Thursday, 13 September 2012

What a shockingly dishonest article this is from the credibility-challenged Robert Fisk. Note the continuous use of "racist" in reference to any criticism of Islam.
So another internet clever-clogs sets the Middle East on fire: Prophet cartoons, then Koranic book-burning, now a video of robed "terrorists" and a fake desert. The Western-Christian perpetrators then go into hiding (an essential requisite for publicity) while the innocent are asphyxiated, beheaded and otherwise done to death – outrageous Muslim revenge thus "proving" the racist claims of the trash peddlers that Islam is a violent religion.

The provocateurs, of course, know that politics and religion don’t mix in the Middle East. They are the same. Christopher Stevens, his diplomat colleagues in Benghazi, priests in Turkey and Africa, UN personnel in Afghanistan; they have all paid the price for those ‘Christian priests’, ‘cartoonists’, ‘film-makers’ and ‘authors’ – the inverted commas are necessary to mark a thin line between illusionists and the real thing – who knowingly choose to provoke 1.6 billion Muslims.

When a Danish cartoon in a hitherto unknown newspaper drew a picture of the Prophet Mohamed with a bomb in his turban, the Danish embassy in Beirut went up in flames. When a Texas pastor decided to ‘sentence the Koran to death’, the knives came out in Afghanistan – we are leaving aside the little matter of the ‘accidental’ burning of Koranic pages by US personnel in Bagram. And now a deliberately abusive film provokes the murder of one of the State Department’s fairest diplomats.
Source: Independent

Prepesterously, Fisk then claims that Al-Qaeda was "defeated by the Arab revolutionaries who demanded dignity rather than a Bin Laden Caliphate across the Middle East". But apparently not very defeated because Fisk then wonders whether it has "now decided to cash in on populist grievances to advance their Islamist cause?"

Then a "Blame Whitey" classic. Muslims would reinterpret the Koran in a more reasonable way if only evil whitey didn't keep provoking them by daring to talk about it. The discussion may only take place "among Muslims", it seems.
Ironically, there is room for a serious discussion among Muslims about, for example, a re-interpretation of the Koran; but Western provocation – and western, alas, it is – closes down such a narrative.

Fisk rounds off his disgraceful article with a ludicrously invalid comparison.
Meanwhile, we beat our chests in favour of a ‘free press’. A New Zealand editor once proudly told me how his own newspaper had re-published the cartoon of the Prophet with a bomb-filled turban. But when I asked him if he planned to publish a cartoon of a Rabbi with a bomb on his head next time Israel invaded Lebanon, he hastily agreed with me that this would be anti-Semitic.

Well, let me see. If Israel had invaded Lebanon because the Lebanese had insulted Moses or King David or something, then, sure, it might have been appropriate to post a cartoon like that. Or if Jews were going around invoking the Torah as an excuse to murder people, likewise. Otherwise, what specifically would the Jewish religion (as symbolised by a rabbi) have to do with the decision of one state (Israel) to invade another (Lebanon)?

His remark that "politics and religion don't mix in the Middle East, they are the same" is certainly interesting, though. That, indeed, is the substance of the criticism we "islamophobes" make of Islam and Muslims. We warn that Muslim immigration is a disaster for the West because Muslims make no distinction between church and state and their presence in our countries as citizens with voting rights will inevitably warp our democracies because of the strong gravitational pull of this irrational prejudice. Somehow, Muslim apologists like Fisk assume that Muslims instaneously shed this baggage when they walk through the arrival gates at Heathrow, though, so this criticism of them may not be uttered once they are here.

Writing in the Telegraph, David Blair points to an interesting precedent for the recent Muslim violence, one that had nothing to do with "islamophobes".
But there is an uncanny precedent for today’s violence. Back in December 1979 – long before the advent of the internet or even satellite news channels – the American embassy in Libya was burned to the ground. Earlier, the US embassy in Pakistan had received the same treatment, costing the lives of two American Marines.

The attacks on both embassies were triggered by an almost forgotten event. In November 1979, a gang of Sunni extremists led by Juhayman al-Uteybi – the Osama bin Laden of his era – managed to take over the Grand Mosque in Mecca and murder hundreds of Muslim pilgrims. When news of the capture of the holiest site in Islam spread across the Muslim world, rumours and conspiracy theories were quick to start. The most poisonous suggested that America had somehow carried out the attack on the Grand Mosque.

This preposterous nonsense was widely believed, stirring such anger that the US embassies as far apart as Tripoli and Islamabad were wrecked. Before Twitter, Facebook, Emails or YouTube, globalised rumour and conspiracy-mongering was already powerful enough to persuade people thousands of miles apart to burn down the nearest US embassy. The only difference with today is that it took much longer for the message to spread. The attacks on the US embassies in Libya and Pakistan were separated by 10 days in 1979, whereas today’s incidents are almost simultaneous.
Source: Telegraph

The only reasonable conclusion to draw is that Islamic culture is fundamentally diseased, capable of producing hair-trigger rioting at the slightest provocation. The problem is not with Islamophobes. It's with Muslims. The Islamophobes are right.


daithikent said...

Robert Fisk seems nothing more than a self loathing Briton. The irony being that the old fool reflects so much that is bad in the 'relationship' between the English and their minority cultures. To blame Christians and free speech for the actions of violent groups is perverse. Are these the reasons that Anders BB killed? The victim mentality pisses me off. Some people just do not seem able to receive feedback.

wargasm jawspasm said...

One could easily get the impression that whatever happens, narcissist muslims following narcissist Islam will inevitably achieve a super-critical closed-loop stupidity "angry and disapointed" reaction - And to them; for us to treat them with reason and fairness will only ever be seen as our exploitable great weakness

Anne said...

Must agree with above posts. Fisk is a fool.

Anonymous said...

From Wikipaedia :

The blogosphere term fisking originates from various American conservative blogs, which have taken particular issue with Mr. Fisk, who holds a "very skeptical view of U.S. foreign policy", and his articles and reports. Many of these bloggers have responded by reprinting his dispatches on their blogs, adding their own paragraph-by-paragraph commentary, purportedly dissecting and debunking Fisk's facts and opinions

Anonymous said...

This just in. Do we need the royals anymore ?

Maria José said...

Anonymous said...

I demand to be arrested for blasphemy. Now.
Posted by Ann Barnhardt - September 14, AD 2012 1:12 PM MST
The Obama regime is going after the people who made the cheesy mohammed movie that the musloids are blaming the riots on. They are "suggesting" that YouTube "review" the content of the clip of the movie they have posted, and are also now looking to jail one of the filmmakers. In addition, the Obama propaganda arm operating as the L.A. Times has posted pictures and explicit location descriptions of the home of one of the filmmakers, clearly an effort to intimidate the filmmakers and to pass tactical intel to the muslim brotherhood - which is why you always publicize your personal info right off the bat like I did. In doing so you claim a massive tactical advantage and utterly deprive the enemy of his MAIN WEAPON, which is intimidation and fear.

Ladies and gentlemen, what you are witnessing is the establishment of the Sharia, specifically "islamic blasphemy" laws, right here in what used to be called the United States of America.

Well, I have a little something to say about all of this.

I have done what many consider to be the most hard-core, serious koran burning to date. I bookmarked the filthy damn thing with strips of raw bacon, and then I burned the satanic screed page by page after reading the demonic filth therein contained.

Anonymous said...

There are plenty of truth telling of the dispicable behaviors of Muslim's prophet Muhammad all over the internet and thousands of videos on Youtube. These videos and stuff on the internet is just a representation of what's already in the disgusting holy Quran. There is nothing false about it. Are Muslims offended by the truth? If they are, they should go and burn their Quran and the history of Muhmmad because that's the source of where it recorded Muhammad's disgusting behavior in raping, murdering, robbing, pedophile and much more... So this particular video was only used a way to give Muslims an excuse, to claim victim status and to deflect attention away from Muslim's typical barbaric behaviour all over the world. Muslim's thinking is, "You hurt our feelings, we physically hurt you." Islam is here to dominate and this was always true since the inception of Islam. For Muslims, it has always been Jihad or holy war for over 1400 years and killing of over 270 millions at the sword of Islam. This is just another show of that. Stop Muslim immigration! Don't let them leech off of the welfare system because they are the only ones that benefit and everyone else is a loser! Stop giving them aid money! Stop buying oil from them! Muslims and Islam must be stopped because they are the greatest threat to humanity and the world!

Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews