A este lado del atlántico:
Perhaps the most shameful aspect of the history of Eurabia is how the supposedly critical media has allowed itself to be corrupted or deceived by the Eurabians. Most of the documents about the Euro-Arab Dialogue place particular emphasis on working with the media, and the Eurabians have played the European media like a Stradivarius. A conference on «Racism, Xenophobia and the Media» in Vienna in May 2006 was coordinated by the EU. By the end of 2006, the network of media practitioners involved in the Euro-Arab Dialogue had grown to over 500 (pdf). These included people, media and organizations from all 37 countries of the Euro-Mediterranean partnership. European and Arab journalists produced dozens of recommendations on how to enhance their cooperation and promote «mutual understanding» between their cultures and religions in the media.
Y muchos otros más detalles que nos cuenta Fjordman en The Brussels Journal.
Mientras, al otro lado del atlántico:
The Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC), which initiated the complaint against Steyn, has previously tried unsuccessfully to sue publications it disagrees with, including Canada’s National Post. The not-for-profit organization’s president, Mohamed Elmasry, once labeled every adult Jew in Israel a legitimate target for terrorists and is in the habit of accusing his opponents of anti-Islamism — a charge that is now apparently an actionable claim in Canada. In 2006, after Elmasry publicly accused a spokesman for the Muslim Canadian Congress of being anti-Islamic, the spokesman reportedly resigned amidst fears for his personal safety.
The Islamist movement has two wings — one violent and one lawful — which operate apart but often reinforce each other. While the violent arm attempts to silence speech by burning cars when cartoons of Mohammed are published, the lawful arm is maneuvering within Western legal systems.
Islamists with financial means have launched a legal jihad, manipulating democratic court systems to suppress freedom of expression, abolish public discourse critical of Islam, and establish principles of Sharia law. The practice, called «lawfare,» is often predatory, filed without a serious expectation of winning and undertaken as a means to intimidate and bankrupt defendants.
Vamos, que estamos como para tirar cohetes en la clausura de las jornadas alianceras de Zapatero. Menos mal que casi nadie le hace caso.
Según la ley de utilidad marginal de la pitanza, un plato de lentejas quita el hambre, dos satisfacen y cincuenta, matan.
Lo mismo ocurre con las noticias, su abundancia y contradicción (según las fuentes) hace que se anulen unas a otras. Todo ocurre como si no existiese ninguna. No importa en absoluto o causa vómito y la huida a no querer saber nada de nada.
Un día la mentira nos envuelve como el aire que respiramos y, como ya no tenemos defensa contra ella, pasamos a su bando y creamos un lenguaje, el de la corrección política, en el que lo blanco es negro o al revés. Tal es nuestro escudo y pantalla contra a la barbarie. Hemos perdido la consciencia y puede que nos asfixiemos en nuestro propio vómito.