Mika Brzezinski: Controlling Exactly What People Think Is Our Job
Liberal establishment propagandist Mika Brzezinski let slip a highly illuminating remark during MSNBC’s Morning Joe, while fretting over the dawning realization that people trust recent convert to conservatism Donald Trump more than they trust the media:
“[Trump] could have undermined the messaging so much that he can actually control exactly what people think. And that, that is our job.”
If that was your job, Mika — you’re fired. (Moonbattery)
West Australian premier Colin Barnett has urged imams and Muslim voters to make their decision about how they vote based on how welcome and supported they have been made to feel by his government.
Colin Barnett never found it necessary to ask WA voters whether they wanted to ‘welcome’ Muslims. There is a price to pay for treason.
In other news:
Trad: Islam says beat wives only as “a last resort”
ABC host Yassmin Abdel-Magied says Islam is the “the most feminist religion”. Keysar Trad, president of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils says she is right: the Koran says men should beat wives only as a “last resort”. Watch.
Andrew Bolt vs Keysar Trad on wife-beating:
There has been some misquoting in the media of what I quoted.
Here is the Quran (4:34):
Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.
If the husband senses that feelings of disobedience and rebelliousness are rising against him in his wife, she should try his best to rectify her attitude by kind words… If this is not helpful, he should sleep apart from her… If this approach fails, it is permissible for him to beat her lightly with his hands, avoiding her face and other sensitive areas… To be specific, one may beat only to safeguard Islamic behavior and if he (the husband) sees deviation only in what she must do or obey in relation to him.
Similar modern readings here.
Some apologists and relativists have told me that this is just a trick – that they could go through the Bible and find similar sexist passages to quote against Christianity.
First, that is false. Christ preached no such things. In fact, he preached the opposite. Seeing a women being stoned for adultery he saved her by saying: “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” He told her that he could not condemn her. He also famously said: “Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.”
In his example and in his preaching he supplanted Old Testament teaching – the “eye for an eye” justice, for instance.
That is the first point. But there is a second equally important one. What the sacred texts of Christianity and Islam say is one thing, but how they are interpreted today by its leading clerics is another.
In the case of wife-beating, Islam’s leading scholars today do not deny the right of men to beat their wives. At best they argue that the Koranic passage above means it must be a last resort. Trad argues it is a last resort that good men will never reach.
But which Pope, cardinal, bishop or moderator or a mainstream Christian church would argue that men have a right – even as a last resort – to beat women? To force her to submit to her husband’s authority?
This is the problem with reforming Islam. The Koran has so many passages that are extremely difficult to explain away, including those purporting to be the words of the founder of the faith himself. This is why Islamic terrorists can do what Christian ones do not: quote the Koran and sacred Hadith to justify what they do – from beheading unbelievers, killing Jews and taking captured women as sex slaves.
That is not to say that this is supported by most Muslims. Not at all. But it does explain why such outrages are met by near silence by leading Muslim scholars. They seem powerless to argue back.
That is slowly changing, though. But the fact remains: the Koran is harder to adapt for a modern, democratic, multicultural and secular society than is the Christian Bible.
Not entirely unrelated, I think Labor is mad to start attacking Israel to please the Muslim minorities in their Sydney seats: