Tag Archives: mma

10 Green Designers to Show Spring 2011 Collections at New York Eco Fashion Week

Susan Cianciolo Fall 2010 Collection at New York Fashion Week. Credit: Emma Grady The countdown begins! New York Fashion Week’s The GreenShows have released the lineup of ethical fashion designers showing their spring/summer 2011 collections on September 12-14. Last season, we brought you photos and video from the front row of the runway shows and this year we’ll be at it again. Click through for ten fashion designers showing their environmentally- and socially-responsible garments during Eco Fashion Week at the

View original post here:
10 Green Designers to Show Spring 2011 Collections at New York Eco Fashion Week

Inside New ‘Avatar’ Footage: Beasts, Hometree And Sigourney Weaver

James Cameron’s producing partner, Jon Landau, gives MTV News a look at the extra nine minutes. By Eric Ditzian Zoe Saldana in “Avatar” Photo: 20th Century Fox James Cameron started teasing us with talk of deleted “Avatar” footage to be included on the DVD back in December, even before his blue alien epic hit theaters. More than $2.7 billion in box-office receipts later, and much of that footage will be first seen not in home theaters but at the cinema, as a nine-minute-enhanced version of “Avatar” that arrives Friday. Recently, Cameron spilled some details about what to expect from the special edition, including an expanded death scene for Na’vi warrior Tsu’tey as well as what he playfully calls the “alien kink” sex scene . Late last week, Cameron’s longtime producing partner, Jon Landau, gave MTV News a call to illuminate some other new scenes, explain how they choose what new footage to include and discuss the explosion of 3-D since “Avatar” first opened. MTV : How long has it been since you watched the movie? Jon Landau : I went away for a vacation finally this summer, and I came back and I watched the new material, and I got excited, because it’s material that is organic to the story. You don’t look at it and think it’s outside of the movie. It adds to it. It’s not superfluous. MTV : “Avatar” was #1 for seven weeks. The special edition is getting a limited release, but are you looking at the calendar and thinking you could have another run at #1? Landau : I don’t think we’ll be #1. This is just about appealing to two groups of people: one are fans of the movie that want to return to Pandora, and two are people that have never seen the movie. I can’t tell you how many people have said to me, “Gee, I never got to see it, and then it was out of the theaters.” It’s about servicing those two groups. It’s not about being #1. We don’t have enough screens. MTV : Hey, Miley Cyrus’ “Best of Both Worlds Concert Tour” hit #1 on fewer screens a few years ago. Landau : That’s not the way we’re approaching it from an advertising or marketing standpoint. This is about delivering on what we have heard from fans. What we tried to do is make the added material diversified. Some of it is backstory, some is action, some is night by luminescence, so no matter what you enjoyed, you’ll be getting more this time. MTV : So the new footage — is this stuff that just needed some finishing touches or was it material that needed to be built from the ground up? Landau : A lot of the stuff we had to build from the ground up. There’s the Sturmbeest hunt, which [digital-effects studio] Weta had not even started working on. Other scenes with the fan lizards — it was just one shot before, and now there’s a whole little sequence where Neytiri and Jake actually play around with them. Weta had finished maybe 50 percent of that. We went back to them and had them finish it off. MTV : So it’s a mix of nearly finished and barely touched material. Landau : And the stuff that was hardest to trim last time. In a Jim Cameron script, every scene has a purpose. These new scenes all have purpose. One scene talks about the history of Sigourney [Weaver] teaching at the [Na’vi] school, which is something we didn’t really do in the original release. MTV : Cameron recently said “The Hurt Locker” could have been better in 3-D . What’s your take — can every film benefit from 3-D? Landau : Does every film lend itself better to being in color rather than black-and-white? MTV : I think somebody like Steven Spielberg would answer, “No.” Landau : I don’t think you want to do “Schindler’s List” in color. I don’t think you want to do “Raging Bull” in color. But I believe it’s the same type of relationship with 3-D. We see our lives in 3-D. 3-D makes what we do as filmmakers even better. We try and create an immersive experience, and that’s what 3-D does. I always said to people that “My Dinner With Andre” would be better in 3-D. MTV : Seriously? Landau : Absolutely! It’ll put you in the room! It’ll put you at the table! To me, one of the most compelling scenes [in “Avatar”] from a 3-D standpoint is the scene where Neytiri throws Jake out of Hometree. It’s a dramatic scene, but the 3-D puts you in Hometree, and I become one of the Na’vi. It takes a passive experience and makes it voyeuristic. MTV : I’ve always felt that 3-D should complement the storytelling rather than something that’s just tacked on for any number of reasons. Landau : The screen plane has always been a subconscious barrier for the audience’s involvement with your movie. If you can make the screen plane disappear, the audience believes it is looking through a window into a world. And good 3-D is looking at a world through a window, not a world popping out of a window. Check out everything we’ve got on “Avatar.” For breaking news, celebrity columns, humor and more — updated around the clock — visit MTVMoviesBlog.com . Related Videos MTV Rough Cut: James Cameron Related Photos “Avatar”

See the article here:
Inside New ‘Avatar’ Footage: Beasts, Hometree And Sigourney Weaver

Pataki Smacks Down Matthews: You Bash Limbaugh, How About Olbermann?

Former New York Governor George Pataki on Wednesday got into a heated discussion with Chris Matthews over the Ground Zero mosque and the Republican opposition to it. In the middle of his second “Hardball” segment on MSNBC, Matthews played a clip of Rush Limbaugh saying on the radio earlier in the day, “If this is a nation that is Islamophobic, how do we elect a man whose name is Barack Hussein Obama?” This led Matthews to ask his guest, “What do you think of guys that keep putting out lies like that?” Over the course of the next five minutes, Pataki basically took over the show not only putting Matthews in his place, but also doing the same to his other guest, Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post (video follows with transcript and commentary): CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Governor, it just seems to me that people on the right of the spectrum, right across the right center right all the way over, really don`t like Muslims. Take a look — here`s Rush Limbaugh today. Here`s what he said today about — about the — about our election of — well, he refers to President Obama, basically, as a Muslim here again. Here he is. Let`s listen. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: My question — Mr. Matthews and Mr. Fineman, a question for you. How can America be Islamophobic? We elected Obama, didn`t we? If this is a nation that is Islamophobic, how do we elect a man whose name is Barack Hussein Obama? (END VIDEO CLIP) MATTHEWS: Governor, this is why, I think, 25 or some 30 percent of the people think that Barack Obama is a Muslim, this trash talking by Rush Limbaugh, the voice of the American right here, who speaks for so many Republicans, assuming that he`s a Muslim because we voted for him and that proves we`re not anti-Muslim. What do you think of guys that keep putting out lies like that? So, in Matthews’ view, Limbaugh not only believes Obama is a Muslim, but he’s also responsible for how 25 to 30 percent of the nation thinks.  Well, before we get to Pataki’s fabulous response, here’s what Limbaugh actually said today on this subject: RUSH LIMBAUGH: Monday night on Mess NBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews. He and Howard Fineman are blaming me for the Obama Muslim poll. They’re blaming me for the fact that about 20, 25% of the American people think Obama’s a Muslim and that fewer and fewer Americans believe that Obama is a Christian. Well, that’s not what I was doing. These guys are outthinking me by half here. To put this back in context, I was trying to explain to these people why the poll was what it was. Don’t forget, it’s not us that took the poll. I’m in the wake of this. I had nothing to do with the shaping of opinion on this poll. The only time I have referenced Obama being a Muslim was when I was quoting Khadafy. I’ve never put it out there myself that Obama is a Muslim. I’ve quoted Moammar Khadafy for saying so. I’m trying to explain to these people in the media, “You want to know why the American people think this, let me help you.” What do we know about Obama being a Christian? The only thing we know is that he has said so. But we don’t see him going to church. We don’t hear him talk about it like other presidents have. But we do know that his pastor for 20 years was Jeremiah Wright. And the American people have heard what Jeremiah Wright said, America’s chickens have come home to roost and all of that. And we also have heard Obama say he never heard Wright say any of these things. Well, sorry, media. We just don’t believe that a parishioner does not hear the pastor for 20 years. Sorry. We may be rubes, but that doesn’t compute with us. I mean those of us that go to church know what the pastor says. One of the reasons we go is to hear what the priest or what the pastor says. This Pew poll was taken back in July. Now, I never said anything about Obama being a Muslim until the last few days. With that as pretext, here’s how Pataki responded to Matthews: GEORGE PATAKI, FORMER GOVERNOR NEW YORK (R): Well, I think it`s clear that Rush and I both understand that Barack Obama is a Christian. He has expressed his Christianity. He has shown that he goes to church, although I have doubts about his choice of the right church when he was with Reverend Wright for so many years in Chicago. But, you know, you can pick out inflammatory positions on either side. The idea of this Islamic center so close to Ground Zero is wrong, and you`re painting it as something that the right is opposed to. In New York State, the Democratic governor and the Democratic speaker are opposed to it. Harry Reid has come out against it. There is bipartisan opposition, and by the way, the vast majority of Americans think it is the wrong center and the wrong site at the wrong time. Exactly. The polling data on this issue finds huge bipartisan opposition to this mosque. Yet, Matthews and his ilk continue to blame this on conservative talkers like Limbaugh: MATTHEWS: Right. PATAKI: And just commenting on Eugene`s analysis that it`s making the U.S. look bad in the Islamic world, if the people who proposed building this in fact wanted to reach out, wanted to build bridges, they would understand the nature of the opposition. They would understand the emotion involved around September 11, and they would have taken up a Democratic governor`s offer to relocate that site. They won`t do that. So, it makes me question, not just question, but doubt seriously, if in fact this is about building bridges, as opposed to just sticking — poking a stick in our eye at one of the hallowed grounds and the scenes of one of the greatest tragedies in American history. And I have to tell you that you — I am not anti-Islam. I am very strongly anti that mosque. (CROSSTALK) MATTHEWS: Well, you think that`s the message, Gene, that we`re sending here as a country? (CROSSTALK) MATTHEWS: Is that the message that we`re sending, we`re not anti- Islamic? (CROSSTALK) PATAKI: It`s not the message you`re sending, Chris, when you say that the right is anti-Islam. MATTHEWS: I`m looking at the poll data. PATAKI: We`re in favor of tolerance across the political spectrum. (CROSSTALK) MATTHEWS: OK. I have just cited a major national poll that says most Republicans don`t like Islam, period. I have just quoted Rush Limbaugh from today`s broadcast where he is making it sound like we have elected a guy who is Islamic, and therefore we`re not anti-Islamic, playing that old game again, that canard that he`s really not a Christian. I would think if I were a guy sitting in a Cairo cafe right now, I be would thinking, I don`t really want to go to Michigan State and study engineering because those people don`t like me. Nicely set up, Pataki whacked the ball out of the park: PATAKI: Well, you know, you always manage to get a clip from Rush. I would love to have one from Keith Olbermann or someone, because you can always take — MATTHEWS: Well, I`m looking for Republican opinion here. Exactly! Matthews is always looking for Republican opinion to bash, which once again set Pataki up nicely: PATAKI: — take positions — let me give you a Republican opinion. (CROSSTALK) PATAKI: We believe in freedom of religion. In New York City, there are over 100 mosques. In New York State, there are over 300 mosques. MATTHEWS: Right. PATAKI: We believe that religious tolerance is an important part of our Bill of Rights and of our country. But that doesn`t mean that we have to tolerate building a center with questionable sources of funds, questionable leadership so close to Ground Zero. It is the wrong thing to do at the wrong site. MATTHEWS: Gene, your last word here, please. EUGENE ROBINSON, WASHINGTON POST: Well, I believe the organizers of the mosque will refuse, as all of us do, to be classified as second-class citizens of this country. PATAKI: That`s right. ROBINSON: I believe the governor forgets that innocent Muslims died in the collapse of the Twin Towers, along with Christians and Jews and everyone else. And — and I just think it is an outrageous violation of what we as Americans hold sacred, freedom of religion, and the fact that we are all equal to say, yes, sure, we like Islam, but we don`t like you here. Brace yourselves, for Robinson was about to get schooled: PATAKI: You know, I think it`s an incredible violation of our freedom of speech if you think that by expressing an opinion that differs from yours somehow, it is in any way treating people as second-class citizens. Ouch! Even Matthews recognized Pataki was right: MATTHEWS: OK. I`m with you. I`m with you. PATAKI: It`s not. MATTHEWS: Governor — Governor, you rang my bell. I agree. Both sides — I respect your opinion. I respect the other guy`s opinion. What I don`t respect are people talking about blacklisting the construction companies, talking about we`re going to get those people and run them out of business who do try to build this center. That is bad Americanism. That is not American to say, all right, you have a right to do it, but we will ruin your business if you do it. Is that freedom of speech or is that something else? PATAKI: No, it`s not. No, it`s not. And I agree with you. (CROSSTALK) MATTHEWS: OK. Then we`re together on that — (CROSSTALK) PATAKI: We have to follow the law. But let me raise another point here. The developer, so-called developer of this project, earlier, about a year or so ago, plunked down $4.9 million in cash to buy the site. A year-and-a-half before that, he was a waiter. He then plunked down $5 million to buy the second site and got a mortgage in excess of $20 million or $30 million, a guy who was a waiter as a restaurant a year-and-a-half ago. People are asking him the source of that almost $10 million in cash. MATTHEWS: OK. PATAKI: He won`t answer the questions. And I think it`s — the American people and certainly the people of New York have a right to know the source of the funding, because that goes to what this center is going to be used for. I have grave doubts. I think it should be moved. And if they were really serious about reaching out and building bridges, they would listen to those of us who respect Islam, but who don`t believe that center should be there. Outstanding, Governor. Absolutely outstanding. Now watch Matthews further make a fool of himself: MATTHEWS: OK. Seven years ago, the man who is building this center was speaking at Danny Pearl`s funeral. I`m not sure he`s a bad guy, like you say he is. This is why folks like Olbermann don’t allow conservatives on their programs, for Matthews was seriously about to get owned: PATAKI: Well, I can tell you, Danny Pearl`s father has said that it should not be built there. Game, set, and match Pataki. Bravo, Governor! Bravo!

Read more:
Pataki Smacks Down Matthews: You Bash Limbaugh, How About Olbermann?

Drake Writes A Letter To Aaliyah, Nine Years After Her Death

‘We remain inspired and moved by all that you’ve given the world,’ he writes to the late singer. By Jayson Rodriguez Drake Photo: FilmMagic Drake’s appreciation for Aaliyah is well-known, from the way he’s spoken of the late singer in interviews to sampling her voice for his “Unforgettable” track with Young Jeezy . In honor of the nine-year anniversary of Aaliyah’s death , Drake penned a letter to the “Rock the Boat” singer that was posted on RapRadar.com . “Dear Dana,” Drake begins, referring to the singer by her middle name. “I’ve never lost a parent, a friend, or a lover but I will never forget this day for the rest of my life. I remember getting the news that you had passed and it connected with my heart like a clean shot from Muhammad Ali. I was crushed.” The Thank Me Later rapper went on to explain that he was one of Aaliyah’s biggest fans and that he was “truly in love” with her. He complimented the star’s appearance, the way she carried herself, and the confidence she communicated in her music, be it about love or heartache. Now that he’s become a professional musician, he lamented that he and Aaliyah would never get the chance to collaborate. “But you should know, we all listen to you every day and we remain inspired and moved by all that you’ve given the world,” he finished. “I hope I make the right life choices so I can end up in heaven where I know you rest your head. I’ll continue to make music in your honor until the day we finally meet.” Share your memories of Aaliyah in the comments. Related Videos Remembering Aaliyah Related Photos Aaliyah: A Life In Photos Related Artists Aaliyah Drake

See original here:
Drake Writes A Letter To Aaliyah, Nine Years After Her Death

Explaining ‘Lives Touched’ to the Mainstream Media

In late July, a Government Accountability Office report circulated which analyzed stimulus funding being spent by the Department of Energy.  The main gist of that report involved the cost of each job being generated by the stimulus bill – a staggering $194,000.  Tucked away in that report was a phrase that was new to most of us, a way to calculate jobs through a term called ‘lives touched’. Last week it was confirmed that some departments being funded by the stimulus are indeed using the metric ‘lives touched’ – a regression from the absurd ‘jobs saved or created’, which was already a step down from the incalculable ‘jobs created’. A spokesperson from the CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company explains: “Lives Touched” is a figure that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) uses to track the amount of people who have been positively affected by the Recovery Act funds.  This total would include people who have been provided full time employment (i.e. saved and created jobs) through the Recovery Act and people who at some point have supported a project funded by the Recovery Act. Essentially, the Obama administration had figured out another way to inflate job numbers to better fit their claims of success.  And yet, the media has remained largely silent on this matter.  Even as Vice-President Biden released a report on the Recovery Act yesterday, with a specific focus on the Department of Energy and job creation. Below is an outline of how the administration and the DOE are collaborating to inflate their numbers by measuring the number of ‘lives touched’ by the stimulus bill. In their remarks , Vice-President Biden and DOE Secretary Chu reference job creation several times (emphasis mine throughout). Biden:   “… the Recovery Act’s $100 billion investment in innovation is not only transforming the economy and creating new jobs … Chu:  “…these breakthroughs are helping create tens of thousands of new jobs …” Biden:  “We’re planting the seeds of innovation, but private companies and the nation’s top researchers are helping them grow, launching entire new industries, transforming our economy and creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs in the process.” The Biden report being cited, The Recovery Act: Transforming the American Economy Through Innovation , references several companies that have generated jobs through the Recovery Act.  Each footnote in the report explains that the job estimates are from a company’s own reports, which is the norm for reporting job results through the recovery website. Referring back to the CH2M company, we know that their reports include a directive to use numbers which estimate ‘lives touched’ by the stimulus.  We not only know this from the spokesperson’s explanation of the metric above, but by the reporting instructions provided to subcontractors which defines the phrase as “(the) total number of workers who have directly charged 1 or more hours of work time to a … contract.” One hour of work and your life has been touched.  Additionally, the instructions state that, “The lives touched headcount will remain the same or increase over time as new workers become involved with ARRA contracts.  The total headcount will never decrease.” In other words, a temporary, part-time, or seasonal worker can come into a project, work no more than one hour on said project, and that person will continue to appear in the headcount with each report.  They will not be removed upon their departure from the project. The DOE themselves have also confirmed this metric.  Spokesman Cameron Hardy explains: “Lives touched” represents the cumulative number of full-time, part-time, and temporary workers that have been employed with EM Recovery Act funds at some point since the start of the program in April 2009.  As of June 30, 2010, the lives touched number is more than 24,000 and we have 10,500 full-time Recovery Act workers, working across the DOE Complex. The metric, according to the DOE, was developed by the Office of Environmental Management “to capture all workers that have been employed under the Recovery Act.”  But why the need to capture all workers, when some may have only worked a mere hour on a project, or who have only supported a project in some manner?  Simply put, to inflate the numbers. The GAO report claims that calculations from the DOE “ranged from about 5,700 jobs to 20,200, depending on the methodology used.”   What is the harm in providing an overall headcount, as long as it remains separate from official job reports?  Well, it turns out that they can’t seem to keep things separate. When these numbers are presented publicly and then parroted through the mainstream media who have clearly not done their homework, as was the case with yesterday’s Biden report, the result is deceit.  The administration provided job estimates while failing to provide any context or explanation as to how the numbers were derived. An example of this can be seen in an April News Flash provided by the Office of Environmental Management.  The chart on the right tallies up the total headcount or ‘lives touched’ as 20,249.  A statement on the left claims that “EM Recovery Act funding has employed over 20,000 workers on stimulus projects in 12 states.”  Which is it, employed or touched? A contract award summary for the National Opinion Research Center speaks volumes of the disparity.  In their ‘description of jobs created’ section, they explain how the numbers are derived: “…the total headcount, (the number of ‘lives touched’ or, the number of people who have labor hours funded by stimulus funds, not distinguishing between part-time and full-time, or the length of the job, as of June 30th is a combined total of 480 staff members hired/retained as of the end of the quarter.” The summary then goes on to explain that only 2 of the 480 jobs being discussed were newly created positions.  Two jobs, but a grand total of 480 are being reported.  That’s a markup up of 24,000%. It would be funny, if it weren’t so sad. It’s all part of the overall deception, however.  The White House continues to throw out random numbers in their quest to convince the public that their behemoth stimulus bill is saving jobs at a massive rate.  Whether it is created, saved, funded, or touched, the Obama administration’s smoke and mirrors tactics continue.  Perhaps that will change.  Perhaps the American people will see right through these lies. Perhaps the polls in November will clearly demonstrate how many lives are being touched by the stimulus bill – in a negative way. Crossposted at The Mental Recession

Read the original:
Explaining ‘Lives Touched’ to the Mainstream Media

Honorary Oscars Announced: Will Jean-Luc Godard Personally Accept His?

Congratulations to filmmakers Francis Ford Coppola and Jean-Luc Godard, actor Eli Wallach, and film historian and preservationist Kevin Brownlow on their imminent recognition at this year’s Academy Governors Awards. They deserve it, but at least in Godard’s case, will the French New Wave pioneer — who historically sniffs at prizes and couldn’t even be bothered to attend his latest film’s Cannes premiere — even show up to accept? Take Movieline’s poll after the jump!

See the rest here:
Honorary Oscars Announced: Will Jean-Luc Godard Personally Accept His?

Jesse Bradford on His New Show Outlaw, Jimmy Smits, and His Favorite Scene

Jesse Bradford has toplined projects ranging from Flags of Our Fathers to Swimfan to Bring It On , and now, in his first consistent TV role since The West Wing , he plays an Ivy League-educated upstart working in a law firm alongside former Supreme Court justice Jimmy Smits on NBC’ s upcoming drama Outlaw . Movieline recently caught up with Bradford to discuss his new role and grill him about his favorite film scene of all time.

See the original post:
Jesse Bradford on His New Show Outlaw, Jimmy Smits, and His Favorite Scene

Scream 4 Adds Anna Paquin and Kristen Bell to Cast, Will Have Highest Celebrity Body Count Ever

Will Scream 4 add Dustin Hoffman next? Anna Paquin and Kristen Bell have just been cast in the troubled Wes Craven film , joining an already overcrowded call sheet that features — deep breath — Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox Arquette, David Arquette, Emma Roberts, Hayden Panettiere, Rory Culkin, Anthony Anderson, Adam Brody, Marley Shelton, Alison Brie and Mary McDonnell. Considering the relative name status of Paquin and Bell — and their eleventh hour addition — expect both to be offed in the first 10 minutes. [ USA Today ]

Read more:
Scream 4 Adds Anna Paquin and Kristen Bell to Cast, Will Have Highest Celebrity Body Count Ever

Michael Bay Calls Pistol-Whipping Allegations ‘Bullsh*t’

Not only that, according to a new open letter on Bay’s blog, but the filmmaker doesn’t even have bodyguards to go on the clubbin’, drinkin’, pistol-whippin’ romp alleged yesterday by a pair of plaintiffs n L.A. This is all so much “bullsh*t,” Bay writes — and he has the alibi to prove it.

Originally posted here:
Michael Bay Calls Pistol-Whipping Allegations ‘Bullsh*t’

NYT Accuses Mosque Protesters of Fomenting Muslim Extremism, Reveals Own Manhattan-Centric Snobbery

Still more slanted coverage in the New York Times of the controversy over a proposed mosque at Ground Zero: First in Saturday’s story by intelligence reporter Scott Shane, fretting that public opposition voiced to the speedy approval and building of a giant Islamic cultural center topped by a mosque two blocks from Ground Zero would somehow make radical Muslim extremists, who despise the very existence of America, hate the U.S. even more: ” Anti-Islam Protest in U.S. Bolsters Extremists, Experts Say ” (Note: This article was compiled from three separate articles prepared for Times Watch ). Some counterterrorism experts say the anti-Muslim sentiment that has saturated the airwaves and blogs in the debate over plans for an Islamic center near ground zero in Lower Manhattan is playing into the hands of extremists by bolstering their claims that the United States is hostile to Islam. Opposition to the center by prominent politicians and other public figures in the United States has been covered extensively by the news media in Muslim countries. At a time of concern about radicalization of young Muslims in the West, it risks adding new fuel to Al Qaeda’s claim that Islam is under attack by the West and must be defended with violence, some specialists on Islamic militancy say. For confirmation of his slanted premise, Shane went to an unlabeled center-left policy group, New America Foundation. “I know people in this debate don’t intend it, but there are consequences for these kinds of remarks,” said Brian Fishman, who studies terrorism for the New America Foundation here. He said that Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born cleric hiding in Yemen who has been linked to several terrorist plots, has been arguing for months in Web speeches and in a new Qaeda magazine that American Muslims face a dark future of ever-worsening discrimination and vilification. “When the rhetoric is so inflammatory that it serves the interests of a jihadi recruiter like Awlaki, politicians need to be called on it,” Mr. Fishman said. Shane even suggested former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was fomenting radicalism with his opposition to the mosque: Mr. Gingrich, the former House speaker and a potential 2012 presidential candidate, said in a Fox News interview that “Nazis don’t have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust museum in Washington,” a comment that drew criticism for appearing to equate those proposing the Islamic center with Nazis. Asked about the view that such remarks could fuel radicalism , Mr. Gingrich sent an e-mail response on Friday that did not directly address his critics but said that “Americans must learn to tell the truth about radical Islamists while being supportive of and inclusive of moderate Muslims who live in the modern world, respect women’s rights, reject medieval punishment and defend American laws and the American Constitution.” He added that he believed “it is possible to be a deeply religious Muslim and a patriotic American.” Sigh. What doesn’t “fuel radicalism” these days, in the view of America-bashers? Besides, Gingrich isn’t the only prominent political name to come out against the project — several Democrats have as well. Yet the Times has made only muted acknowledgment of the inconvenient fact that prominent Democrats like New York Gov. David Paterson, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and former DNC chairman Howard Dean have come out against building the Islamic center so close to ground zero, with Dean calling it “a real affront to the people who lost their lives” on 9-11. Is Democrat Dean also “fueling radicalism”? Besides the knee-jerk fretting over “fueling radicalism,” there’s a healthy dose of Manhattan-centric snobbery in the paper’s attitude toward opponents of the mosque, who obviously have no clue about what’s really going on. About four minutes from the end of an August 19 ” Political Points ” podcast at nytimes.com, reporter Sheryl Gay Stolberg took up discussion of the controversial plan to build a mosque near Ground Zero, explaining how the hicks in the sticks who disapprove of the plan, don’t know what’s going on, unlike sophisticated Manhattanites (who actually may not like it much either). Stolberg: “Here’s another reason for the disconnect. I think, in New York, especially in Manhattan, people realize that Muslims live and work in Lower Manhattan , in the area where they’re seeking to build this mosque and community center, which would also include a fitness center where young people could play basketball or swim or what have you. Out in the country, the news coverage has not been as intense, there are fewer details and it allows for the debate to be reduced to its essence, boiled down to a few words: Mosque at Ground Zero. And those words have become inflammatory around the country and I think the nuances is somewhat lost, frankly.” And a Tuesday column by metro writer Clyde Haberman in support (naturally) of the mosque included this unpleasant nativist sniffing: Obscured in the fog of this culture war are a few New York realities, perhaps not fully appreciated by outsiders like Mr. Gingrich of Georgia or Sarah Palin of Alaska . Two blocks may seem like nothing to a non-New Yorker. But anyone who lives or works in Manhattan knows that this distance can be significant. Two blocks is equivalent to several miles in other cities or in the suburbs. Your dry cleaner moves two blocks, and it’s so long, pal. He’ll never see you again. He might as well have relocated to Yonkers.

Read the original here:
NYT Accuses Mosque Protesters of Fomenting Muslim Extremism, Reveals Own Manhattan-Centric Snobbery