MiamiHerald.com | 03/21/2006 | Cartoons -- not for the faint-hearted

MiamiHerald.com 03/21/2006 Cartoons -- not for the faint-hearted

When Muslims around the world took to the streets to protest Danish cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammed, I kept thinking that they should take a break and watch South Park. Anyone complaining that the West treats Islam without the respect it affords other religions has not seen the outrageous, offensive, hilarious cartoon about the foul-mouthed children growing up in South Park, Colo. If all the groups who have stood at the cutting end of one South Park's jokes went outside to protest, there would be nobody left at home anywhere.

Crossing the line
As it happens, the only notable walkout came from inside the show, when the singer Isaac Hayes, the velvety voice of Chef in the show, decided to quit, saying that South Park has gone too far in disrespecting religion. No kidding. South Park goes too far all the time. Every show crosses the line. That's what makes it so great. You can't watch without cringing, and sooner or later everyone reaches a point when they say, ''Wow, that really was too much.'' And then you keep laughing and you keep watching. South Park is fabulous satire. Nobody is sacred. Trust me, nobody.

As the show's producers noted, however, Hayes never had a problem playing the raunchy, sexually savvy school chef who treats the children with peculiar respect as he imparts the raunchiest adult advice. After nine years on the show, Hayes decided to take offense when his own faith, Scientology, became the subject of South Park's merciless writers. His accusation that the show engages in ''inappropriate ridicule'' of religion reminds me of the cries of Muslim extremists, who still find nothing wrong with insult, ridicule or worse when it comes to Christians and Jews, but demand only reverence and respect for Islam. Special treatment for one religion amounts to bigotry.

Hayes, as far as we know, expressed no objection to the show in which Satan, the long-suffering boyfriend of a sex-crazed Saddam, took on a sad and scrawny Jesus -- who has his own public-access cable show -- in a boxing match. (Jesus won, but only because Satan took a dive to win a bet against himself.)

Nothing is sacred
Hayes did not object when, at the height of the Terri Schiavo controversy, with America torn over the heart-wrenching plight of a woman about to be disconnected from life support, the show took on that subject. A truck runs over the hapless Kenny. God needs his sharp video game skills to coordinate the final war against evil, but his friends want Kenny disconnected so they can inherit his Gameboy toy. That's not him anymore, says one of the boys looking at Kenny hooked up to machines. ``It's a tomato.''

One of the children, Kyle, is a Jew, which makes for incessant mockery that some have called anti-Semitic. Critics have called the show anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim, anti-Christian, homophobic, sophomoric, infantile, inexcusable and very badly drawn. I call it really, really funny.

My favorite episode took on the Katrina disaster. In Two Days Before the Day After Tomorrow, the children cause a massive flood in Beaverton. A journalist standing outside the city limits says he cannot go in and has seen nothing but can report hundreds of millions have died. As Beavertonians stand desperately on their rooftops, South Park residents discuss whose fault it is. Half blame Osama, the other half blame Bush. Then a scientist blames global warming, which he calculates will begin two days before the day after tomorrow.
Freedom makes you cringe

These riotous characters have argued that the Japanese and redheads have no soul, Mormons are not strong enough to fight the devil and God is a Buddhist.

As Hayes rightly noted, the show has no deference for religion. The creators make fun of just about everyone, but they reserve their sharpest penknives for the hypocritical and sanctimonious. I shudder to think what they'll say about Hayes.

Call it the ticklish underbelly of a free society.

For those considering opening up their countries to free speech, look closely. Sometimes that freedom makes you cringe, other times it makes you laugh so hard you can hardly wait for the next episode.

Frida Ghitis writes about world affairs

SF Chronicle: No more kaffiyehs / Radical Chic confusion among the fashion rebels

No more kaffiyehs / Radical Chic confusion among the fashion rebels
Frida Ghitis
Sunday, March 5, 2006 Chronicle Sunday Insights

Amsterdam -- As the slave to fashion that I am, it's my duty to report the urgent news from the front lines of Europe's Radical Chic world. The latest developments in rebel fashion, I'm afraid, are rather grim.

Yes, as I push against the North Sea wind blowing frigid air along Amsterdam's narrow streets, I still see some determined fashion rebels tightly wrapping their checkered black and white Palestinian kaffiyehs around their necks.

Sadly, the kaffiyeh, appears to be on its way out, with no visible replacement in the horizon. Perhaps the desert headwear-turned fashion scarf has lost allure as the political winds of the Middle East have blown it out of the corridors of power.

Most will remember the kaffiyeh when they picture its most famous wearer, Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, who never faced the public without one neatly positioned over his head and shoulders. Only his closest confidants ever got a glimpse of his uncovered head.

The kaffiyeh was originally meant for covering men's heads in Middle Eastern deserts, but it took the fashion world by storm on the chaotic runways of anti-globalization street protests, with bearded wearers jauntily protecting their faces from tear gas as they threw rocks at the establishment, represented by policemen wearing their hopelessly old-fashioned riot gear.

In a clever juxtaposition -- a geographical and political melange of styles -- the preferred top to go with the black and white scarf was a Che Guevara T-shirt. But the pensive visage of Fidel Castro's revolutionary comrade is strictly summer fashion. In the winter he is mere lining, underwear, really.

Arafat remains a symbol of the struggle for the downtrodden, even if his actions did not always live up to the ideals. Still, when it comes to keeping a fashion trend alive, it is no secret that you need an effective marketing campaign. It's not just style that sells. Whether it's Tommy Hillfiger attire at the Olympics or Giorgio Armani designs on the runways of Milan, style alone does not do the trick. You need models, marketing and a message.

Nike had Michael Jordan and Che Guevara-Wear has Fidel Castro's Cuba promoting him. A stroll down any Cuban street brings you face to face with larger than life images of the man, his message and, above all, his face. Yes, there are those dark eyes staring into space, and that cool beret covering his hair, which is probably messy, what with all that work saving the oppressed.

As for kaffiyeh sales among trendy Western rebels, we have a marketing crisis in the works.

As long as Arafat was alive, it didn't matter what he and his Fatah party did, the kaffiyeh made it to the front pages and the fashionable rebels rushed online to order more groovy black and white scarves. After he died, his heirs in Fatah still ruled the Palestinian Authority, and the black and white still fluttered proudly over televised shoulders in Ramallah. Then came the Palestinian elections on January 25, however, and everything changed. The green was in, the black and white was out.

The Palestinian Islamic group Hamas, the party that won control of the Palestinian Parliament, does not wear black and white. Horrors! Hamas, Fatah's rival, favors Islam's green.
That throws a stylistic monkey wrench into the wardrobe choices of European and North American radical chic. To be truly hip, you must keep up with the message your clothes send. You can still wear one of those "Bush Terrorist" T-shirts. That states pretty clearly where you stand.

You could try the red shirts of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, or the everyman jacket of Iran's Ahmadinejad. But, when the wind is blowing in Amsterdam, you need more, and an Arafat kaffiyeh runs the risk of confusing your public. Does black and white mean you don't support Hamas? And if you don't support Hamas, does that mean you have forsaken the Palestinian cause? It's so tough being a rebel!

Luckily for radicals in Amsterdam, the shops are full of options. There is the always-popular sweat shirt that reads, "I went to Amsterdam and all I got was stoned." Maybe that will have to do until spring comes and we can all break out those Che Guevara shirts.

Frida Ghitis writes about world affairs -- and occasionally fashion.

MiamiHerald.com | 03/03/2006 | Reject flawed proposal to create new human-rights panel

MiamiHerald.com | 03/03/2006 | Reject flawed proposal to create new human-rights panel

UNITED NATIONS

Reject flawed proposal to create new human-rights panel
BY FRIDA GHITIS

The first time you walk into the United Nations, you can't help but get a little choked up. As you approach, a carving on the wall of a nearby park reminds you of the hope-filled prophecy from Isaiah: ''They shall beat their swords into plowshares. Nation shall not lift sword against nation.'' Then, with the building before you, you hear the drumbeat of all the member nation's flags fluttering above. Inside the courtyard, the sculpture of a giant pistol with its barrel tied into a knot is yet another symbol of the world's hopes, not just for the institution, but for itself, for a planet where conflicts are solved without war; where despotism, war and cruelty can one day be banished.

Despites its failings, the United Nations still embodies our aspirations for a better future. The sounds of dozens of languages spoken by representatives from scores of countries still evoke the dream of a place where the world can come together to fight for our highest ideals. And nothing in the history of the world body has ever betrayed those ideals more tragically than the grotesque U.N. Human Rights Commission.

That's why the very flawed proposal for the creation of a Human Rights Council to replace the old commission must be rejected. The proposed council is clearly an improvement over the UNHRC, but it keeps some of the worst aspects of the old body. That's just not good enough. The United Nations is much too important to allow one of its core missions, the protection of human rights, to suffer under the soft bigotry of low expectations.

For years the old Human Rights Commission made a mockery of its sensitive mission. Membership in the UNHRC was the best protection against international censorship for human-rights violations. The membership routinely included countries whose leaders should have been imprisoned, not massaged by diplomatic niceties. Genocidal regimes such as Sudan and North Korea sat around the table with representatives of countries such as Syria, Zimbabwe or Libya.

When Secretary-General Kofi Annan finally put in motion a plan to abolish the commission and replace it with a worthy body, a ray of hope came over the United Nations' horizon. Negotiations to create the new entity have been arduous, and there is no question that finding a formula to please 191 countries is no easy matter. But the solution brought by the General Assembly president last week is simply not good enough. Its number one problem is that it still allows the worst violators to join the rights council. Much has been made of the provision that would allow for a review of the membership, and could potentially suspended violators.

But the reviews will take years. As Hillel Neuer of the monitoring group U.N. Watch noted, ''When the council created by this draft meets, the faces around the table will look awfully familiar.'' Neuer adds that Annan ''had called for radical surgery,'' and the proposal ``offers to give the patient two aspirins and wheel him back into the street.''

There are other problems with the proposal. Everyone acknowledges that. And yet, major human-rights groups, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch support its approval. A letter from a dozen Nobel Peace Prize winners, including Desmond Tutu and Jimmy Carter, also called for its approval. But why approve a plan that is so flawed on a matter that is so crucial?
Perhaps they believe that this is the best we can achieve. Or maybe they think that this is a way of supporting the organization.

This, however, is the time to create the best possible human-rights body for the sake of those who suffer the worst abuses and for the sake of the United Nations. That time will not come around again soon. This is the time to make the United Nations a place that brings a surge of emotions, not for a beautiful dream lost to cynical politics, but for one we may yet bring to fruition.

Chicago Tribune | No more kaffiyehs: Radical-chic confusion

Chicago Tribune No more kaffiyehs: Radical-chic confusion

AMSTERDAM -- As the slave to fashion that I am, it's my duty to report the urgent news from the front lines of Europe's "radical chic" world. The latest developments in rebel fashion, I'm afraid, are rather grim. Yes, as I push against the North Sea wind along Amsterdam's narrow streets, the checkered black-and-white Palestinian kaffiyehs wrapped around the necks of fashion rebels appear to be on the way out, with no visible replacement in the horizon.

Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat never faced the public without one positioned over his head and shoulders. The desert headwear was originally meant for covering men's heads in Middle Eastern deserts, but it took the fashion world by storm on the chaotic runways of anti-globalization street protests, with protesters jauntily protecting their faces from tear gas as they threw rocks at the establishment.

In a clever juxtaposition--a geographical and political melange of styles--the preferred top to go with the black-and-white scarf was a Che Guevara T-shirt. The bearded Guevara, icon of Latin America's leftist rebels, would be astonished to know how many capitalists have profited from selling his likeness. But the pensive visage of Fidel Castro's revolutionary comrade is strictly summer fashion. In the winter the T-shirts are mere lining, underwear really.

Arafat and Guevara remain symbols of the struggle for the downtrodden, but when it comes to keeping a fashion trend alive, it is no secret that you need an effective marketing campaign. It's not just style or Tommy Hilfiger or Giorgio Armani that sells. You need models, marketing and a message.

Nike has Michael Jordan and Fidel Castro has Che Guevara-Wear. A stroll down any Cuban street brings you face-to-face with larger-than-life images of Guevara, his message and, above all, those dark eyes staring into space and that cool beret covering his hair. As for kaffiyeh sales among trendy Western rebels, we have a marketing crisis in the works.

As long as Arafat was alive, it didn't matter what he and his Fatah party did, the kaffiyeh made it onto the front pages of newspapers and fashionable rebels continued to order more groovy black-and-white scarves online. Then came Arafat's death, the Palestinian elections on Jan. 25, and everything changed.

The Palestinian Islamic group Hamas, the party that won control of the Palestinian Parliament, does not wear black and white. Horrors! Hamas, Fatah's rival, favors Islam's green.

That throws a stylistic monkey wrench into the wardrobe choices of the radical chic. To be truly hip, you must keep up with the message your clothes send. You can still wear a "Bush Terrorist" T-shirt. You can try the red shirts of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez or the everyman jacket of Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. But when the wind is blowing in Amsterdam, you need more, and an Arafat kaffiyeh runs the risk of confusing your public. Does black and white mean you don't support Hamas? And if you don't support Hamas, does that mean you have forsaken the Palestinian cause? It's so tough being a rebel!

Luckily for radicals in Amsterdam, the shops are full of options. There is the always-popular sweat shirt that reads, "I went to Amsterdam and all I got was stoned.

"----------Frida Ghitis writes about world affairs--and occasionally fashion.