On another planet

Johann Hari reports on the National Review cruise:

The idea that Europe is being “taken over” is the unifying theme of this cruise. Some people go on singles’ cruises, some on ballroom-dancing cruises. This is the Muslims Are Coming cruise. Everyone thinks it. Everyone knows it. And the man most responsible for this insight is sitting only a few tables down: Mark Steyn. He is wearing sunglasses on top of his head and a bright shirt. Steyn’s thesis in his new book, America Alone, is simple: The “European races”–i.e., white people–”are too self-absorbed to breed,” but the Muslims are multiplying quickly. The inevitable result will be “large-scale evacuation operations circa 2015″ as Europe is ceded to Al Qaeda and “Greater France remorselessly evolve[s] into Greater Bosnia.” He offers a light smearing of dubious demographic figures–he needs to turn 20 million European Muslims into more than 150 million in nine years, which is a lot of humping–to “prove” his case.

But facts, figures, and doubt are not on the itinerary of this cruise. With one or two exceptions, the passengers discuss “the Muslims” as a homogenous, sharia-seeking block–already with near-total control of Europe. Over the week, I am asked nine times–I counted–when I am fleeing Europe’s encroaching Muslim population for the safety of the United States.

Via David Weigel.

Comments

#1 Toby
June 26, 2007

Steyn is an idiot. He had a good line for a while, but now he takes himself too seriously. His most despicable column said that the US campaign in Iraq was a failure because “not enough Iraqis had been killed at the start”. And the same man sent up a mournful wail about Terry Schiavo!.

I saw a counter article to his book which pointed out that the fastest growing religion in Europe is our old friend, fundamentalist Christianity i.e. Bible thumpers. We (Europeans) are liable to counter the “Muslim menace”, only to find creationsim taught in our schools and private sexual acts banned.
#2 Anonymouse
June 26, 2007

It’s a problem but the discussion is unhealthily polarized.

I live in Europe (btw the EU is not homogenous, it’s very different in different parts), and it’s a problem in this part, when there are lots of refugees moving in here and failing to integrate and making lots of kids too.

It’s not a discussable topic without political suicide. You get immediately lumped together with all kinds of right wing idiots.
#3 bigTom
June 26, 2007

Strange to hear “when I am fleeing Europe’s encroaching Muslim population for the safety of the United States.” when I feel like fleeing the US to escape the bible thumping fundies.
#4 guthrie
June 26, 2007

Toby:
“private sexual acts banned”

So voyeurism will be compulsory?
#5 ben
June 26, 2007

“…when I feel like fleeing the US to escape the bible thumping fundies.”

How many heads have the bible thumping fundies chopped in the last couple of decades? At worst, they’re simply annoying. Your going to flee because of an annoyance?
#6 Coin
June 26, 2007

when I feel like fleeing the US to escape the bible thumping fundies.

Clearly this means you must be a liberal and, therefore, a muslim fundamentalist. Mark Steyn is proven right!
#7 QrazyQat
June 26, 2007

How many heads have the bible thumping fundies chopped in the last couple of decades? At worst, they’re simply annoying. Your going to flee because of an annoyance?

Aside from their terrorist acts? There’s the removal of some of our most cherished rights, and they’re trying, indeed promising, to remove many more in the future. That’s something worst than “an annoyance”, even if you forget their terrorist acts and the ones they didn’t get to carry out (several large weapons caches, in the hands of these loonies, have been found out in the past 3-4 years — the scariest part is that they weren’t found out because law enforcement was on their case, but by accidents).
#8 elspi
June 26, 2007

ben,
there are a million people dead in Iraq because of the bible thumpers little war.
The Muslims cannot hold a candle to the bible thumpers.
#9 ben
June 26, 2007

Er, which terrorist acts are you referring to, QrazyQat? And which of our “most cherrished” rights have “they” removed? Which terrorist acts did “they” not get to carry out? What weapons caches? I have a weapons cache, or at least some people would refer to my firearms collection as such, so what?

elspi, which war was it that was carried out in the name of Christianity that resulted in a million dead? I thought the mantra was “blood for oil,” not “blood for Christ.” Which is it?
#10 elspi
June 26, 2007

“which war was it that was carried out in the name of Christianity”

Take it from somebody living in the belly of the bible-thumper beast, it was their war from the very beginning.

Don’t confuse the not-bible-thumpers’ (necons) reasoning with the thumpers’ reasoning.
They were both wrong, but wrong differently.
#11 Dano
June 26, 2007

which war was it that was carried out in the name of Christianity that resulted in a million dead? I thought the mantra was “blood for oil,” not “blood for Christ.” Which is it?

Some have been saying there’s close to 1M Iraqi dead.

And wrt “cherished” rights they’ve removed, the other crew have limited free speech with ‘bong hits for Jay-zus’, limited the scope of the ESA, signing statements, stem cells, extraordinary rendition, chipping away at abortion, warrantless wiretapping, Gitmo, the list goes on and on with this clown show and it’ll take a generation to clean up the mess.

Best,

D
#12 ben
June 26, 2007

Er, I know which war they are referring to, Dano, I don’t however see that it is a war in the name of Christianity. Can you show me somehow that it is?

Your free speech example is a little lame, show me where real political speech has been limited, a serious example please.

I don’t know what the ESA is, google searches turn up many things that have nothing to do with rights. Nor do I know what you mean by “signing statements”.

What does the limits on FEDERAL SPENDING for stem cells have to do with rights? Don’t the folks who get taxed have the right to not have their tax dollars spent on stem cell research if they don’t want it done either? Private individuals and organizations, not to mention state entities, can spend all the money they like on stem cell research.

Chipping away at abortion? Do you think there should be no limits on abortion? What about a 9 mo old fetus?

Gitmo? Since when are non-uniformed combatants afforded many rights?

And finally, regardless of whether or not you think the above constitute rights violations, how much head-chopping has happened in the name of Christianity in the last couple of decades? In the last Century? These two things, radical (if you call bible thumpers ‘radical’) Christianity, and radical Islam are not the same. One is at worst a nuisance with limited political power, the other is a very motivated and violent phenomenon.
#13 dhogaza
June 26, 2007

Don’t the folks who get taxed have the right to not have their tax dollars spent on stem cell research if they don’t want it done either?

The majority of people DO want their tax dollars spent on stem cell research. What about their rights?

ESA = Endangered Species Act.
#14 hardindr
June 26, 2007

Er, which terrorist acts are you referring to, QrazyQat?

ben, meet Paull J. Hill, James Kopp and the Army of God…

What weapons caches?

This one perhaps?

This post by David Neiwert makes for interesting reading too…
#15 Mike C.
June 27, 2007

Anonymouse,

It’s not a discussable topic without political suicide. You get immediately lumped together with all kinds of right wing idiots.

Gee, and who lumps you in with those “right wing idiots?” Those brilliant multicultural leftists in media, perhaps?

QrazyQat,

There’s the removal of some of our most cherished rights

Yes, because our Founding Fathers were all about abortion rights, after all. What freedom could be more fundamental?

several large weapons caches, in the hands of these loonies, have been found out in the past 3-4 years — the scariest part is that they weren’t found out because law enforcement was on their case, but by accidents

The most deadly terrorist attack in the United States was committed by Muslims. The second most deadly was committed by a professed agnostic (McVeigh).
#16 Mike C.
June 27, 2007

The majority of people DO want their tax dollars spent on stem cell research. What about their rights?

The majority of people in Britain don’t believe in man-made global warming. What about their rights?

/honestly, do we really want to rely entirely on public opinion for making these kind of decisions?
#17 Harald Korneliussen
June 27, 2007

“Over the week, I am asked nine times–I counted–when I am fleeing Europe’s encroaching Muslim population for the safety of the United States.”

He doesn’t need to worry, see. Because by the time this happens, pigs will fly, and obviously flying pigs are ideal for repelling the muslim hordes.
#18 Tim Lambert
June 27, 2007

Mike C, the key words from your link: “The online study”. It’s an online poll and tells you nothing at all about what the majority of people in Britain think. You can [go and vote](http://lifestyle.aol.co.uk/go-green/global-warming-open-to-debate/article/20070514111009990010) if you want.
#19 Ian Gould
June 27, 2007

“How many heads have the bible thumping fundies chopped in the last couple of decades?”

Do we count the dead in the war George W, Bush started because god told him too?

How about the victims of Terry McVeigh, former member of “Christian Identity” Church?
#20 Ian Gould
June 27, 2007

“The most deadly terrorist attack in the United States was committed by Muslims. The second most deadly was committed by a professed agnostic (McVeigh).”

McVeigh was raised a Catholic, left the Church as an adult to joint a white supremacist “Christian” church and issued a statement from prison announcing that he had returned to the Catholic church.

His profession of agnosticism seem to have been made after his arrest when he was trying to distance himself from his fellow white supremacists in order to protect them from any public backlash.
#21 raj
June 27, 2007

The worst thing that the EU has done is to induct Eastern European countries into the EU. Not only are their economies under-performing, but also they are headed by, and supported by, religious fundamentalist nut-cases. The only thing that could rationalize their induction is that West European companies wanted the cheap labor that was available from the East.
#22 agricola
June 27, 2007

as much as he is probably correct on this occasion, Johann Hari is somewhat of a questionable source as was discussed by Private Eye some years ago.
#23 QrazyQat
June 27, 2007

Yes, because our Founding Fathers were all about abortion rights, after all. What freedom could be more fundamental?

habeas corpus comes to mind.

Others have pointed to some bible-thumper terrorist groups. It shouldn’t even take someone pointing to bring to mind anti-abortion people, who make threats and kill people and fire bomb buildings — the very definition of terororism. Eric Rudolph, the Olympic park bomber who also targeted gay and lesbian and abortion activities, not to mention the many people who hid and fed him for years when law enforcement was trying to catch him — those terrorist sympathizers were not punished. Look at the SLP’s report on rightwing teerorists and check the number who are part of the Christian Identity movement (certainly others mentioned there are also bible-thumpers). This David Neiwert post has some more links. Meanwhile the feds are focussed on eco-terrorists, who are certainly potentially dangerous but who haven’t yet managed to actually kill many people — they seem to try not to, although their methods are an accident waiting to happen at best. This means rightwing teeroroism gets a low priority even though it’s the most common and dominanat form of terrorism in the USA, with a richj tradition going back to thousands and thousands of lynchings and cross burnings (virtually all committed by bible thumpers, BTW). In one of these rightwing terror cases the guys were found out because the post office delivered some materials to the wrong address and the guy who got them reported it. In another a guy was stopped by the Tenn. cops and let go even though the cops “found in his car several weapons and coded documents that seemed to detail a plot”.

Yeah, tell me these people aren’t a threat to the American way of life, not to mention our lives.
#24 Carl Christensen
June 27, 2007

I consider myself a liberal who can’t stand Bush, but it’s a pretty far connection to make the Iraq War (all about wealth & power) into some sort of “fundie US Christian” thing. Whereas we see time and again that Muslim fundamentalists really are kidnapping & maiming & killing in the name of their god, in something like 75 countries (for separatist movements alone) last time I looked.

I’m hardly “pulling a Hitchens” but although I think the Steyn/right-wing nuts are a bit funny, I don’t understand why so many on the left insist on bending over backwards for fundamentalists of any religion, whether Muslim or otherwise. And the stats from polls show that even the moderates think jihad is fine & should be used, hate Jews with a psychotic passion that would get a German arrested these days, etc, etc. As someone who is disgusted by Republicans & the Iraq War & abortion clinic bombers etc, I find the “immoral equivalency” between “Bush/Iraq War” and “Bin Laden/terrorism” ridiculous (i.e. this too-common used excuse by the left that “but Bush is just as bad as Muslim terrorists!”).
#25 QrazyQat
June 27, 2007

but it’s a pretty far connection to make the Iraq War (all about wealth & power) into some sort of “fundie US Christian” thing.

I see your point, but how can you not see a connection when you have the architects of the war continually talking about their “crusade” (as it was called by GW Bush) or high up commanders saying things like “Well you know what I knew, that my God was bigger than his…I knew that my God was a real God, and his was an idol.” (Lt Gen Boykin) when referring to Muslims? And the continual talk of a clash of civilizations, the US against Islam talk that has permeated the administrations (and their helpers in government, the media, and prominent rightwingers).

There’s a connection besides getting the oil pumping (without, mind you, the gauges — there but never installed — that allow someone to see how much oil is being taken) and that connection is the whackiest bible thumping cohort out there.
#26 Carl Christensen
June 27, 2007

the simple answer if it was all some US fundie “crusade” (a word Bush used once in a faux pas way early on and quickly dropped) — why the hell is the Bush & Cheney families and hordes of these right-wing a-holes in bed with Saudi Arabia & Pakistan? It seems to be neither a “crusade” (or anything in the AlQaeda/terror sense); any more than the US dicking around in South America was a “crusade.” Neither is it the BS of “bringing democracy to the Middle East.”

It’s just, unfortunately, BS power politics & business (in the definite, capitalist sense) as usual. So comparisons that Bush/Christian fundamentalist with Bin Laden/Muslim fundamentalist is a bit silly. And it’s a pretty weak excuse for Muslims or the left to make; as if it justifies bombing kids in Israeli pizzarias or whatever. If the Muslim world, for once in my life, or in the last millenium, adapted a more Gandhian approach or had a necessary religious reformation, then perhaps people would take them seriously other than thinking they’re all terrorists.

although the old reactionaries in the NR article are amusing, I really can’t fault them or say, the typical air traveller who is afraid when a loudly talking imam shows up on their plane. it isn’t redneck Blatz-beer swilling white boys from Macon Georgia who are killing people in the name of their god in something like 75 countries.
#27 Mark Schaffer
June 27, 2007

Hello Mr. Lambert,

I thought you would want to know that I have successfully voted several times in that online poll regarding Global Warming just by using the back button on the Firefox browser. This should make those crowing about this poll fall silent…but probably won’t.
#28 QrazyQat
June 27, 2007

it isn’t redneck Blatz-beer swilling white boys from Macon Georgia who are killing people in the name of their god in something like 75 countries.

They’re killing people in the name of their god in the USA. They’re taking down rights that’ve stood in the USA since it was formed, and which existed in Great Britain for several centuries before that, and flushing them down the drain. Pretending they’re not is foolish.

If you want to be afraid of every darkskinned person you see praying, go ahead, but also be afraid of those white bible thumpers who are out there actively killing people and planning more killings.
#29 Carl Christensen
June 27, 2007

that’s just bullshit; there have been what, a few abortion clinic bombings from Christian nut jobs in 30 years in the US. compared to the daily onslaught from Muslim terrorists in 70 countries? And I have seen 99.9% of Christians deriding & prosecuting this minuscule fraction of nuts; where in polls of moderate Muslims (depending on country) you get 12 to 50% who approve of terrorist jihads. You really have to get a sense of proportion.

For crying out loud, look at the recent screeching for jihads over the Salman Rushdie honors in the UK. Pakistani politicians are causing for the knighting of Bin Laden for “equal opportunity?” As laughing (or scary) as the US religious nuts get; they’re nothing compared to the Islamic nutjobs. You really have to wonder about a culture that has conniptions over Danish cartoons — it’s time to reform & grow up…
#30 SG
June 28, 2007

Hey Ben, one of my countrymen was held in Gitmo for 5 years, all charges against him were thrown out of court and he was eventually convicted on a torture-induced confession. I get really sick of fools like you claiming he was an un-uniformed combatant on the back of that.

You`re a canadian Ben, there`s nothing to stop George Bush declaring you a non-lawful combatant and locking you up down there. When you confess under torture, would you like to me to go on blogs claiming you didn`t deserve habeus corpus?

Stupid libertarians.
#31 SG
June 28, 2007

Yeah carl, reform and grow up like happened with the piss christ?

And what do you mean, daily onslaught? I have lived alongside and trained alongside muslims for 10 years and never experienced any daily onslaught of any sort. Which 70 countries are you talking about, exactly?
#32 Valuethinker
June 28, 2007

Carl Christensen

When you are considering US foreign policy, don’t underestimate the impact of the fundamentalist (dispensationalist?) view of the ‘End of Times’.

Israel has risen again. The US must support it because of the time of the Second Coming of the Lord is nigh. This view was certainly part of Harry Truman’s decision to back the creation of Israel.

The US has now reached Babylon in its great struggle with the Forces of Satan. Again, this too was foretold in the Book of Revelations.

You and I might think this is nuts, this literal reading of one of the more problematic books in the New Testament.

Remember General Boykin’s musings, and repeated public speeches to church groups, that we were in a war with the forces of the Dark One, aka Islam? This man was head of all Special Forces activities for the United States, worldwide.

These people take the Bible quite literally, and it drives their foreign policy views. And they are widespread within the US government, within the US legislative, and within the military and intelligence communities.
#33 Valuethinker
June 28, 2007

It’s interesting to watch Steyn defend his ex-boss, and the bankroller of many of his writing activities, Conrad Black, in his coverage of the Black trial.

There’s huge potential conflict of interest there, but AFAIK Steyn hasn’t admitted it.
#34 Carl Christensen
June 28, 2007

regarding “piss christ” — I must have missed where Catholics were killing people in outrage, or boycotting the entire USA because it happened to house the artist. It was a pretty minor event of outrage when compared to say the Danish cartoons, or whatever outrage-du-jour is offending Muslims.

I’m an atheist, but it’s pretty obvious that it’s safe (if not downright fashionable) to bash Christians. Compare “piss christ” with the comparably mildly sacreligious “Danish cartoons”, and the reactions forthwith. so who needs a reformation?

and regarding the US-brand of fundamentalism — you’d find probably 0.001%, who are taking the “end-of-times” look at things. there’s the hypocritical utterings of what, some kooky general? Whereas the polls of Muslims in the west show 12-50% supporting jihad. that’s an order of magnitude of embedded psychoses.
#35 QrazyQat
June 28, 2007

that’s just bullshit; there have been what, a few abortion clinic bombings from Christian nut jobs in 30 years in the US. compared to the daily onslaught from Muslim terrorists in 70 countries

Yeah, and we don’t torture as much as Hitler or Stalin did, so it’s all just a-okay. But then Muslims worldwide at their worst don’t come anywhere near those guys so they’re no problem either, right? Right? I mean, you’re doing this idiotic equivalency thing, so that’s what you believe because you’re consistent, right?

Look, we have in the USA a sad history that continues today of domestic terrorism, most notably directed — by white Christians — toward black people (with many thousands of lynchings and cross burning, along with simple beatings, dragging behind pickups and the like), Jews, homosexuals, and of course the older burnings of various Chinatowns across the country. This stuff continues, most notably now toward black people, homosexuals, and most anyone brown. Other than 9/11, the biggest, and certainly the most ongoing, terrorism in the USA has been conducted by white Christians — they are our IRA, our Red Brigade, our Alergerians. Pretending that they don’t exist and don’t do what they do because there are other bad people in the world is silly.

As for support, as I mentioned, terrorist Eric Rudolph was aided and abetted by people hiding and feeding him for years, and is still supported by many. Next month in Milwaukee they’re having a 3-day celebration to honor a domestic terrorist, Paul Hill. That’s white, Christian Paul Hill, with his white, Christian supporters. And of course as I also mentioned these white Christian folk have wheedled their way into our government and chopped off several basic rights, including habeas corpus, which is something that no outside terrorist can do. I think that’s destructive and therefore worth worrying about.

BTW, here’s a list of just some terrorism directed toward abortion clinics; keep in mind this is only a part of the dmoestic terrorism problem, which is almost completely driven by white Christians.
#36 Carl Christensen
June 28, 2007

again, you’re falsely calling people “white Christians” as if they are backed by more than .001% of Christians in the US. whereas we’ve seen that the horrifying acts of Muslim fundamentalists have tacit approval by many Muslims, far great than your strawman US Christian redneck.

here’s a simple test — make a “Piss Mohammed” work of art a la the old “Piss Christ” and see the reaction.
#37 ben
June 28, 2007

“Youre a canadian Ben…”

Nope, I’m an American, born in Oregon. I lived about half my life in Canada. Nice place, but I left on account of high taxes, crappy gun laws, and socialized medicine.

Which countryman of yours was held for 5 years at Gitmo? Why was he held there? I don’t have any info on the man, so I can’t address what you are talking about.

Carl, I think you are hitting the nail of the issue on the head. The “Christian” terrorists are but a minuscule fraction of the Christian population. And Christians are far from all white. IIRC, the REVEREND Martin Luther King Jr. was a Christian.
#38 SG
June 28, 2007

David Hicks, Ben. You should pay attention to the rights your government is taking away. If you don’t do so, you might present to the world the impression that you don’t really care about the rights of others.

As another example, Mamdouh Habib. Picked up outside the war zone (in Pakistan), transported to Gitmo, held there for 3 years, fucked up the arse with a baton, released without charge.

So yeah, if you want you can say that it doesn’t matter because he’s not American. But that doesn’t make you sound very charming does it? And you might like to bear in mind that these two men are citizens of one of your allies. When you’re sodomizing your allies without charge, you are no longer a good country. Something has gone wrong. You might like to ponder that.
#39 Harold Pierce Jr
June 28, 2007

RE: Middle East Chess Game

Being oil men, Bush and Cheney know this most uncomforable fact: America is flat out of oil! And I do mean flat out of oil especially of those crudes used for production of transportation fuels. The US is in Iraq to secure the oil fields for the Western Democracy.

Here is the Middle East Chess Game Background.

This game started in 942 AD when the 12th or Lost Imam fell down a well in Iraq. The Imam was a Shiite.

Black Pieces: Iran, Team Islam for conquest of the world.

White Pieces: Israel, Team for Western Democracy & Freedom

Chessmen for Black : Terrorists, Syria, Pakistan, etc.

Chessmen for White : USA, Brits, Can, Aus., Nato, etc.

Black Game Plan: Draw White into battle in Iraq. Defeat White or cause White to withdraw. Capture all Mideast oil. Capture Mecca and Medina. Expel infidels. Capture all oil fields in Caspian Sea and former USSR republics. Capture Suez Canal and all oil fields in N. Africa. Capture all oil fields in West Africa. Note: By initiating Armageddon against White, Black believes the Lost Imam will reappear, make Black invincible and lead Black to victory over the Evil Infidels (No kidding! They really believe this!)

If all of these campaigns are successful Black offers to West: Either convert to Islam or we won’t sell you any our oil. West refuses: Checkmate, Western tribes wither, become weak and are conquered by Black. Black tells West not support destruction of Israel or no oil.

White: Team Israel says enough of this Islam nonsense. Destroys Black with nukes!

Note: This is why Black is aquiring nukes. They know that they have no chance to defeat White unless they have these weapons.

Question: Which tribe has the best chess players with the most Grandmasters and who are the dumbest pawns on the planet?
#40 SG
June 28, 2007

btw carl, in case you didn`t know, it is extremely rude to print pictures of the Prophet. What part of “rude” don`t you understand? Denmark was one of the Coalition of the Willing at the time. So having invaded a Muslim nation and slaughtered a million muslims, a Danish newspaper committed what muslims consider to be sacrilege. Generally, committing sacrilege is considered rude, even by many atheists. Can you understand how the response to this might be a little difference.

Also, for the record, Muslims don`t generally portray Jesus negatively. They are not, in fact, rude towards other religions. The piss christ was made by a member of a christian society to poke fun at the religion in which he was raised. Most people who bash christians and christian iconography are christians or people raised by christians. Do you see this difference?
#41 ben
June 29, 2007

SG, Muslims do not portray Jesus negatively because he is one of their prophets, not out of deference to Christians.

They blew up the buddah’s in Afghanistan didn’t they? A bit rude that was, eh?
#42 SG
June 29, 2007

Indeed they do and indeed they don`t, Mr. ProTorture. However, the buddhas in Afghanistan were blown up by a group completely unrepresentative of the organisations protesting against the cartoons. Comparing the taliban and muslim political activists in Turkey, Syria, Jordan or Western cities is very rude.

Muslims in general don`t blow up other people`s religious icons. They are a polite bunch. Drawing a picture of their prophet and publishing it in the newspaper is, on the other hand, extremely rude. Now, why don`t you answer the point of our last debate instead of shifting ground like that? And why don`t you tell me if you can see a difference between the piss-christ and the cartoons.
#43 Ian Gould
June 29, 2007

“They blew up the buddah’s in Afghanistan didn’t they? A bit rude that was, eh?”

Yeah because as we all know Muslims are all one undifferentiated group mind. Kind like hating Jews because “they killed Jesus”.

Tell me Ben, who was running Afghanistan for the past 1,000 years while the Buddhas remained unmolested?

Visited any Spanish mosques lately?
#44 Carl Christensen
June 29, 2007

oh give me a break – “it’s rude to print pictures of prophet” — nobody knows what the hell Mohammed loked like. So we now have to kow-tow to every ravings of religious nuts? Again — do an image of Mohammed in a jar of piss, a la Piss Christ. You think the crucifix isn’t an important symbol to Christians?

So we don’t seem to mind offending orthodox Jews & born-again Christians we ridicule all the time; but suddenly with Muslims it’s “cultural sensitivity.” Like the guy trying to blow up a car-bomb in the London West End theatre district last night, let’s respect his anger at Tony Blair & Salman Rushdie. It’s obvious Islam needs a reformation. Hell you have the head in Australia saying women are meat if they don’t wear a hijab.

again — as a liberal, I see no point in defending an intolerant, misogynist, homophobic, mass-murdering death cult. you defenders are painting Christians about as absurdly and irrationally as the New Republic cruise in the article are painting the Muslim hordes invading Europe. But I didn’t see Eric Rudolph trying to blew up NYC theatres last night in the name of Jesus.
#45 Carl Christensen
June 29, 2007

the Taliban was a sharia-law ideal in the Muslim would, and attracted the “angry young Muslims” from the west that you’re now crying about are in Guantanamo and tortured.

Honestly, to listen to you guys you’d think everyone in Guantanamo was wrongly there, and were just Pakistani kids working for Oxfam to help people. How many of those were in that sharia law “paradise” helping whip women, shoot ‘em in soccer stadiums etc? I’m not saying torture is good and I think Guantanamo overall is a stain on America; but c’mon, all these crocodile tears for jerkoffs that you know 95% were part & parcel of the disgusting sharia law “paradise” (not that it excuses the maybe 5% who were innocent; as that’s not our system of law).
#46 Ian Gould
June 29, 2007

“again — as a liberal, I see no point in defending an intolerant, misogynist, homophobic, mass-murdering death cult.”

and you have no problem denouncing over a billion of your fellow human beings , most o whom have never harmed you or anyone else as members of said death cult.

But hey if we don’t keep telling ourselves how much more civilised than them we are we won’t be able to sit back and cheer when our brave boys in Iraq send a few more towel-heads to Allah.

Your “knowledge” about the Guantanamo inmates is roughly on par with those good pl’ boys back in the 1920′s who knew that even if that nigger dint rape no white woman he was a fixin’ to.
#47 Dano
June 29, 2007

That ain’t the Carl C comment type I know, lil’ projection troll.

D
#48 ben
June 29, 2007

“and you have no problem denouncing over a billion of your fellow human beings , most o whom have never harmed you or anyone else as members of said death cult.”

And you (meaning many folks here) have no problem denouncing as many Christians who have done even less.

The whole “Christians hate jews because they killed Christ” is idiotic. Christ was a Jew. He was THE Jew. Give me a break.
#49 Eli Rabett
June 29, 2007

ben, those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it. You are doomed.
#50 Abe G.
June 29, 2007

nobody knows what the hell Mohammed loked like. So we now have to kow-tow to every ravings of religious nuts?

Well, you don’t have to do anything. But is it kow-towing or doing the responsible and strategic thing?

The right wing is clearly after confrontation, which is why the right’s blogosphere advocates printing offensive cartoons and mocking or insulting the religion of Islam. They have no interest in empowering moderate Muslims. They would rather piss in the cornflakes of the extremists in order to exact revenge for 9/11 and other terrorist acts, and in hope, it seems, of some decisvie military war. Nevermind that their strategy drives Muslims towards extremism and makes it more difficult for moderate Muslim organizations or governments to gain power. Nevermind that the military cannot solve this problem (see, for example, Iraq).

It seems this juvenile strategy is based on emotion and very little logic at all. Instead of knee-jerk simplistic reactions can we even discuss what the best way to empower moderate Muslims? Is a little critical thought and evaluation too much to ask for some people?

Unfortunately I think I know the answer already.
#51 Carl Christensen
June 29, 2007

ugh, more of this BS, “we’re driving them towards extremism/terrorism.” It’s basically a not-very-veiled thread by the moderates, i.e. “see we just can’t control the extremists among us because of your cartoon, burqua ban, etc.” It’s time to join the 21st century.

I suppose we’re driving redneck Republican born-again Christians to extremism/bombing by not allowing Creationism in lieu of evolution taught in schools, things like “Piss Christ” etc. I wish all of these religious nuts would go to Mars and fight it out there. I see nothing but excuse-making and justifications for atrocities all around. Until there’s a Muslim Gandhi or MLK Jr I remain unimpressed. The best way to empower Muslim moderates is for them to renounce jihad, bombings of innocents etc. Perhaps they should try leading by example for once?

If that bomb went off in London last night, you hypocrites would just be screeching we deserved it or it was expected because of Salman Rushdie’s award. Ridiculous…
#52 richard
June 29, 2007

“Nevermind that their strategy drives Muslims towards extremism..”

You can argue that both ways, surely. Telling publishers to cool it and refrain from publishing images that radical Muslims find offensive could be construed as empowering the radical Muslims. It can be seen as a demonstration of their power. At the same time, manufactured ‘outrage’ over such images might have the opposite effect you are imagining: it might weaken radicals.
#53 Carl Christensen
June 29, 2007

well I think I’ve made enough comments on this, and we’re flogging it to death like a fundamentalist would!
I just stumbled across an article on Christopher Hitchens by the author of this “deck chairs” piece, maybe I am turning into him in my middle age!

http://johannhari.com/archive/article.php?id=450
#54 Abe G.
June 29, 2007

If that bomb went off in London last night, you hypocrites would just be screeching we deserved it or it was expected because of Salman Rushdie’s award. Ridiculous…

This is part and parcel of the problem. Your bias makes it impossible for you to understand even the political opposition in your own culture. Sure, there are some who say the west “deserves” acts of terror, but that’s a firnge minority to say the least.

If you want a Muslim Ghandi or MLK, then you need to help create an environment in which one can come to power. Instead of getting pissed off and emotional, can we at least have a logical discussion on how to facilitate such a sea change in the Muslim world?

When you give the extremist Muslims ready-made propaganda like the Danish cartoons or Abu Graib, you make them that much more effectual and ready to fight. That does not excuse the radical behavior one bit. But if we want to spawn intelligent, rational behavior, we had better not abandon it ourselves.
#55 Carl Christensen
June 29, 2007

>If you want a Muslim Ghandi or MLK, then you need to help >create an environment in which one can come to power.

OK, this is about the silliest thing written. MLK & Gandhi came from WITHIN poor conditions. The US & British gov’t (respectively) didn’t “create an environment” to facilitate them coming to power (unless you mean in a bad sense, which I don’t think you do). There are millions of Muslims who have fled their hellhole countries to make better lives in the Western world. There are far favorable conditions for them than MLK Jr & Gandhi had; yet 10-50% still think jihad is OK, Jews must be pushed to the sea, “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” is a best-seller in their communities, etc etc.

This will be my last “take” on the subject; there are plenty of political boards to spout off on and Deltoid isn’t the place for it…
#56 SG
June 29, 2007

Ben, I grew up in a christian society, went to christian schools and learnt christian “morals”. So yes, I have no problem denouncing those aspects of MY society which I have a problem with. I also have no problem poking fun at or being downright rude to those streams of christianity (like the National Review) who are stupid or evil. Just like the person from a Christian background who made the piss Christ.

I do not feel so comfortable being rude to the symbols of other societies and religions. Do you get this difference? How many times do I have to make this point before you will respond to it?

Carl, do you really think that free speech means having the right to be offensive to whoever you want?

Oh and Ben, when are you going to respond to my point about Mamdouh Habib? Do you support the actions of your government in their treatment of him, and if so how can you reconcile that with either a) your libertarianism or b) your (and carl’s) claim that the west is more civilised than Islam? Carl decries torture and societies that torture, but you support your society’s right to torture. Please explain.
#57 Abe G.
June 29, 2007

Jesus, Carl, no one denies that the Muslim world has more than its share of irrational belief. What do you propose to do about it?

Making it worse is stupid. Why can’t people grasp this concept?
#58 z
July 2, 2007

“but it’s a pretty far connection to make the Iraq War (all about wealth & power) into some sort of “fundie US Christian” thing. ”

Hey, speaking ex officio for the International Jewish Cabal, don’t try to stick us with it.
#59 z
July 4, 2007

“that’s just bullshit; there have been what, a few abortion clinic bombings from Christian nut jobs in 30 years in the US. ”

“As a naval officer I abhor the implication that the Royal Navy is a haven for cannibalism. It is well known that we have the problem relatively under control, and that it is the RAF who now suffer the largest casualties in this area.”
-Monty Python, episode 26
#60 z
July 4, 2007

“Jesus, Carl, no one denies that the Muslim world has more than its share of irrational belief. What do you propose to do about it?”

Well, we can certainly point fingers at it and point out that “they’re worse than we are”. I would think that that’s enough to let us out of the need to think about “our” own behavior, to allow us to fight “them” with impunity, and to let us out of the need to think about our own behavior in the course of our fighting them with impunity.
#61 jack strocchi
October 7, 2007

Quoted by Tim Lambert June 26, 2007 10:51 AM, with evident satisfaction:

He offers a light smearing of dubious demographic figures–he needs to turn 20 million European Muslims into more than 150 million in nine years, which is a lot of humping–to “prove” his case.

Ummm, if you add 83 million Muslim Turks to the Euro-mix that would damn near do it. Especially given higher fertility and breeding frequency of Muslim women over time.

I am not so sure that Islam itself is such a bad religion – most religions make people better than they otherwise would be. The real Clash of Civilization is between civil secularists (of all denominations) and rural sectarians. (Webers “bureaucratic rationalisation” v Marx’s “idiocy of rural life”). This culture clash cuts accross conventional religious definitions and is the basis for much “culture shock”

Unfortunately many of the Muslims that seem most keen to immigrate to Europe come from the Badlands of Islamia, bearing a pre-modern form of “Trashcanistanian” multiculturalism. Does not mix well with prevailing post-modern form of “Eurotrashy” subculturalism.

The Turkish Muslims tend to be more urbanised and civilised than their hicker bretheren. So I suppose we can all cross fingers and hope for the best when Turkey accedes to the USE. Full of confidence because we know that liberal-Leftist policy makers have an unblemished record of unerring good judgement in the management of large scale, rapid cultural diversification.
#62 Tim Lambert
October 7, 2007

Jack, the Weakly Standard is worthless. See the [Financial Times](http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/123ade02-4e6f-11dc-85e7-0000779fd2ac,dwp_uuid=f4f78a4e-50b6-11dc-86e2-0000779fd2ac.html):

>Jytte Klausen, a professor of politics at Brandeis University who studies European Muslims, says: “It’s being advocated by people who don’t consult the numbers. All these claims are really emotional claims.” Sometimes they are made by Muslim or far-right groups, who share an interest in exaggerating the numbers.

>Nominal Muslims – whether religious or not – account for 3-4 per cent of the European Union’s total population of 493m. Their percentage should rise, but far more modestly than the extreme predictions. That is chiefly because Muslims, both in Europe and the main “emigrating countries” of Turkey and north Africa, are having fewer babies.

>”Nobody knows how many Muslims there are in Europe,” says Ms Klausen. Few European states ask citizens about religious beliefs. Estimates based on national origins suggest that 16m nominal Muslims live in the EU. There are about 5m in France, 3.3m in Germany and 1.5m-2m in the UK. …

>But the birth-rates of Europe’s Muslim immigrants, though still above the EU’s average, are falling. The fertility rate of north African women in France has been dropping since 1981, say Jonathan Laurence and Justin Vaisse in their book Integrating Islam. “The longer immigrant women live in France, the fewer children they have; their fertility rate approaches that of native-born French women.”

>At the last count Algerian women living in France averaged an estimated 2.57 children, against 1.94 for French women overall.

>The decline in birth-rates is more dramatic in north Africa itself. Women there use contraceptives more and have babies later than they did. In Algeria and Morocco 35 years ago, the average woman had seven children. According to the United Nations, it is now 2.5 in Algeria (about the same as Turkey), 2.8 in Morocco, and falling in all of them. The US Central Intelligence Agency’s World Factbook has even lower estimates of Algerian, Tunisian and Turkish birth-rates: below France’s rate and below the replacement level of 2.1 children per woman. Emigrating countries are no longer exporting high birth rates to Europe.

>At the same time, northern Europe has seen a rebound in fertility. Several countries have introduced policies – such as more generous parental leave and better childcare – to encourage people to have babies. …

>The US National Intelligence Council predicts there will be between 23m and 38m Muslims in the EU in 2025 – 5-8 per cent of the population. But after 2025 the Muslim population should stop growing so quickly, given its falling birth-rate. In short, Islamicisation – let alone sharia law – is not a demographic prospect for Europe.