Of course, I don't want books banned, but I don't want my tax dollars used to subsidize anti American propaganda, either. I don't buy into the simplistic algebra equation that the enemy of my enemy is necessarily my friend. Just b/c I don't like Iranian Shia theocrat puppet Assad, doesn't mean I support his Sunni Al Qaeda opponents.
Snippets of reviews of "In Praise of Hatred" from the back cover:
From 15 September 2012 UK "Independent" review "In Praise of Hatred, By Khaled Khalifa, trans. Leri Price"
"Khalifa has chosen to profile fanaticism from a feminine perspective, rather than the more predictable "male martyr", is this book's great innovation. It is a courageous endeavour"
The left believes that it is OK to promote Islamic religious intolerance and OK to promote hate and killing as long as you can rationalize you're also somehow promoting feminism. Seems pseudo secular humanist liberals only vilify Christians and are happy rationalizing autocratic theocracy as long as it's specifically Islamic theocracy. One would think discouraging Muslims from becoming "martyrs" would be included in their "war on women", but instead they see disparate gender statistics of kamikaze jihadis as an affirmative action problem.
More reviews of "In Praise of Hate" from amazon:
“Khaled Khalifa’s In Praise of Hatred...is powerfully seductive in its exploration of hate.” —Egypt Independent
and a review from the front flap:
"Witnessing the ruling dictatorship’s bloody campaign against the Muslim Brotherhood, she is filled with hatred for the regime and becomes increasingly radical"
Basically, in rationalizing the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood, this book is like the "Klansman" inspiration for "Birth of a Nation" that rationalized the equally evil KKK.
"she launches herself into a battle for her religion, her country, and ultimately, for her own future."I thought Obama hated people who clinged to God, guns, and religion, but I suppose he and his minions were only specifically slagging off Americans and Christians.
In the book's afterward:
"population outraged by ... regime 1976 intervention in Lebanon to aid Phalangist forces against the Palestinian-Muslim-Leftist alliance. Syrian leftists and Islamists organized against the regime."
However, the library almost made up for wasting money on the Arab Muslim equivalent of a KKK recruiting manual with a "Read" poster promoting love instead:
FYI, the student in the above poster is reading Simon May's "Love: A History":
Simon May's intro:
"Isn't love indefinable-- a matter of feeling, not thought?"
Is love a fancy, or a feeling?
Which, apparently, was an anachronism:
Marianne quotes Hartley Coleridge's Sonnet VII to Elinor ("Is love a fancy or a feeling?") to inquire about her feelings for Edward. However, this sonnet was published for the first time in 1833 - some 22 years after Sense and Sensibility takes place in 1811.
And to end on a politically incorrect note, since owning dogs is against Sharia law:
A sentiment I'm certain to which Sir John would heartily concur:
"But Marianne could no more satisfy [Sir John] as to the colour of Mr Willoughby's pointer than he could describe to her the shades of his mind."