ARC's 1st Law: As a "progressive" online discussion grows longer, the probability of a nefarious reference to Karl Rove approaches one

Sunday, February 05, 2006

A Clarifying Moment Indeed

H/T Little Green Footballs

Senior Hamas member Musa Abu Marzuk described the Palestinian Authority’s recognition of Israel as “an error, which can be rectified,” speaking to reporters in Cairo Sunday.

Meanwhile, Israel just has more reason to continue erecting that wall...

*** UPDATE ***
For some more idiotic thinking, see this post from our new entry to the Moonbat blogrool, Steve Gilliard at The News Blog:
Europeans are in no position to give Muslims lectures on proper decorum. They left way too many bodies behind in Muslim countries for that to be taken seriously.

And while the Danes are justifibly proud of their tolerance and record on human rights, do they think vuglarly attacking another religion lives up to that tradition? Yes, there is free speech, but also human decency. Not one Danish cartoonist is running for his life in the middle east today. But decent people, doing NGO work, are.

They had every right to do what they wanted. It's a guaranteed right. But the reason you can't yell fire in a crowded theater is because people could die. The same applies here. If you mock or degrade Muhammad, Muslims will feel highly offended. Is it right to riot? Of course not, but when you hand a tool to Islamic radicals, they will, of course, use it.

The fact is that Europeans now live in multicultural societies and they better consider that. They chose to invite Muslims to live in their countries and now they need to respect their traditions like every other religion

I recall when the Danes left so many Syrian bodies laying around.... oh, wait... Gilliard is just a tool.

Fortunately, Gilliard has the cojones to include criticism from one of his lefty contributors:
Gilly has it all wrong here, and I think that he (and the many Riotoing Mob Apologists in the comments) are confusing all kinds of issues.

Colonialism is an issue here? Oh, yeah, right, I forgot about that time when Norway invaded Syria. Oh, wait, they didn't. But doesn't anyone remember the group of Tibetians that burned down the Chinese consulate in DC, sacked their stores, and threatened to kidnap takout delivery guys, in retaliation for treatment of Tibetians in Tibet by China? Oh, yeah, I forgot, that didn't happen either. This isn't about the Crusades or anything like that.

Muslims are living in Europe now, so EUROPE has to respect THEIR religion? Erm, quite the other way around, methinks. The laws of the home country apply to all, regardless of religion, at least in anyplace I'd want to live (unlike most of the countries where these folks are fleeing from). As one poster sagely pointed out, answer these questions in a yes or no fashion, and make your conclusions accordingly: Can you open a mosque in Copenhagen? Can you open a Pentecostal church in Mecca? And let me add: What would the results be?

Should Europeans have to "respect" self-censorship, along with honor killings, burquas, beheadings for herasey, slavery and conquest of nonbelievers, and bans on pork products, lest they give offense? And, frankly, I (and I'm sure most Europeans) don't give a shit if these are part of "real pure Islam" (which please remind me, has the global headcount equivalent of Catholic Italy or Protestant Scandinavia in what part of the world?) or "local tribal cultures"--they seem to pop up as part of the mainstream, not isolated fringe incidents. When you have national laws preventing women from driving, leaving the country without a male relative, etc. it's gone a bit beyond "local practice" methinks.

Ditto for the countless offensive anti-Semitic cartoons that are published in government-sponsored newspapers throughout the Middle East. You can't claim something is "fringe behavior" when it's also "national policy."

Then there's the Disney Response, the "its an interconnected world, we all need each other, get used to it." Erm, I don't have to "get used" to the problem of homelessness in New York by letting a junkie sleep in my living room. Europe does not "owe" any group visas or jobs or walking on eggshells.

Europe spent centuries getting the balance between state and religion right (ie largely eliminating it from daily life), which is the exact opposite of the station that Islam occupies in the Middle East today. There seems to be a base incompatibility here. Why should Europe dismantle itself in order to accomodate those who would gladly send it back to the Dark Ages?

As I have said earlier, watch for a gradual choking-off of visas given to residents of nations that have participated in violent anti-Danish and anti-European riots, as well as nations that harbor fundamentalist mullahs at high levels as well. I would include Palestine--whose current government seems to be taking a stand of "please don't cut us off financially OR WE'LL KILL YOU"--in this group. The last time I checked, there were plenty of non-rioting, non-burqua insisting, non-honor-killing folks in Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union (two huge labor pools that were only not acessible in the past due to the Iron Curtain), India, China, the Phillipines, etc. who are standing ready to fill any labor "need" in Western Europe.

I think a lot of liberals here--who would be singing a very different tune had the furor been over an anti-Christian cartoon (South Part, any episode, almost, anyone?)--are being "colorblinded" by this case. They see what they perceive as "oppressed" people (by their own governments, folks...) "rising up" against nasty imperialist whities (hey, anyone remember when Denmark invaded Iran? Oh, yeah, they didn't) who insult their core values (by giving them jobs, housing and welfare?). Don't fall into the trap. It is not "anti-Islam" to refuse to bend to the most extreme of its practitioners, nor is it an insult to point out its worst practices.

Read the whole thing... good demonstration of mushy thinking by Gilliard. And this is EXACTLY why the Dems in Congress are going to have problems. If Gilliard's fellow contributor sees the idiocy that he's trying to push, it's likely that much of the Dem base recognizes the same.

And with Clinton ("the centrist") sympathizing with the rioters (and effectively condoning their actions), it's a clear division within the relativism of the progressives.

Your Co-Conspirator,
ARC: St Wendeler