According to a piece in The New York Times, John Donatich, the director of Yale University Press, said that the decision not to include the cartoons was “difficult.”
Really? Why was it difficult? Mr. Donatich presides over part of an academic institution whose motto is “lux et veritas,” “light and truth.” His “difficult” decision announced to the world that his motto timiditas et deditio: “cowardice and surrender.” He told the Times that he bravely published an unauthorized biography about Thailand’s current monarch, but when it came to publishing representations of a 7th-century religious fanatic — there he drew the line: “when it came between that and blood on my hands,” he said “there was no question.”
Mr. Donatich’s capitulation takes its disgraceful place in an increasingly long line of Western capitulations to Islamic intolerance. Earlier this year, the British government decided to deny Geert Wilders, the Dutch politician and critic of radical Islam, entry in the the UK. Why? Because his film Fitna, which is critical of Muslim extremism, might upset the Muslim population of Britain. Perhaps the single best question about this shameful episode was posed by the British comic Pat Condell, “How much more of your freedom needs to be whittled away to defend this intolerant, misogynistic, homophobic, antisemitic ideology from the robust and frank and open criticism that it so richly deserves?”
How much indeed? John Donatich has just demonstrated that Yale University Press can be bullied into bowdlerizing its books to suit Muslim sensibilities. How much further, given a little push, a little nudge, a timid recommendation from some “expert,” would he being willing to go? Aristotle was right when he observed that courage is the most important of the virtues because without courage we cannot practice the other virtues. This is a lesson Mr. Donatich has yet to learn.
How hilariously appropriate that the google ad currently being displayed with this article is an ad for “Quality Islamic Clothing.”
Of course, it doesn’t exactly help that our Coward-in-Chief is currently leading the fight to appease Muslim fanatics.
As a Yale graduate, this comes as no surprise. My degree from a few years back is in “American Studies” and, I can tell you firshand that it was one of the most life changing experiences I’ve had. I thought I was “liberal minded” upon entering Yale, but to see the level of hyprocrisy and “Un-American Studies” which getting that degree involved, I’m more moderate to conservative as a direct result. My “American Studies” degree was bascially four years of pointing out how bad a country America is and aplogizing for all of our missteps.
Why is it that our politicos can’t respond to our shouts at town halls? They are so intent on showing us that democracy is alive that they will take phone calls during the question and answer period like Rep. Lee. On the other hand, a group of unknown experts can suggest that the first amendment may leave blood on your hands so you better not touch that one. Is this still America?
This is why no tax monies for ANY purpose should go to private universities. Their elites suck the life out of our country in their inability to be courageous for the individual. Muffin heads.
Appalling. Simply Appalling. Cowardice revered as virtue.
@Chris
Your tale of the “‘American Studies’ degree” is further evidence of my rule of thumb that anything in academia with the word “Studies” in it is really just indoctrination in Leftist thinking.
I’m trying to think of an exception. When I was a kid, we had “Social Studies” classes, but those got changed to “Social Science” about the time that “Black Studies”, “Womyn’s Studies”, “Lesbian, Gay, and Transgendered Hispanic Pagan Studies” started coming into vogue.
Hm… That’s another one. If something is a real science, it has its own name, but if it has to make “Science” part of its name, it probably isn’t. (Climate Science?)
Yikes!
#5: “This is why no tax monies for ANY purpose should go to private universities.”
Well, since this would shut down a large percentage of our defense R&D, I guess a lot of leftist radicals would agree with you.
“Social Science”
Anything that calls itself a science is not.
timiditas et deditio
Fabulous.
But the awful Christians who object to Federal money being spent on crucifixes in pee and cow patties on Madonnas are the intolerant ones.
Yale: A bunch of weenie chickens who recite “speaking truth to power” [!!] at the drop of a dime, but haven’t a clue what that really means.
“11. Locomotive Breath:
“Social Science”
Anything that calls itself a science is not.”
We have a winnah!
The real science degrees don’t call their coursework “Physic Science,” or “Biologic Science.”
“Social” courses, like the vast majority of “Studies” courses, are utter bunk
Why would any blood be on his or Yale’s hands if someone used the publishing of the cartoons as an excuse for committing and act of violence? In the liberal’s view, Muslims are not moral agents. They cannot control their actions.
The US news industry occasionally trumpets itself as standing for freedom. Yet when their entire raison d’etre is challenged, they sold out their birthright and claimed that their ‘right not to publish’ is also an honorable first amendment exercise. The legacy press has spectactularly failed in the first test in my lifetime to which its been subjected. It was suggested at the time that the press coordinate a massive and worldwide re-publication of the cartoons as an asserrtion of press freedom in response to the rioting by the imams and their crazies. The legacy media demurred. That course would have put the imams themselves in the crosshairs of the rioters they foster since any violence the imams direct would lead to still more re-publications. Instead the media elites and their institutions are adrift in a sea of spinelessness.
The indominatable journalist and writer Oriana Falacci, who’d been variously shot, imprisoned and dragged down stairs by her hair while covering world events, and who once told Khomenei to his face in Iran that the chador she just threw at his feet was a medieval rag, said to an interviewer near the end of her life: “What are you going to do to me? You go fuck yourself, I say what I want”. The academy and the legacy media can use one or two of the principles which anchored her courage.
Those who talk about their own courage always seem to be craven cowards. Just as those who claim to be tough — New Yorkers, for example — are big fat wussies who capitulate at the first opportunity. The Brits may still pride themselves on being able to muddle through, but that’s not what the rest of us are seeing from them.
As has been pointed out many times before and, sadly, will need to be pointed out many times again, Mr. Donatich and his ilk fairly well write the book on how activist groups can get respect and results–kill people and you win. Remain peaceful and your road will be much harder.
Ghandi must be rolling over in his grave.
Hello Mr. Kimball I appreciate your writing. I would like to see you address David Hockney’s pseudo-scientific claims and book concerning Italian Renaissance artists in a future issue of The New Criterion. Thank you.
biblio44:
The bulk of university based defense R&D goes to public universities
As I try to figure out how Ghandi has anything to do with this and how he’ll roll over in his grave since, as a good Hindu, he was cremated, I’ll just say, Yale should be ashamed of themselves. Light and truth indeed.
I have a similar story from a very reliable source about a book being considered for publication by Yale Press. The book is about the children of persons imprisoned in the Soviet Gulag. It was almost denied publication because some on the editorial review board thought it made communism look bad.
#20: “The bulk of university based defense R&D goes to public universities.”
Maybe. Maybe not. Among the list of the 100 top defense contractors, I could find only two universities: MIT and Johns Hopkins.
But don’t get me wrong. I pretty much agree with SenatorMark: Public money for public education, private money for private education!
The Islamo Fascists have accomplished their initial goal, to make the American Press censor itself and have the American Population trembling in fear. Our Fearless Reader envies their techniques and no doubbt emulate similar control in the future. It is sad to think that because of our President and his obvious Muslim Sympathies along with the spineless inability of some of us to stand against tyranny, that our enemies feel emboldened and entitled to force their culture and lawlessness upon us. The Progressive Socialist Wimps at Yale contribute to the Islamic feelings of power and to the impotence of the American Will. We owe these people no special consideration because of their willingness to engage in barbaric acts.
It is only a small group that adheres to our President’s policy of appeasement, supplication, and apology. It is these people who support our enemies and to whom our enemies may find aid and comfort when they begin their attacks within this country.
Y’all must pardon me for bein’ a pore dumb redneck but I cannot understand persactly why all Islam isn’t worried about what WE will do if they anger us. Why isn’t “Death To America!” answered by death from America?
My well known kindly humanitarianism says that the first screech of Death To America should not be answered with nukes, napalm or cluster bombs would do. Save the nukes for the second offense.
“…but to see the level of hyprocrisy and “Un-American Studies” which getting that degree involved”
That’s what I’ve been telling people for a long time. “Earning” a soft science degree at an Ivy League academic institution often means one had to whore it out in a very disgusting manner. The typical Harvard and Yale liberal arts graduate is an intellectual mediocrity. Things have gotten much worse since the affirmative action grading began some four decades ago. Never forget that the shallow and poorly read Barack Obama obtained his law degree from Harvard. This con jobbing stuff has got to stop.
“when it came between that and blood on my hands,” he said “there was no question.”
Apparently the Director of Yale University Press thought that it wasn’t worth risking violence by publishing the cartoons. Not violence to himself, but to others. If he seriously thought that other people would be hurt if he published the cartoons, then isn’t he right not to publish them? What right has he to put others at risk?
“And in the latter days mens heart’s will fail them for fear.” JC
Good call, Blarty – but then why publish a book about the cartoons at all?
If these cartoons are so incendiary to a group of people who are apparently so lacking in self-control that the Director of Yale University Press is worried about “blood on his hands”, perhaps they should limit their publishing to Birds of Northern South America.
Of course, someone managed to get Islamic Imperialism published without evident bloodshed, so perhaps the Yale Press is a tad hypocritical – or just merely looking for some cheap PR.
from # 20: “Well, since this would shut down a large percentage of our defense R&D, I guess a lot of leftist radicals would agree with you.”
You assume that defense R&D must be carried out at universities. We coud easily develop other venues for such research and development.
Anyway, I wonder how much Muslims, especially the Saudis, contribute to Yale U every year?
Blarty, I hope you appreciate that the freedoms you enjoy were purchased by the struggle of others who had a bit more strength of conviction than your post exhibits. If not for them, today we’d all be members of the third Reich or some other shame of history.
Can you explain how the rioting of nutjobs of whatever pursuasion over the publication of a cartoon is the responsibility of the publisher? Yale has simply taken what it sees as the path of least resistance. Unfortunately, their vision does not extend beyond tomorrow; it will not be enough and more one-way concessions will necessarily follow. Sharia for accused Muslim students at Yale? Quotas for how many tenured Imams there will be? Muslim-only dorms? Until it stands up for itself, Yale and its printing appendage will retreat further and further. Every generation must earn its own freedom. Yale has chosen not to fight for theirs on the basis of an imagined threat, and we are all a bit worse off for it.
32. Duke:
Blarty, I hope you appreciate that the freedoms you enjoy were purchased by the struggle of others who had a bit more strength of conviction than your post exhibits.
Um, yeah, okay, but that doesn’t really apply to the issue at hand. Assuming for the sake of argument that the Director had a LEGITIMATE fear of violence to others, then what right had he to sacrifice those people just to prove a point?
I agree that it’s stupid that anyone should even have to worry about cartoons provoking violence, and that the only people accountable for the violence are those who bring it. But I hardly think that the Director of the YUP acting out of reasonable fear (assuming it was indeed reasonable) amounts to “Yale being measured for a burqa.”
28 Barty:
Failing to criticize people acting badly for fear of making them act worse has not held up well since it was last used in WWII. Then and now, people tend to see it as cowardice, pure and simple.
Should we stop criticizing bad people in Dafur?
Blarty, you’re right. Those freedom riders, and marchers at Selma and Birmingham were terribly irresponsible to confront Bull Connor & pals. I mean, just look what happened to Michael Schwerner, James Chaney and Andy Goodman. No, far better to have left the South as it was and these guys in charge:
http://tinyurl.com/l8up87
RE: “28. Blarty Blarckleblart:
“when it came between that and blood on my hands,” he said “there was no question.”
Apparently the Director of Yale University Press thought that it wasn’t worth risking violence by publishing the cartoons. Not violence to himself, but to others. If he seriously thought that other people would be hurt if he published the cartoons, then isn’t he right not to publish them? What right has he to put others at risk?”
So, I assume that you agree that if someone were to threaten violence (to stick with your premise, random violence, against others) if the Daily Kos were to keep publishing, the Koassacks would be morally obliged to shut down.
I’ll say~!
Disgusting cowardice, it makes me puke. The Islam hold the oil, so let them keep it and use all other energy available. But this is not cheap , and money bows for oil. Shit holes all, who dare not think secular.
Jessie Coleman
Why would New Criterion contradict Hockney’s theories on the use in optical devices in painting (actually in the North more than Italy) which are clearly correct? Charles Falco, who provided the acaademic rigour behind Hockney’s theories is a scientist of some repute. So the theory is hardly psuedo-scientific.
Great stuff, Roger. You’re doing us all a service by exposing the cowardice of the Yale University Press.
The real question that should be asked by Yale “scholars” is WHY publication of images of Muhammed (not just cartoons), and discussion about Muhammed is forbidden.
It is because if the truth about Muhammed was widely understood, the foundation of Islam itself would crumble. Islam is built on two great lies:
1) Islam is a religion of peace
2) Muhammed was a “holy” man
The truth, as recorded in the Koran, Ahadith & Sira, is that Muhammed was a:
- sadistic sociopath
- a murderer
- a slave master
- a human trafficker
- a torturer
- a decapitator
- an amputator
- a mutilator
- a rapist
- a misogynist
- a sexual deviant
- a paedophile rapist
- a sex trafficker
- a looter & thief
- a liar
- an intimidator
- a terrorist
- a genocidist
Muhammed was a truly sick human being, a barbarian megalomaniac motivated by unquenchable lust, greed and power.
Muhammed was simply a successful Charles Manson, only 1,000 times more evil. He should be reviled, not revered. And like Manson, Muhammed should have been incarcerated, not venerated.
The Koran(33:21) upholds this butcher as “an excellent model of conduct”. For Islam to claim a sadistc murdering sociopath as a role model explains why Islam is so violent. And if Islam is so violent, it can’t be a religion of peace no matter how much they say it is, or how much we ignorantly want to believe it is.
Muhammed is Islam’s Achilles heel and the Islamists know it. That is why, in their logic, it is better to not see or discuss their barbarian “prophet”, nor allow anyone else to. Muslims & infidel alike must simply submit to the big lie that Muhammed was a “holy” man.
I will not submit. If freedom of speech dies and if the truth dies, our culture dies, and the Islamists rule. That is what this is really all about.
The truth about Muhammed needs to be exposed to the light of day. The Truth is the only way we can fight back.
~ The Infidel Alliance
Some Yale guy looking for his 15 min. (of fame) is writing a book about the cartoons that doesn’t include the cartoons ?
How very delicate. Not to mention that “the cartoons that shook the world” isn’t quite accurate, since it was the Danish imam carrying the cartoons around the Arab world/far east several months after they appeared in Jyllands-Posten that shook (up) the world. Which was the point.
The cartoons themselves, each done by a different artist, are a little mild. Certainly mild compared to some of the disgusting drawings that were also circulated in the Arab world and, falsely, attributed to infidel publications.
Mohammed has been depicted everywhere and anywhere throughout the ages, including the north wall frieze at the US supreme court. Followers of Islam in other centuries weren’t, apparently, as brain dead as some of the current crop.
Mohammed Image Archive
Earlier this year, the British government decided to deny Geert Wilders, the Dutch politician and critic of radical Islam, entry in the the UK. Why? Because his film Fitna, which is critical of Muslim extremism, might upset the Muslim population of Britain.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, this creep is free to travel to politically correct Britain and strut his stuff.
(It’s either this guy or some other Saudi ranter whose speeches are regularly piped into radical mosques in Britain, live, from Saudi Arabia.)
Anti-Semitic Saudi chief imam feted in London: Senior cleric of Mecca’s Grand Mosque speaks at East London Mosque
The boot-licking bow of your first man in front of the king of Saudi Arabia said it all: you no longer live in the land of the brave and the free. Sure, give in and keep practising that bow, that’ll make it easier for them to chop off your head.
Allah, please have mercy on America.
The brilliant thing with Islam is that its followers don’t have to speak the truth to non-believers. They can lie all they want in court as they don’t acknowledge Western laws. What they do acknowledge is Islamic and/or Sharia law. Now, in the name of tolerance, the dim-witted West is allowing these Islamic/Sharia laws to take root in their countries, resulting in the birth of a parallel society, that will eventually supplant its host.
Muslims worldwide can hardly believe their luck and are laughing all their way to world domination, unless the West wakes up and turns the tide by segregating ALL states and ALL religions. No laws can be made or should exist in the name of this or that religion. No exception.
Curiously enough, the countries in Europe that were the least affected by the debilitating influence of the Roman Catholic Church have historically been the most stable ones and are currently the most democratic: Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Denmark, Netherlands, Finland.
Islam is not just a religion but an all encompassing ideology, dictating all aspects of life. By the free democratic West giving in to the demands of Islam to establish its own laws, it is signing its own death sentence.
If you had not included the NYTimes link, I would not have believed this.
Events like this beggar comment. Such profiles in cowardice make one ask: Why does Yale even bother printing books at all?
Dhimmitude appears to have completed its sweep of the elite universities, as well as most of the “mainstream news” and other “liberal” quarters.
I am speechless – but then I guess that’s the whole idea, isn’t it?
A Prophet for Profit
——————–
In Islam’s defense, it should be noted that Islam discourages (in some places, forbids) depiction of ‘any’ religious figure, not just Mohammed.
No text printed in the Arabic-speaking world will show a pictorial representation of the Virgin Mary, Jesus, Abraham, the Buddha, Moses, Adam or Eve and so on.
In Saudi Arabia (the strictest of the strict), you cannot present yourself at Customs and Immigration with a rosary, a Bible or a Hindu God figurine, for example. (If you’re a Westerner and you show up toting a Koran , you’ll cause all kinds of unsavory reactions.)
Course, if you’re a Westerner and show up brandishing a Koran at JFK on a flight from across the Pond, you’ll also cause all kinds of commotion, albeit for different reasons.
The “Cartoon” incident is not the first of its kind. The Supreme Court building in DC has a frieze depicting the Prophet of Islam. Check the full story – including Chief Justice William Rehnquist’s rebuff of the protests in this case at:
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48695
According to Islamic tradition, the Kaaba in pre-Islamic Mecca contained not only all kinds of icons and depictions of ancient Arabian deities, but included Christian ones as well.
When Mohammed entered the Kaaba, he smashed all of them to pieces except, so the tradition says, the representations of the Virgin Mary and the baby Jesus. (Arabian imaginative traditions are legendary for their outlandish attributes, often approaching fantasy).
Finally, to end this lesson, it should be noted that this squeamishness vis a vis depicting religious figures (or any living thing, actually, including animals) is most notable in Sunni Islam.
Shia Islam has no problem showing prophets, martyrs and so on in full regalia.
Persian carpets are famous for their pictorial artistry in which humans and animals figure prominently in their renditions.
In ‘tribute’ to this cowardice, here’s my version of Mohammed.
Before we all start slamming the liberal academic elite, do note that that AAUP condemned the action of the press.
To 7 and 3: I graduated with a degree in Greek and Roman Studies, which was the name that replaced Classics in the 90s. The re-branding was motivated by the “need” to “democratize” Classics whereby students were allowed to graduate with a so called elitist degree without the bother of having to learn the languages of antiquity – notorious for their difficulty and “deadness”, i.e.lack of utility. I was fortunate to have as teachers classical scholars two generations removed, who did not cave into department and, in general, academia politics, and insisted on the necessity of studying Greek and Latin as part of the requirement for graduation. One of the worst attestations to this detrimental re-branding is that, just over 10 years later, when I am asked about my academic background and I answer, “Classics”, I get a bovine, bewildered stare to which the response, “You, know, Greek and Roman Studies, which includes the history, literature and philosophy (and languages) of ancient Greece and the Roman Empire”, I can instantaneously perceive the relief of illumination on the face of the inquirer. But the illumination is short-lived as the standard line that follows is, “Why would anyone wanna do THAT?”…
Its so funny watching ‘libtards; like ‘blarty’ open their mouths and then stick their foot right in it and have to scrabble about to explain their naive, simplistic, illogical, Islamophile, cowardly views of life.
#26
PETER
My friend, y’all have a way with words – and your thoughts are mine, as well…
Spot-on, bro !!
Thanks,
77/88
S.M.
Islam is as Islam does and that is the one unfortunate fact that Muslims and their apologists cannot run away from. Try reading the Koran I know its difficult as it is in random order and full of tedious repetition and nonsense. But in there you will find all the misogyny, antisemitism, violence and Arab Supremacist you see Muslims practicing all over the globe. If you then read the Sahih aHadith you will learn about Mohammad which you will not do in the Koran. Mohammad is supposed to be the shining example for all Muslims to follow and a man for all time but unfortunately the aHadith shows a Mohammad who was violent, bloodthirsty a paedophile and serial womaniser and abuser. Of course Muslims try to hide all this by pointing to the peaceful verses in the Koran but what they forget to tell you is that these are the Medina verses written when Mohammad was weak and they are abrogated by the later Meccan warlike verses when he was strong. Did I mention HYPOCRISY well of course the Koran is full of it and is why abrogation had to be introduced to save Allah’s face from all the contradictions of the Koran. Is Islam capable of reformation well how do you reform a book which is supposed to be the ACTUAL and UNALTERABLE word of God does not seem like there is any room for reformation there. Unlike the Bible which is DESCRIPTIVE the Koran is PRESCRIPTIVE and therein lies Islams folly and its greatest weakness.
These anti American Universities gave up any semblance of education years ago…
The Yale decision may be a negative precedent for future academic explorations into controversial subjects. Yale should be scolded and shamed because of this.
My response at http://theobservedblog.blogspot.com/2009/08/cartoons-that-shook-university-in-its.html
33. Blarty
It seems like we’re talking past one another. I still do not see how the publisher is responsible for violence that might follow publication (see my post #32). If you call me a name is it your fault if I resort to violence over it? Of course not, not in civilized societies. To acquiesce in the opposite is to deplete some of that societal civility. Are we not allowed in the USA to openly discuss the cartoon controvery for fear of orchestrated rioting? I think the proper response should be bring it on, we’ll discuss what we please and if you go outside our bounds of civlilized discourse then welcome to jail or the righteous indignation of people like Peter #26 whom you might threaten directly. What we don’t do is self-censor our free speech rights for fear of barbaric intimidation tactics. Exploring self-censorship is in fact the purpose those cartoon were originally printed. The irony of that fact in view of Yale’s decision on this book is just beyond belief.
33. Blarty
It seems like we’re talking past one another. I still do not see how the publisher is responsible for violence that might follow publication (see my post #32). If you call me a name is it your fault if I resort to violence over it? Of course not, not in civilized societies. To acquiesce in the opposite is to deplete some of that societal civility. Are we not allowed in the USA to openly discuss the cartoon controversy for fear of orchestrated rioting? I think the proper response should be bring it on, we’ll discuss what we please and if you go outside our bounds of civlilized discourse then welcome to jail or the righteous indignation of people like Peter #26 whom you might threaten directly. What we don’t do is self-censor our free speech rights for fear of barbaric intimidation tactics. Exploring self-censorship is in fact the purpose those cartoon were originally printed. The irony of that fact in view of Yale’s decision on this book is just beyond belief.
Too Bad Yale has never heard of “semper fidelis”. The students would be better off with some Gunnies in charge of their classes.
I am disgusted at the craven stance taken by Yale U. Press. They are cow-towing to Muslim fanaticism. I can cite several books published in
the past decades on German history where the press did not omit illustrations
depicting anti-semitism in forms that were grossly offensive to Jews.
Yale’s action represents cowardice in its worst forms. What happened to
the First Amendment?????
Sheldon S. Cohen Yale ’53
The money trail is pretty clear. Yale is a partner to the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology in Saudi Arabia. I am sure they do not want to lose their $50 million gift from the Saudis by offending them with this book.
#62
I’m not familiar with the specifics at Yale, but, some years ago (post 911), I became aware that funding university chairs in the US, professorships of Islamic studies etc., came to be an intentional, organized effort by the Saudis, a propaganda effort, if you will.
(also, the Saudis were taking out full page newspaper ads in American newspapers in defense of their philosophy de vie)
I think there must be a lot of cash (petrodollars) funding those chairs at American universities and those schools, subsequently, bending over and spreading ‘em.
Between the phony “science” being funded at universities by megaliths, the perversion of objectivity as a function of foreign cash & the general tenor of de rigueurliberal ideas being pounded into the heads of the captive audiences, a university education just ain’t what she was cracked up to be, eh wot ?
Roger,
You start your piece off similarly to how we describe our blog – Creeping Sharia.
You hit on some great points in your writings on the Yale issue and hope to see more as the examples of dhimmitude are numerous.
Keep up the fine work.
So lefties have finally found a religion they wish to treat with deep respect, following the demands of its followers to the letter and that is…drumroll…Islam, the ideology dressed up as a religion that despises every pet cause of the Left, feminism, abortion, gay rights etc.
Why do leftists’ heads not explode from sheer hypocrisy?
Golly, They had some “studies” courses in the Paleolithic Age whenI went to college but after reading the syllabi, I took dull old Chemistry instead.
I considered medicine but didn’t have the motor skills for surgery and would have spent way too much time getting histories on patients as I am curious and like people.
Even chemistry came with a certain amount of indoctrination. Fortunately, I was older than my classmates and had already been in a war, so professors couldn’t scare me. I gave them hell right back.
I congratulate the American studies student for retaining sanity. I went ahead and got more degrees but never wante to work with university buzzards though they are truly overpaid compared to private industry. I did work for govenment for a time and saw that their pay scales were excessively high for the “talent pool” they had. I could tell stories about the ignorance of government people who supposedly held doctorates in physical sciences but they do get a bit technical.
The next time a Yale grad puts his degree on the wall, I might remind them that they are a step closer to community college level respect at this point. No joke, it’s a sad day for the Ivy crowd when night school students know more about art than the Ivy crowd.
Can not express your opinion on something you do not know
God says in the Qur’an that was revealed to Prophet Muhammad:-
In the Name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful
(And who is better in speech than he who [says: "My Lord is Allah (believes in His Oneness)," and then stands straight (acts upon His Order), and] invites (men) to Allah’s (Islamic Monotheism), and does righteous deeds, and says: “I am one of the Muslims.”)
http://muttaqun.com/quran/toc_eng.html
This link as a translator of all the Qur’an in English With the interpretation
I’m sure that anyone who read the Qur’an will make sure that the book revealed by the Creator of all things
In my opinion Islam is not bad, but people are bad in its application
I’m not a good Muslim, but after I saw these cartoons I want to be good find me the best view of the world
Ahmed , Portsaid , Egypt .