One wonders how many more Westerners must be killed by -hate filled Moslem terrorists?
Is the notion that we are at war with a truly evil culture that difficult for the average Moslem apologist to understand?
Or, are they part and parcel of the Moslem conspiracy to destroy Western Civilization?
Yes, I read the Article.. however, she does acknowledge and promotes the author, and his is pro Muslim and Jihad, So who needs someone like Oprah to tell folks to read the drivel that this clown writes?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.