I have no comment regarding such an incredibly stupid and intolerant comment. I just wanted to highlight it.
Michelle Obama: The Perfect Role Model for Third World Women?
- Thread starter SirJosephPorter
- Start date
I have no comment regarding such an incredibly stupid and intolerant comment. I just wanted to highlight it.
SirJosephPorter, you seem to take all comments extremely personally. Lighten up, dude.
All news media have their own biases. I was critiquing the journalist's (possibly extending to CNN, since it's editors do approve and negate articles to be published) in this case, since their premise for their article is rather patronizing. But I don't think that's necessarily out of line with other CNN articles I have read and news reports that I have watched.
But you should note two things. One, the journalist interviewed a few female intellectuals living in third world countries who took it upon themselves to share their opinions on what Michelle Obama represents to them, and to speak for other third world women, who may or may not share their opinion. Two, I have not called CNN, nor the journalist, liars, nor have I implied that they lied.
On your patronizing attitude to me, you should know that those two media sources to which you referred are primarily geared towards Arab audiences, not Muslim ones. As well, while I do find Al Jazeera's English-language media to be more objective than CNN, I do not refer to it as my primary source of news.
Finally, for someone who seems to promote feminism, or at least neoliberal values towards women, you certainly act much more like a typical male misogynist. Maybe you should stop treating everyone who disagrees with you with disrespect. I also suggest you stop making so many assumptions about people you've never met, since you end up generally looking silly.
All news media have their own biases. I was critiquing the journalist's (possibly extending to CNN, since it's editors do approve and negate articles to be published) in this case, since their premise for their article is rather patronizing. But I don't think that's necessarily out of line with other CNN articles I have read and news reports that I have watched.
But you should note two things. One, the journalist interviewed a few female intellectuals living in third world countries who took it upon themselves to share their opinions on what Michelle Obama represents to them, and to speak for other third world women, who may or may not share their opinion. Two, I have not called CNN, nor the journalist, liars, nor have I implied that they lied.
On your patronizing attitude to me, you should know that those two media sources to which you referred are primarily geared towards Arab audiences, not Muslim ones. As well, while I do find Al Jazeera's English-language media to be more objective than CNN, I do not refer to it as my primary source of news.
Finally, for someone who seems to promote feminism, or at least neoliberal values towards women, you certainly act much more like a typical male misogynist. Maybe you should stop treating everyone who disagrees with you with disrespect. I also suggest you stop making so many assumptions about people you've never met, since you end up generally looking silly.
let alone one born to an upper class privilege!... thank you amatullaah.
I don't get why a rich, relatively white (despite SJP's assertions that no one is darker than her), woman, should be viewed as a role model to women dealing with racism, poverty, war, starvation, slavery, or worse.
But I don't think that's necessarily out of line with other CNN articles I have read and news reports that I have watched.
I see, Amatulah, and of course that make the story automatically false, an automatic fabrication.
But you should note two things. One, the journalist interviewed a few female intellectuals living in third world countries who took it upon themselves to share their opinions on what Michelle Obama represents to them, and to speak for other third world women, who may or may not share their opinion.
How do you know that they don’t speak for third world women? Have you talked to women in those countries and they told you that these women don’t represent the views of third world women? If not them, do you speak for third world women? As far as I am aware, nobody has contradicted the story. Even Fox, which would eagerly print any story trashing Michelle (true or false), did not say anything to the contrary.
So on what basis do you make the claim that these women do not represent the general views of the women in those countries (at any rate, you are not saying that CNN fabricated these interviews, that they invented these names and put words in their imaginary moths, at least that is something).
So, it is the word of CNN, arrived at after painstaking research, plenty of peg work and extensive interviews against your word that these women do not represent the general view of the women in these countries. I will take CNN’s word, rather than your word for it.
On your patronizing attitude to me, you should know that those two media sources to which you referred are primarily geared towards Arab audiences, not Muslim ones.
Is there a difference? Most Arabs are Muslims (the few that are not are viciously persecuted, barely permitted to live, but that is about it).
I also suggest you stop making so many assumptions about people you've never met, since you end up generally looking silly.
As to looking silly, I have strong opinions on many subjects ansd I am not afraid to express them. Anybody who wants to express his opinions has to be OK with looking silly from time to time. So I am not scared of looking silly (not that I look silly in this case).
I see, Amatulah, and of course that make the story automatically false, an automatic fabrication.
But you should note two things. One, the journalist interviewed a few female intellectuals living in third world countries who took it upon themselves to share their opinions on what Michelle Obama represents to them, and to speak for other third world women, who may or may not share their opinion.
How do you know that they don’t speak for third world women? Have you talked to women in those countries and they told you that these women don’t represent the views of third world women? If not them, do you speak for third world women? As far as I am aware, nobody has contradicted the story. Even Fox, which would eagerly print any story trashing Michelle (true or false), did not say anything to the contrary.
So on what basis do you make the claim that these women do not represent the general views of the women in those countries (at any rate, you are not saying that CNN fabricated these interviews, that they invented these names and put words in their imaginary moths, at least that is something).
So, it is the word of CNN, arrived at after painstaking research, plenty of peg work and extensive interviews against your word that these women do not represent the general view of the women in these countries. I will take CNN’s word, rather than your word for it.
On your patronizing attitude to me, you should know that those two media sources to which you referred are primarily geared towards Arab audiences, not Muslim ones.
Is there a difference? Most Arabs are Muslims (the few that are not are viciously persecuted, barely permitted to live, but that is about it).
I also suggest you stop making so many assumptions about people you've never met, since you end up generally looking silly.
As to looking silly, I have strong opinions on many subjects ansd I am not afraid to express them. Anybody who wants to express his opinions has to be OK with looking silly from time to time. So I am not scared of looking silly (not that I look silly in this case).
As well, while I do find Al Jazeera's English-language media to be more objective than CNN,
Amatullaah, that is pretty much what I said (that you probably consider Al Jazeera and Al Arabia as objective sources of news). So we are in agreement (not that Al Jazeera is more objective than CNN, but that you think that it is).
Amatullaah, that is pretty much what I said (that you probably consider Al Jazeera and Al Arabia as objective sources of news). So we are in agreement (not that Al Jazeera is more objective than CNN, but that you think that it is).
The more I read SJP's posts the more I've come to realize that he simply cannot understand the written word. Maybe I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps he actually understands but is deliberately twisting things because he can't argue the point.
Cannuck... does this really surprise you? He does not even know that his comments are insensitive and intolerant. His assumption that Al Jezzera is the preffered source of news of the poster because the poster may be Muslim.
You will find that SJP will patronize you and feel good about it. He will think that by patronizing you you will feel content as he really looks at you as one with a lower status than he.
Well said!
But he does not understand that nor does he see it.
Well good luck with that. Even though that is good advice he will not take it to heart. He has dubbed himself "Sir Joseph Porter"... that in and of itself should tell you how he feels about himself.
Again well said... but he would rather continue to make himself even more silly in defense of his sexist and racist comments.
eagelSmack, in case it escape your notice, the poster herself admitted that i was right.
Finally, for someone who seems to promote feminism, or at least neoliberal values towards women, you certainly act much more like a typical male misogynist.
Amatullaah, I assume you are referring to my criticism of Islam (and of the way it treats women). Well, get used to it, I have very little respect for Islam (or Christianity or Hinduism for that matter).
But if you are going to take part here, you must develop a thick skin, you will see plenty of criticism of Islam here. Also, while I will criticize your views, I will never ever attack you personally. Unfortunately, there are plenty of Trolls here, who consider it their God given right to insult those they disagree with. They will hurl plenty of personal abuse, insults at you if they disagree with you.
So as I said, you must have a thick skin if you are going to participate here.
Amatullaah, I assume you are referring to my criticism of Islam (and of the way it treats women). Well, get used to it, I have very little respect for Islam (or Christianity or Hinduism for that matter).
But if you are going to take part here, you must develop a thick skin, you will see plenty of criticism of Islam here. Also, while I will criticize your views, I will never ever attack you personally. Unfortunately, there are plenty of Trolls here, who consider it their God given right to insult those they disagree with. They will hurl plenty of personal abuse, insults at you if they disagree with you.
So as I said, you must have a thick skin if you are going to participate here.
SirJosephPorter, let's play a game called "Spot the Anomaly!"
Okay, here we go!
Me:
Me:
Now, let's continue with our little game...
Me:
Also, you just said,
Edit: Emphasis is mine.
Edit # 2: It's a shame you didn't take my advice, SirJosephPorter.
Okay, here we go!
Me:
You:
Me:
You:
**Note: None of have an idea who CNN's sources for this article, aside from those quoted in it, are, since they have not published their sources via a bibliography. Until then, none of us can ascertain the veracity of this article, however, we can speculate as to its bias and analyze it, nonetheless.
Me:
You:
Answer: Yes, there is a difference. While most Arabs are Muslims, most Muslims are not Arabs. In fact, less than 20% of all Muslims are Arabs. Yet, you said that "I assume being a Muslim, you think that Al Jazeera or Al Arabia are the only reliable sources of news", which indicates that you think that all Muslims a)speak Arabic, and b) turn to a source of news geared towards only Arabs, not all Muslims.
Now, let's continue with our little game...
Me:
You:
Answer: You said, and I quote, that,
Now, you say that,
whereas I have just proven to you that you were wrong.
Also, you just said,
however, you said;
which, while not an attack, puts words in my mouth that aren't true (as I have already proven previously in this post). So you did intentionally misrepresent me and my views, all the while never having ever met me, either.
Edit: Emphasis is mine.
Edit # 2: It's a shame you didn't take my advice, SirJosephPorter.
Last edited:
That's a fun game Amatullaah!... I spotted many anomalies. i wonder how SJP may fare in this... Should be interesting.
I thought this was supposed to be about Blackie O getting her mitts on the charity purse strings?
Me:
Quote:
All news media have their own biases. I was critiquing the journalist's (possibly extending to CNN, since it's editors do approve and negate articles to be published) in this case, since their premise for their article is rather patronizing. But I don't think that's necessarily out of line with other CNN articles I have read and news reports that I have watched. I have not called CNN, nor the journalist, liars, nor have I implied that they lied.
You:
Quote:
I see, Amatulah, and of course that make the story automatically false, an automatic fabrication.
You got me, Amatullaah, where is the anomaly here? I see sarcasm on my part, but where is the anomaly?
**Note: None of have an idea who CNN's sources for this article, aside from those quoted in it, are, since they have not published their sources via a bibliography. Until then, none of us can ascertain the veracity of this article, however, we can speculate as to its bias and analyze it, nonetheless.
This is where the question of reputation comes in. They don’t usually give bibliography in a newspaper article, it is not a scientific paper (besides, in the newspaper business most sources are confidential anyway, reporters would rather go to prison than reveal their sources).
You are free to believe that all these women CNN claimed to talk to were fabricated names, that a CNN columnist just dreamed up the article on day, when he was bored. I happen to think that CNN has a very high reputation, and if CNN says that they talked to these women, I believe CNN.
If you think they are lying, that is your business. But again, where is the anomaly?
Quote:
All news media have their own biases. I was critiquing the journalist's (possibly extending to CNN, since it's editors do approve and negate articles to be published) in this case, since their premise for their article is rather patronizing. But I don't think that's necessarily out of line with other CNN articles I have read and news reports that I have watched. I have not called CNN, nor the journalist, liars, nor have I implied that they lied.
You:
Quote:
I see, Amatulah, and of course that make the story automatically false, an automatic fabrication.
You got me, Amatullaah, where is the anomaly here? I see sarcasm on my part, but where is the anomaly?
**Note: None of have an idea who CNN's sources for this article, aside from those quoted in it, are, since they have not published their sources via a bibliography. Until then, none of us can ascertain the veracity of this article, however, we can speculate as to its bias and analyze it, nonetheless.
This is where the question of reputation comes in. They don’t usually give bibliography in a newspaper article, it is not a scientific paper (besides, in the newspaper business most sources are confidential anyway, reporters would rather go to prison than reveal their sources).
You are free to believe that all these women CNN claimed to talk to were fabricated names, that a CNN columnist just dreamed up the article on day, when he was bored. I happen to think that CNN has a very high reputation, and if CNN says that they talked to these women, I believe CNN.
If you think they are lying, that is your business. But again, where is the anomaly?
While most Arabs are Muslims, most Muslims are not Arabs.
Now Amatullaah, where did I say that most Muslims are Arabs, show me the quote.
Quote:
On your patronizing attitude to me, you should know that those two media sources to which you referred are primarily geared towards Arab audiences, not Muslim ones.
That may be, but most Muslims hold the Middle East in holy reverence, so it is natural for them to pay attention to what is happening in the Middle East. Al Jazeera and Al Arabia are of interest to all Muslims (including evidently yourself), not only Arabs.
Quote:
Is there a difference? Most Arabs are Muslims (the few that are not are viciously persecuted, barely permitted to live, but that is about it).
And anything wrong with that statement?
Yet, you said that "I assume being a Muslim, you think that Al Jazeera or Al Arabia are the only reliable sources of news", which indicates that you think that all Muslims a)speak Arabic, and b) turn to a source of news geared towards only Arabs, not all Muslims.
All Muslims speak Arabic, not necessarily. Al Jazeera (and I think Al Arabia as well, though I am not sure) do have English broadcasts, Muslims don’t have to know Arabic to listen to these channels.
As to the news being geared towards Arabs, I think I already addressed that. Middle East is holy land for all Muslims, so it would be reasonable that they would be interested in what goes on in Middle East.
Me:
Quote:
As well, while I do find Al Jazeera's English-language media to be more objective than CNN, I do not refer to it as my primary source of news.
You:
Quote:
Amatullaah, that is pretty much what I said (that you probably consider Al Jazeera and Al Arabia as objective sources of news). So we are in agreement (not that Al Jazeera is more objective than CNN, but that you think that it is).
Again, where is the anomaly? I said that you consider Al Jazeera and Al Arabia as objective sources of news, not as primary sources of news. So where is the anomaly?
Now Amatullaah, where did I say that most Muslims are Arabs, show me the quote.
Quote:
On your patronizing attitude to me, you should know that those two media sources to which you referred are primarily geared towards Arab audiences, not Muslim ones.
That may be, but most Muslims hold the Middle East in holy reverence, so it is natural for them to pay attention to what is happening in the Middle East. Al Jazeera and Al Arabia are of interest to all Muslims (including evidently yourself), not only Arabs.
Quote:
Is there a difference? Most Arabs are Muslims (the few that are not are viciously persecuted, barely permitted to live, but that is about it).
And anything wrong with that statement?
Yet, you said that "I assume being a Muslim, you think that Al Jazeera or Al Arabia are the only reliable sources of news", which indicates that you think that all Muslims a)speak Arabic, and b) turn to a source of news geared towards only Arabs, not all Muslims.
All Muslims speak Arabic, not necessarily. Al Jazeera (and I think Al Arabia as well, though I am not sure) do have English broadcasts, Muslims don’t have to know Arabic to listen to these channels.
As to the news being geared towards Arabs, I think I already addressed that. Middle East is holy land for all Muslims, so it would be reasonable that they would be interested in what goes on in Middle East.
Me:
Quote:
As well, while I do find Al Jazeera's English-language media to be more objective than CNN, I do not refer to it as my primary source of news.
You:
Quote:
Amatullaah, that is pretty much what I said (that you probably consider Al Jazeera and Al Arabia as objective sources of news). So we are in agreement (not that Al Jazeera is more objective than CNN, but that you think that it is).
Again, where is the anomaly? I said that you consider Al Jazeera and Al Arabia as objective sources of news, not as primary sources of news. So where is the anomaly?
Quote:
I assume being a Muslim, you think that Al Jazeera or Al Arabia are the only reliable sources of news.
Now, you say that,
Quote:
eagelSmack, in case it escape your notice, the poster herself admitted that i was right,
whereas I have just proven to you that you were wrong.
Amatullaah, and just how does that prove me wrong?
Quote:
Also, while I will criticize your views, I will never ever attack you personally,
Quite true, and I stand by it.
Quote:
I assume being a Muslim, you think that Al Jazeera or Al Arabia are the only reliable sources of news,
which, while not an attack, puts words in my mouth that aren't true (as I have already proven previously in this post).
I am glad you recognize that that is not an attack. And just how does this put words in your mouth? I did NOT say that you said that Al Jazeera and Al Arabia are the only reliable sources of news, I said I assume that to be the case, big difference. That is a reasonable assumption, many Muslims consider them to be the only reliable sources of news, they would much rather believe Al Jazeera than believe CNN.
So you did intentionally misrepresent me and my views, all the while never having ever met me, either.
I did nothing of the sort, I simply said that I assume something, that does not put words in your mouth. If my assumption is wrong, you should say so (though as it turned out, my assumption was not wrong, you would much rather believe Al Jazeera than you would believe CNN).
So unfortunately, I did not spot a single anomaly. You will have to be more specific if you want to discuss this further.
I assume being a Muslim, you think that Al Jazeera or Al Arabia are the only reliable sources of news.
Now, you say that,
Quote:
eagelSmack, in case it escape your notice, the poster herself admitted that i was right,
whereas I have just proven to you that you were wrong.
Amatullaah, and just how does that prove me wrong?
Quote:
Also, while I will criticize your views, I will never ever attack you personally,
Quite true, and I stand by it.
Quote:
I assume being a Muslim, you think that Al Jazeera or Al Arabia are the only reliable sources of news,
which, while not an attack, puts words in my mouth that aren't true (as I have already proven previously in this post).
I am glad you recognize that that is not an attack. And just how does this put words in your mouth? I did NOT say that you said that Al Jazeera and Al Arabia are the only reliable sources of news, I said I assume that to be the case, big difference. That is a reasonable assumption, many Muslims consider them to be the only reliable sources of news, they would much rather believe Al Jazeera than believe CNN.
So you did intentionally misrepresent me and my views, all the while never having ever met me, either.
I did nothing of the sort, I simply said that I assume something, that does not put words in your mouth. If my assumption is wrong, you should say so (though as it turned out, my assumption was not wrong, you would much rather believe Al Jazeera than you would believe CNN).
So unfortunately, I did not spot a single anomaly. You will have to be more specific if you want to discuss this further.
Edit: Looks like you are putting words in her mouth and sterotyping.
She is a Muslim... she MUST feel that Al Jezera is a reputable source because all Muslims do... is that about right? Is that what you were thinking?