Six Days

It Gets "Interesting"

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Sat, 11 Mar 2006 05:42:00 +0000

This has been a week with a number of rather "interesting" (in the Chinese sense) developments. Some good news, mostly not, and interesting all round. Also yet another act of censorship, and call for solidarity.

The EU is seriously considering religious defamation laws, according to Agora's translation of a recent Jyllands-Posten article. Having flirted with Nazism, Communism and neo-Napoleonic nanny-statism, do the Eutopians now want to go back to medieval theocracy? Not the old monoculture, mind you, but a strange new kind that presumably respects all religions simultaneously? Or will it be a monoculture after all ? How the content of the Koran will be handled, defamatory as it is to Christians and Jews is anybody's guess, although the Germans have already decided to see for themselves. How the pro-freedom-of-speech Danes will react to EU imposed censorship is another interesting question.

The Germans, as mentioned, may be putting the Koran on trial.

The Czechs have uncovered some unpleasant truths. Muslims, are, as usual, miffed.

Pakistan (remember them?) and Spain (responding to deadly Islamist intimidation by becoming uber-dhimmis) are together lobbying for an anti-"religious defamation" measure from the UN. Why is this a problem ? We all know how the West's lefties revere the UN and bow to "international law". Once such a "UN law" is passed (no the UN is not a legislature, no matter what you hear on SBS), all a country will need is a left wing government and then its game over, even if blasphemy laws were not legislated locally. We will then see legislated dhimmitude by default in any Western nation without a spine, and a minority of nations rebelling against the UN. This minority may not include the US, judging by recent White House and State Dept reactions to the MoToons.

Mark Steyn is no longer writing for UK papers. Jumped ? Pushed ? Why ? I dunno. But an unfortunate development regardless.

In a previous post I linked to a rather interesting article from the Telegraph in the UK. This article explored the dangers of self-ghettoised Muslim communities establishing islands of their own culture in the UK and working towards self-rule and Sharia Law. The article quoted Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo. a former Muslim and expert on Islam. The article is good, and worth reading, and I am reprinting it below. This is because it no longer appears on the Telegraph web site, where it has been replaced with a notice:

This story has been removed for legal reasons

(Filed: 19/02/2006)

It is not in the Google cache either. Naturally, this cannot stand ! Like the MoToons, and the Manifesto, this needs to be reprinted far and wide. So here it is [Hat Tip: Mike Jericho]

ENGLAND:
The day is coming when British Muslims form a state within a state
By Alasdair Palmer
The Telegraph Group February 19, 2006
For the past two weeks, Patrick Sookhdeo has been canvassing the opinions of Muslim clerics in Britain on the row over the cartoons featuring images of Mohammed that were first published in Denmark and then reprinted in several other European countries."
They think they have won the debate," he says with a sigh. "They believe that the British Government has capitulated to them, because it feared the consequences if it did not.
"The cartoons, you see, have not been published in this country, and the Government has been very critical of those countries in which they were published. To many of the Islamic clerics, that's a clear victory.
"It's confirmation of what they believe to be a familiar pattern: if spokesmen for British Muslims threaten what they call 'adverse consequences' - violence to the rest of us - then the British Government will cave in. I think it is a very dangerous precedent."
Dr Sookhdeo adds that he believes that "in a decade, you will see parts of English cities which are controlled by Muslim clerics and which follow, not the common law, but aspects of Muslim sharia law.
"It is already starting to happen - and unless the Government changes the way it treats the so-called leaders of the Islamic community, it will continue.
"For someone with such strong and uncompromising views, Dr Sookhdeo is a surprisingly gentle and easy-going man. He speaks with authority on Islam, as it was his first faith: he was brought up as a Muslim in Guyana, the only English colony in South America, and attended a madrassa there.
"But Islamic instruction was very different in the 1950s, when I was at school," he says. "There was no talk of suicide bombing or indeed of violence of any kind. Islam was very peaceful."
Dr Sookhdeo's family emigrated to England when he was 10. In his early twenties, when he was at university, he converted to Christianity. "I had simply seen it as the white man's religion, the religion of the colonialists and the oppressors - in a very similar way, in fact, to the way that many Muslims see Christianity today."
Leaving Islam was not easy. According to the literal interpretation of the Koran, the punishment for apostasy is death - and it actually is punished by death in some Middle Eastern states. "It wasn't quite like that here," he says, "although it was traumatic in some ways."
Dr Sookhdeo continued to study Islam, doing a PhD at London University on the religion. He is currently director of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity. He also advises the Army on security issues related to Islam.
Several years ago, Dr Sookhdeo insisted that the next wave of radical Islam in Britain would involve suicide bombings in this country. His prediction was depressingly confirmed on 7/7 last year.
So his claim that, in the next decade, the Muslim community in Britain will not be integrated into mainstream British society, but will isolate itself to a much greater extent, carries weight behind it. Dr Sookhdeo has proved his prescience.
"The Government, and Tony Blair, the Prime Minister, are fundamentally deluded about the nature of Islam," he insists. "Tony Blair unintentionally revealed his ignorance when he said, in an effort to conciliate Muslims, that he had 'read through the Koran twice' and that he kept it by his bedside."
He thought he was saying something which showed how seriously he took Islam. But most Muslims thought it was a joke, if not an insult. Because, of course, every Muslim knows that you cannot read the Koran through from cover to cover and understand it.
The chapters are not written to be read in that way. Indeed, after the first chapter, the chapters of the Koran are ordered according to their length, not according to their content or chronology: the longest chapters are first, the shorter ones are at the end."
You need to know which passage was revealed at what period and in what time in order to be able to understand it - you cannot simply read it from beginning to end and expect to learn anything at all.
"That is one reason why it takes so long to be able to read and understand the Koran: the meaning of any part of it depends on a knowledge of its context - a context that is not in the Koran itself."
The Prime Minister's ignorance of Islam, Dr Sookhdeo contends, is of a piece with his unsuccessful attempts to conciliate it. And it does indeed seem as if the Government's policy towards radical Islam is based on the hope that if it makes concessions to its leaders, they will reciprocate and relations between fundamentalist Muslims and Tony Blair's Government will then turn into something resembling an ecumenical prayer meeting.
Dr Sookhdeo nods in vigorous agreement with that. "Yes - and it is a very big mistake. Look at what happened in the 1990s. The security services knew about Abu Hamza and the preachers like him. They knew that London was becoming the centre for Islamic terrorists. The police knew. The Government knew. Yet nothing was done.
"The whole approach towards Muslim militants was based on appeasement. 7/7 proved that that approach does not work - yet it is still being followed. For example, there is a book, The Noble Koran: a New Rendering of its Meaning in English, which is openly available in Muslim bookshops.
"It calls for the killing of Jews and Christians, and it sets out a strategy for killing the infidels and for warfare against them. The Government has done nothing whatever to interfere with the sale of that book.
"Why not? Government ministers have promised to punish religious hatred, to criminalise the glorification of terrorism, yet they do nothing about this book, which blatantly does both.
"Perhaps the explanation is just that they do not take it seriously. "I fear that is exactly the problem," says Dr Sookhdeo. "The trouble is that Tony Blair and other ministers see Islam through the prism of their own secular outlook.
They simply do not realise how seriously Muslims take their religion. Islamic clerics regard themselves as locked in mortal combat with secularism.
"For example, one of the fundamental notions of a secular society is the moral importance of freedom, of individual choice. But in Islam, choice is not allowable: there cannot be free choice about whether to choose or reject any of the fundamental aspects of the religion, because they
are all divinely ordained. God has laid down the law, and man must obey.
'Islamic clerics do not believe in a society in which Islam is one religion among others in a society ruled by basically non-religious laws. They believe it must be the dominant religion - and it is their aim to achieve this.
"That is why they do not believe in integration. In 1980, the Islamic Council of Europe laid out their strategy for the future - and the fundamental rule was never dilute your presence. That is to say, do not integrate."Rather, concentrate Muslim presence in a particular area until you are a majority in that area, so that the institutions of the local community come to reflect Islamic structures. The education system will be Islamic, the shops will serve only halal food, there will be no advertisements showing naked or semi-naked women, and so on.
"That plan, says Dr Sookhdeo, is being followed in Britain. "That is why you are seeing areas which are now almost totally Muslim. The next step will be pushing the Government to recognise sharia law for Muslim communities - which will be backed up by the claim that it is "racist" or "Islamophobic" or "violating the rights of Muslims" to deny them sharia law.
"There's already a Sharia Law Council for the UK. The Government has already started making concessions: it has changed the law so that there are sharia-compliant mortgages and sharia pensions.
"Some Muslims are now pressing to be allowed four wives: they say it is part of their religion. They claim that not being allowed four wives is a denial of their religious liberty. There are Muslim men in Britain who marry and divorce three women, then marry a fourth time - and stay married, in sharia law, to all four."The more fundamentalist clerics think that it is only a matter of
time before they will persuade the Government to concede on the issue of sharia law. Given the Government's record of capitulating, you can see why they believe that.
"Dr Sookhdeo's vision of a relentless battle between secular and Islamic Britain seems hard to reconcile with the co-operation that seems to mark the vast majority of the interactions between the two communities.
"Well, it isn't me who says Islam is at war with secularisation," he says. "That's how Islamic clerics describe the situation.
"But isn't it true that most Muslims who live in theocratic states want to get out of them as quickly as possible and live in a secular country such as Britain or America? And that most Muslims who come to Britain adopt the values of a liberal, democratic, tolerant society, rather than insisting on the inflexible rules of their religion?"
You have to distinguish between ordinary Muslims and their self-appointed leaders," explains Dr
Sookhdeo. "I agree that the best hope for our collective future is that the majority of Muslims who have grown up here have accepted the secular nature of the British state and society, the division between religion and politics, and the importance of allowing people to choose freely how they will live.
"But that is not how most of the clerics talk. And, more significantly, it is not how the 'community leaders' whom the Government has decided represent the Muslim community think either.
"Take, for example, Tariq Ramadan, whom the Government has appointed as an adviser because ministers think he is a 'community leader'. Ramadan sounds, in public, very moderate. But in reality, he has some very extreme views. He attacks liberal Muslims as 'Muslims without Islam'. He is affiliated to the violent and uncompromising Muslim Brotherhood."He calls the education in the state schools of the West 'aggression against the Islamic personality of the child'. He has said that 'the Muslim respects the laws of the country only if they do not contradict any Islamic principle'. He has added that 'compromising on principles is a sign of fear and weakness'.
"So what's the answer? What should the Government be doing? "First, it should try to engage with the real Muslim majority, not with the self-appointed 'community leaders' who don't actually represent anyone: they have not been elected, and the vast majority of ordinary Muslims have nothing to do with them.
"Second, the Government should say no to faith-based schools, because they are a block to integration. There should be no compromise over education, or over English as the language of education. The policy of political multiculturalism should be reversed."The hope was that it would to ensure separate communities would soften at the edges and integrate. But the opposite has in fact happened: Islamic communities have hardened. There is much less integration than there was for the generation that arrived when I did. There will be much less in the future if the present trend continues.
"Finally, the Government should make it absolutely clear: we welcome diversity, we welcome different religions - but all of them have to accept the secular basis of British law and society. That is a non-negotiable condition of being here."If the Government does not do all of those things then I fear for the future, because Islamic communities within Britain will form a state within a state. Religion will occupy an ever-larger place in our collective political life. And, speaking as a religious man myself, I fear that outcome."

[Update 15/3/2006]

Looks like the editor responsible for publishing the story has herself been fired from the Telegraph.

Dark times indeed.

Our Taxes: Spent on Censorship or Just Being Wasted ?

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 05:39:00 +0000

It is becoming almost routine that this humble blog with its meagre 20 or so visits a day should be graced every two weeks or so by none less than the Australian Federal Department of Communications and the Arts, the body responsible for monitoring internet content.

Their visits are never pleasant, and the mystery still in my mind is: Is this an investigation of the kind of content on the site (not hosted in Oz, so leave me the hell alone please) or is this some slacker at the DCATA with nothing better to do on a Friday afternoon than to surf the Web at OUR expense ?

(Department Of Communications And The Arts)
Australia, 0 returning visits
Date
Time
WebPage
10th March 2006
16:16:04
Six DaysNo referring link
10th March 2006
16:38:02
Six DaysNo referring link

Have any of my fellow anti-Dhimmi ozbloggers attracted similar attention? (This is addressed to the two or three of you who might visit this site from time to time...)

Should I give this individual a chance to comment (that's what the comments field below is for) before I report him to his employer for wasting our tax money, and giving me the Orwellian jitters ?

While we are on the topic of Government departments: at least our dear visitor doesn't work at the Deparment of Immigration, Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. That deparment needs a "Humanitarian" and "Multigender" in the name too. Then at least they would spell "DHIMMIA" properly...

Koran Indicted - Germany Awakes ?

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Thu, 09 Mar 2006 06:00:00 +0000

Many of us have been waiting for the inevitable collision between the emerging raft of religious vilification, "tolerance" and blasphemy laws, and the Koran, holy book of the intended beneficiaries of these new laws.

There have been a number of near-misses.

The recent Abu Hamza trial in the UK introduced the "Koran defence", where Hook's lawyers argued that whatever the vile terror sponsor and hatemonger might have said, it was merely his interpretation of the Koran. For some reason, all present seemed to think that this was the end of the matter, and while Hook went to jail for stirring hatered (not an outcome I support either), there was no further enquiry into the presument innocence of the Koran itself.

Somehow, the Koran always manages to evade scrutiny and censure.

In the "Catch the Fire Ministries" case in Victoria, the defendants were prevented from quoting from the Koran to support their case, as this would constitute further intolerance of the kind they were accused of in the first place.

In the UK, recently overturned "religious tolerance" laws were of concern to a Muslim community, who lobbied government to ensure that the Koran would be explicitly excempt: they knew full well how compatible the Koran is with modern notions of tolerance !

This opportunity did not go unnoticed by at least one group that did promise to put the Koran on trial if the laws were to be passed. Fortunately they were not.

And still we have not had a public airing of the Koran before a court, media and public. That is until now. A German attempt three years ago failed, but it is being launched again, across the country.

Looks like Germany is waking up fast. [Hat Tip: Agora]

A broad alliance of grass-roots movements have gone to the prosecutors of several states to hinder the dissemination of the Quran. According to the indictment, the Quran is not just a religious and historic book, but also a political book, which is incompatible with the constiution.
Berlin
At the prosecutor’s office at Gorch-Forck-Wall 15 in Hamburg, an unusual letter was received Monday morning, containing an indictment filed this weekend. The indictment targeted the Quran, charging that the holy book of the Moslems, according to the accuser, is incompatible with the German constitution.
“Support Denmark!”
The accuser is “Bundesverband der Bürgerbewegungen (BVB)”, which concerns itself with, in its own words, “defending basic rights and freedoms” against Islam. The extensive international furore, allegedly caused by the Muhammed cartoons, has made clear the relevancy of the alliance. Its homepage is decorated with a Danish flag with the words “Support Denmark! Defend the Free World.” superimposed on it.
The indictment has been filed in several states, including Hamburg, Niedersachsen, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Bayern and probably more.

In several talkshows on German TV, conservative politicians have pointed out that the Quran is incompatible with the German constitution. The Turkish-born writer Serap Cileli said on January 29 this year that “the Quran must be considered a historic document. It is not compatible with our constitution and Human Rights.”
Now the alliance wants the matter tried at
the courts.
Potent Political Book
The author of the indictment in Hamburg, Jutta Starke, says that the Quran was reported to the police two or three years ago, but that the report was dismissed on the grounds that it was a book of only historical interest.
“The evenths of the last months have made clear that the Quran isn’t just a historical book, but very much a potent political book, a thing which we document extensively in the indictment,” Jutta Starke says.
She says it is a task of sisyphean dimensions to inform the media, politicians and churches of the true intentions of Islam in the enlightened world of the West. “We are grateful to Jyllands-Posten that discussions about Islam have now become possible,” says Jutta Starke.
“You suffer for all of Europe and that’s why we find it indecent that Europe hasn’t loudly, in unison, taken a stand for Freedom of Speech against the laws of the Quran.”
The indictment consists of five pieces of paper and a number of appendices. The indictment says that it is not against Islam’s spiritual message, but against the judicial and political message.
The decisive count of the indictment “is in the Quran’s status vis a vis the Federal Republic of Germany’s constitution”. In the appendices to the indictment, 200 points have been listed “where the Quran is against and claims itself above the constitution.”
The Quran has an Answer to Everything
It is pointed out that the Quran to Moslems is the end all, be all in matters of faith, in matters of society and state and in the discourse with people of different views. The Quran says that it is the words of Allah. According to the views of several, including leading, Moslems in Germany, it is
literally and absolutely true at all time and in all places, the indictment says.
The newly elected German-born chairman of the Moslem Central Council of German, Ayyub Axel Köhler, is quoted in the indictment:

“A constitution after the principle of the division of powers into the legislative, the executive and
the judicial powers, is nowhere to be found in the Islamic theory of the State. From an Islamic viewpoint, this is obvious, since the laws - the laws of God - in the form of sharia, are already made and thus no legislative power is needed, in that sense of the word. Only Allah is the legislative power.”
Muslim Chancellor
A prominent Moslem, Ibrahim El-Zayat, is quoted as saying that he thinks it is possible that “the Federal Chancellor in 2020 is a Moslem, born and raised in Germany, that the Federal Supreme Court has a Moslem judge, and that a Moslem representative will be on the Federal Radio/TV Council to secure the Moslem citizens’ constitutionally guaranteed rights.”
“This land is our land
and it is our duty to make positive changes. With the help of Allah, we will make it a paradise on Earth, by making available the Islamic ummah (ED: Islamic community) and all of mankind. Allah doesn’t change the situation of a people till the people have changed the situtation,” El-Zayad is quoted as saying.
Violence against the Infidels
The indictment is against the 200 verses of 114 suras (ED:chapters) of the Quran that are not compatible with the constitution, including demagoguery, incitement to murder, murder and
mutilation, war, acceptance of thievery against infidels, meaning all non-Moslems. Verses are also pointed out where the equal rights of men and women are not upheld and where people of different faiths are oppressed.
Example: “The unbelievers among the People of the Book (Jews and Christians): They are
the vilest of all creatures.” (Sura 98:6)
According to the indictment that paragraph violates Article 4 of the Constitution and Paragraph 166 of the Penal Code

Now if only all those places afflicted with blasphemy and "tolerance" laws were to launch something similar. Oh to see such a case in Victoria!
I do not want the Koran banned : I want the laws themselves to be overturned, the Islamists to stop using these laws as cover, and most importantly for the Koran to get a good airing in the process, along with "moderate" Muslim sentiment in light of such developments. Lets see where this goes.

Kufr Aleikum,
Fingers crossed...

Web Sites and Voltaire Plays

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Wed, 08 Mar 2006 23:23:00 +0000

Brussels Journal reports that Euroislam.info, a German hosted site has been shut down for publishing the Motoons. This is not the first site to be forcibly shut down. The last one was shut down by the Swedish Government.

With the World turning upside down all too rapidly, it is not surprising to see France moving to the forefront of European anti-dhimmitiude, even as Jean-Marie Le Pen allies with Islam against Jooooooooos.

A play by Voltaire : "Fanaticism, or Mahomet the Prophet" was NOT banned in a French town. The Mayor showed spine and called in police instead! Voltaire, a figurehead of the Enlightenment, the man who said "I disapprove of what you say but I will die for your right to say it" is naturally offensive to Muslims.

After "pleading" with authorities, Muslims resorted to rioting which the Mayor described as "quasi-insurrectional". It pays to note that prominent "moderate" Tariq Ramadan was opposed to the staging of the play.

This follows the censoring of a Marlowe play in Britain due to content that was offensive to Muslims. Other attacks on European culture include calls for destruction of Renaissance frescoes which depict Mohammad in hell, a scene from Dante's Inferno presumably also offensive to Muslims.

It is not just about cartoons. It is about our whole culture. The sooner we realise this and stop retreating the better.

More disturbing things on the horizon: Gleefully, bending over since the Madrid bombings, Dhimmi Spain joins with moderate-key-ally-in-the-GWOT Pakistan in calling for an international anti-blasphemy law via UN resolution. This one scares me more than Paki nukes.

Also from Western Resistance: Members of State Muslim Body in Italy Refuse to Condemn Terror. A small surprise here. Usually they redefine it to mean the stuff that the US and Israel do, and then condemn that.

Finally, here is a little something for those who think that blasphemy laws are a good thing, that the poor darling Muslims are victims to be pitied and that terror is just a cry for help:

Declaration of theTreaty of Umar, 2006
In submission to political Islam:
We shall not create or publish any art to be displayed in any public forum that is offensive to any Muslim.
We shall not write articles, books or essays that criticize political Islam.
We shall not give a full report on the violence of political Islam around the world nor mention
jihad.
We shall show respect towards political Islam and defer to Islam’s demands on political, cultural and public issues.
We declare that the First Amendment does not apply to political Islam.
We shall criticize our civilization, but never criticize political Islam.
We shall find fault with ourselves when political Islam commits violence.
We shall change our laws and customs in accordance with the wishes of political Islam.
We shall not study the Koran, the life of Mohammed (the Sira) or the Traditions of Mohammed (the Hadith).
We shall not teach the history of political Islam’s 150 million victims.
We shall not teach how Islam sold African slaves to the world and enslaved Europeans and Asians.
We shall only teach about the “Golden Age of Islam” .
We shall not criticize the payment of the jizyah (foreign aide) to Islamic countries.
We shall keep our gates wide open for Muslim immigrants.
Whoever criticizes a Muslim with deliberate intent shall be declared a bigot and attacked.
We submit to political Islam and as dhimmis we seek the protection of Islam.

A Taxonomy of Moderates

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Wed, 08 Mar 2006 08:59:00 +0000

This article is based on correspondence in response to the following statement:

"the idea of defining Islamism in terms of the priority of common/sharia law is *very* elegant."

Defining Islamism: A Necessary Condition?

The definition of Islamism in terms of the priority of Sharia over the Secular State and the Rule of Law (or their equal co-existence) is a useful definition of Islamism, and provides a necessary, but insufficient condition for defining "moderates", as explained below. This definition can also be subverted by relativistic arguments, limiting its rhetorical value.

The State is Not Allah

Arguably, the main purpose of the US right to bear arms is as a countermeasure in the event where the state becomes something that the people can no longer tolerate. Obviously, there is some "self-evident truth" that to some Westerners at least sits above the state itself. We are not a secular theocracy, with the State as god. That is Fascism/Communism. We are still a nation of individuals, and we value our individuality more than the contracts we create to facilitate it, though we value these quite dearly indeed. Out of these contracts we forge a state.

Anticipating Trouble

This does not to refute the definition of Islamism provided previously, which is in fact useful. I am merely anticipating the inevitable and flawed counter argument, which is already leveled: that our societies are evil and corrupt, even by our standards (so many lefties are all too ready to agree here) and that in challenging our law with their Sharia Muslims are no more guilty that any "freedom fighters" in the past. Yes, I know that this is an odious argument, and that there is a huge difference between Sharia and any Western notions of common law, or even leftie notions of an ideal utopia (of a non-relativist variety). This counter argument does not hold substance, but consists of the kind of rhetorical sludge that no logical razor can hope to cut, at least not in any effective, eloquent way, one that that would unambiguously end the argument in the eyes of "Joe Average-Intelligentsia" ("Joe Chardonnay-Sixpack...") And so the relativistic rot of our society continues...

Islamists, Literalists and the Mainstream

Some facts worth remembering who considering the definition above: It is not axiomatic. It derives naturally from mainstream Islamic adherence to the Koran as the complete, final, perfect and literal word of God, the person of Muhammad as the perfect example, and Islamic jurisprudence of 300 years after his death as the only source of interpretation. The definition is thus subsumed by the definition of "literalist". This means that all mainstream Muslims are Islamists by this definition, and those that are not Islamists are sinners, heretics or traitors by the basic standards of their culture.

"Negative Moderates"

This is well worth remembering, because it means that "moderates" may be merely lax in their faith, or ignorant of its tenets. As we have seen countless times, this means that in times of crisis, where they turn to their family, community and culture for strength, they must turn against the supremacy of the Secular State and its Rule of Law. This is an important point: the "moderate by default" is a potential Islamist, and this is the path of many a suicide bomber, who were seen to be assimilated, westernised and hedonistic, but suddenly turning towards their faith (with the support and acclaim of their families and communities) and then taking the next logical steps that piousness, holy texts and religious leaders demand. Lets call these poor or lax moderates "negative moderates". Most of the "youths" rioting in France last November or Sydney beaches last December would be "negative moderates". So would many members of FATAH, or Iraqi Baathist insurgents, and any number of unveiled, fashionably dressed Al Jazeera reporters. Negative moderates are not necessarily our friends.

"Positive Moderates"

"Positive moderates" would be a small minority of moderates indeed, those who are educated in Islam, and take a clearly non-literalist, pro-Enlightenment stand. This may include some members of sects like Ahmaddiyah and more tolerant Sufis, as well as a number of prominent individuals. Sadly, these are all considered heretics and worse by the Muslims mainstream. There is even a handful of prominent positive moderate religious leaders. These tend to be disenfranchised, and their claims of wider mainstream appeal false and counterproductive. Probably unintentionally, they legitimise the Islamists (ie the Muslim mainstream) by claiming far more acceptance within the Ummah than they actually receive, and providing the well-meaning Western intelligentsia with the evidence of the kinder, gentler, friendlier Islam that they so desperately crave. The leadership and Islamic bona fides of such people are not taken seriously by the overwhelming majority of their "fellow" Muslims, because almost none of them want to challenge the supposed perfect, literal, complete and final nature of the Koran, nor to tolerate any such challenge from others. Having said this, Irshad Manji's stand in the Manifesto against Islamism is courageous and commendable, as are the tiny "Free Muslims Against Terror" in the US, the emerging Democractic Muslim movement in Denmark, and "Ni Putes ni Soumises" in France.

It should be mentioned that the most Positive of Positive Moderates are not Muslims at all, but rather ex-Muslims like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Ibn Warraq, Ali Sina and Salman Rushdie. Perhaps Positive Moderates are in the last stage of denial...

Uses and Challenges

The above definition of Islamist is thus a useful benchmark for the determination of true moderate Muslims. It falls short of a sufficient condition for "moderation". It also fails to provide an easy method of distinguishing positive moderates from negatives. It may not be a sufficient condition, but it certainly serves as a necessary condition: anyone who sees a role for Sharia law in society, and at any point puts it above the rule of law of a secular state is not a moderate. Sadly, the definition is also complicated by the practice of taqiyya.

Is Tariq Ramadan a moderate by this definition alone ? Possibly, especially with a selective reading. Is this really his agenda ? Are there examples to the contrary ? Indeed. Is he an Islamist ? In my book, certainly. The counterargument is that there are plenty of Christians who are guided by their religious sentiments in their activism and lawmaking. This is true, but we never call these people "moderates", and are often quick to call them "fundamentalists", sometimes unjustly. This is not a complete argument, unless one wants to label all religiously motivated legislators, judges and activists as "fundamentalists".

A more difficult and subtle argument would return to the sub-legal basis of Western culture: to me it is obvious that there are aspects of Reconstructed, Post-Enlightenment Western Secularism, as well as mainstream Protestantism, Catholicism and Ashkenazi Judaism which dovetail naturally with Western notions of common and natural law, while Sharia does not. Exploring this topic in detail is a task beyond me, but one I leave open to the great legal and philosophical minds out there.

Kufr Aleikum !

Miffed

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Mon, 06 Mar 2006 03:22:00 +0000

An Open Letter to Unelected, Moustached Pseudo-Moderate President Musharraf of Pakistan (A nuclear capable, proliferating, terror sponsoring state under official Sharia Law... Does anyone even remember?)

Dear Mr Musharraf,

May I call you Pervez ? No ? That's OK. You have a whole lot more medals than me, and I have never actually grown any kind of moustache, let alone one as prodigious as yours. May I call you "Mush" ? No ? WHY NOT ?

Congratulations

Before we get down to business please allow me to congratulate you on your many successes. It takes real genius to overthrow a democratically elected government in a military coup and still be the darling of the White House and State Department, lauded as a key partner in the Great War on Terror, especially given the track record of your country in this little enterprise.

Now as it happens I am not such a big fan of democracy, at least not in your country, given the kind of elected Islamists that you rub shoulders with every day and enjoy pretending to oppose. Your dictatorship is yet another lesser of two evils, and one I would be even happier about were you truly the secular moderate that our media keeps talking about. Now I may be a simple blogger and not versed in such matters, but it seems to me that while Murbarak in Egypt fought tooth and nail against allowing the Muslim Brotherhood anywhere near elections, your post-Sept 11 reaction to a similar situation in Pak was very much the opposite. Hey, the White House can't argue with democracy, right ? Well done. Instant bad cop ! And there were all those unsophisticated idealistic types thinking that secular moderate dictators do things like repeal Sharia law, and try to modernise their country. A great secularist and modernist, an ally in the Great War on Terror, you joined in the standing ovation offered to Mahatir Mohammad in his speech that set the tone of the New Anti-Semitism, but all too passe nowadays. And you are still Ally Number One. True genius.

Your country is found to be the largest nuclear proliferator through government channels, and the father of your atom bomb runs the racket? Big deal, he is a national hero, untouchable !

And speaking of those nukes. Iran's (hopefully) as-yet-non-existent nukes are scaring the pants out of even the Euroweenies, but noone seems too worried about the country who made it all possible, and has developed warheads and delivery capability.

And what a country ! The country that was the Taliban's main supporter, and now the hideout of choice of Al Qaeda's top brass. The country that reluctantly pursues "terrorists" in the West while letting them train and mount attacks in the East. The country that is still a Waqf, regardless of the secular state that Jinnah had in mind. How the heck did you pull all that off ?

How many inept, halfhearted attacks did you have to mount against terrorists living happily in your Tribal Areas ? Not many, but enough to justify keeping US troops out so they could not do the job ?

You are a very clever man, and I refuse to believe those lies about you. I refuse to believe that you are politically outmaneuvered by Islamists in government. You allowed them to be elected in the first place. I refuse to believe that your military intelligence service the ISI may be riddled with Islamists but I wonder how you could stay in power without them. Coups like yours are usually accompanied with purges. So perhaps the ISI's allegiances are not such a problem for you after all, but you get to blame them when things go bad. I refuse to believe that you of all people would not know where Bin Laden is. I refuse to believe that you would not be a competent man in charge, with trusted, competent people working for you. People who could be counted on to stage the odd fake assassination too...

But this is not why I write you you today.

Unfair...

It has come to my attention that you have provided a number of blogs some undeserving publicity. Those blogs had the distinction of being the main targets of attack by Islamist hackers. It would appear that hackers are not just malicious angry nutcases, they do useful things like pass their hate lists on to sympathetic governments.

Mr Musharraf, I work a day job, do an unmanageable amount of volunteer work and thanklessly maintain this blog, whose readership consists of a very small number of like minded nutcases, an Australian government Department concerned with free speech (they think there should be less of it), and the occasional Islamist doing a google search on "blogs by people I should be beheading". I work hard Mr Musharraf, and my work is largely thankless, with no help from you.

Admittedly, these blogs are better written, researched and visited than mine. In fact, my blog is probably going to be the subject of upcoming BBC lifestyle series "What Not to Write", hosted by a pair of well dressed post-menopausal bitches with caffeine addictions and a flair for humiliating people. But this is hardly the point. Or maybe, this it is the point. Yes, these 12 blogs that you have so kindly provided free publicity to may well deserve the attention that mine lacks. This is why, Mr Musharraf, I am begging, indeed, imploring you for a break. Please, oh pretty please with 77 Virgins on Top (see, I'm open minded), please

PLEASE BAN MY BLOG !

If you cannot see your way clear to doing this, could you please ask someone in your Ministry of Telling People What to Think to explain to me what else I would need to do to qualify. Its not like I haven't already done plenty.

Do I need to insult the Prophet ?

Hey, Mohammad is, like, and old dead guy who liked little girls! (And a few other things to boot...)

Do I need to call for a new cartoon competition ?

I hereby call upon both of my regular readers as well as any Government Departments and Islamoloonies visiting Six Days to send me some challenging pictures of Mohammad celebrating the Kama Sutra and the variety of farm animals that may have been found in Medina in 600 AD.

Do I really need to go as far as a catalogued compendium of Motoons throughout history ? Its not fair. Just because Zombie did all this work.

Hey, if you don't ban me, can I at least please get a fatwa ? My friends would be so, like, jealous.

Just Good Friends

Failing all of this, I ask you, Mr Musharraf to at least visit Six Days now and then. I look forward to your visit and your comments, and would be more than happy to put your blog up on my blogroll as well. As we get to know each other email addresses may be exchanged too. Finally, as I get to know you, I may even welcome you to join me over a couple of Carlsbergs in the local pub. Incidentally, that is where it stops, much as I may admire your power, your political genius, your interest in blogging and your well sculpted moustache. Given the reputed tastes of your good friends the Pashtuns, and the previously mentioned tell-tale moustache, I must emphasise that I would not actually share any of your other possible tastes, common as they are in Dar-al-Islam. For this, I blame the West's ready availability of unmarried, uncovered women, lessons about "stranger danger" delivered to us as children and a relative absence of farm animals. Sorry, but I have been corrupted away from what what you would probably call nature and towards decadent Western heterosexuality. I blame pornography, loose morals, secularism, the human rights of women, and the human rights of horny teenage me. I also blame a succession of Catholic girls, but that is an entirely different if delightful story (What is it with them and Jewish men?). But, as I said, we can still be good friends. If I misunderstood you then apologies, but you cannot be too careful when dealing with someone called PERVEz...

Otherwise, if you still find yourself in the market for neocon studmuffin, you may want to look up this guy.

Thanks and Goodbye

So thanks for taking the time to read this. I look forward to seeing your new blog too. Please forgive the brevity of this rant. I gotta go now and do more stuff to stop you and your ilk from destroying all that we in Dar-al-Harb hold dear.

Kufr Aleikum,

Ben Ze'ev

Manifesto

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 07:31:00 +0000

This just in from some of the biggest names in anti-dhimmitude. Lets see if the cowardly media that failed to print those cartoons will also shy away from printing this manifesto. If this courage can be found, I do not expect a generous reception from the ROP. Just as with the pictures, it falls to every blogger out there to reprint it and I am doing my humble bit.

After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new totalitarian global threat: Islamism.

We, writers, journalists, intellectuals, call for resistance to religious totalitarianism and for the promotion of freedom, equal opportunity and secular values for all.

The recent events, which occurred after the publication of drawings of Muhammed in European newspapers, have revealed the necessity of the struggle for these universal values. This struggle will not be won by arms, but in the ideological field. It is not a clash of civilisations nor an antagonism of West and East that we are witnessing, but a global struggle that confronts democrats and theocrats.

Like all totalitarianisms, Islamism is nurtured by fears and frustrations. The hate preachers bet on these feelings in order to form battalions destined to impose a liberticidal and unegalitarian world. But we clearly and firmly state: nothing, not even despair, justifies the choice of obscurantism, totalitarianism and hatred. Islamism is a reactionary ideology which kills equality, freedom and secularism wherever it is present. Its success can only lead to a world of domination: man's domination of woman, the Islamists' domination of all the others. To counter this, we must assure universal rights to oppressed or discriminated people.
We reject « cultural relativism », which consists in accepting that men and women of Muslim culture should be deprived of the right to equality, freedom and secular values in the name of respect for cultures and traditions. We refuse to renounce our critical spirit out of fear of being accused of "Islamophobia", an unfortunate concept which confuses criticism of Islam as a religion with stigmatisation of its believers.

We plead for the universality of freedom of expression, so that a critical spirit may be exercised on all continents, against all abuses and all dogmas. We appeal to democrats and free spirits of all countries that our century should be one of Enlightenment, not of obscurantism.
12 signatures
Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Chahla Chafiq
Caroline Fourest
Bernard-Henri Lévy
Irshad Manji
Mehdi Mozaffari
Maryam Namazie
Taslima Nasreen
Salman Rushdie
Antoine Sfeir
Philippe Val
Ibn Warraq
Presentations:
Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, from somilian origin, is member of Dutch parliement, member of the liberal party VVD. Writter of the film Submission which caused the assasination of Theo Van Gogh by an islamist in november 2004, she lives under police protection.

Chahla Chafiq
Chahla Chafiq, writer from iranian origin, exiled in France is a novelist and an essayist. She's the author of "Le nouvel homme islamiste , la prison politique en Iran " (2002). She also wrote novels such as "Chemins et brouillard" (2005).
Caroline Fourest
Essayist, editor in chief of Prochoix (a review who defend liberties against dogmatic and integrist ideologies), author of several reference books on « laicité » and fanatism : Tirs Croisés : la laïcité à l'épreuve des intégrismes juif, chrétien et musulman (with Fiammetta Venner), Frère Tariq : discours, stratégie et méthode de Tariq Ramadan, et la Tentation obscurantiste (Grasset, 2005). She receieved the National prize of laicité in 2005.
Bernard-Henri Lévy
French philosoph, born in Algeria, engaged against all the XXth century « ism » (Fascism, antisemitism, totalitarism, terrorism), he is the author of La Barbarie à visage humain, L'Idéologie française, La Pureté dangereuse, and more recently American Vertigo.
Irshad Manji
Irshad Manji is a Fellow at Yale University and the internationally best-selling author of "The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim's Call for Reform in Her Faith" (en francais: "Musulmane Mais Libre"). She speaks out for free expression based on the Koran itself. Née en Ouganda, elle a fui ce pays avec sa famille musulmane d'origine indienne à l'âge de quatre ans et vit maintenant au Canada, où ses émissions et ses livres connaissent un énorme succès.

Mehdi Mozaffari
Mehdi Mozaffari, professor from iranian origin and exiled in Denmark, is the author of several articles and books on islam and islamism such as : Authority in Islam: From Muhammad to Khomeini, Fatwa: Violence and Discourtesy and Glaobalization and Civilizations.

Maryam Namazie
Writer, TV International English producer; Director of the Worker-communist Party of Iran's International Relations; and 2005 winner of the National Secular Society's Secularist of the Year award.
Taslima Nasreen
Taslima Nasreen is born in Bangladesh. Doctor, her positions defending women and minorities brought her in trouble with a comittee of integrist called « Destroy Taslima » and to be persecuted as « apostate »
Salman Rushdie
Salman Rushdie is the author of nine novels, including Midnight's Children, The Satanic Verses and, most recently, Shalimar the Clown. He has received many literary awards, including the Booker Prize, the Whitbread Prize for Best Novel, Germany's Author of the Year Award, the European Union's Aristeion Prize, the Budapest Grand Prize for Literature, the Premio Mantova,
and the Austrian State Prize for European Literature. He is a Commandeur of the Ordre des Arts et Lettres, an Honorary Professor in the Humanities at M.I.T., and the president of PEN American Center. His books have been translated into over 40 languages.
Philippe Val
Director of publication of Charlie Hebdo (Leftwing french newspaper who have republished the cartoons on the prophet Muhammad by solidarity with the danish citizens targeted by islamists).
Ibn Warraq
Ibn Warraq , author notably of Why I am Not a Muslim ; Leaving Islam : Apostates Speak Out ; and The Origins of the Koran , is at present Research Fellow at a New York Institute conducting philological and historical research into the Origins of Islam and its Holy Book.
Antoine Sfeir
Born in Lebanon, christian, Antoine Sfeir choosed french nationality to live in an universalist and « laïc » (real secular) country. He is the director of Les cahiers de l'Orient and has published several reference books on islamism such as Les réseaux d'Allah (2001) et Liberté, égalité, Islam : la République face au communautarisme (2005).

This comes at a time when Europe is falling to its knees before their new overlords. Douglas Murray has just been to the anti-dhimmi conference in Holland commemorating Pim Fortuyn, the father of political anti-dhimmitude. He explores this sad state of dhimmitude in Eurabia, and mentions Ayaan Hirsi Ali, one of the signatories in the manifesto.

It seems the British police — who regularly provide protection for mosques (as they did after the 7/7 bombs) — were unable to send even one policeman to protect an organ of free speech. At the notorious London protests, Islamists were allowed to incite murder and bloodshed on the streets, but a passer-by objecting to these displays was threatened with detention for making
trouble.
Holland — with its disproportionately high Muslim population — is the canary in the mine. Its once open society is closing, and Europe is closing slowly behind it. It looks, from Holland, like the twilight of liberalism — not the “liberalism” that is actually libertarianism, but the liberalism that is freedom. Not least freedom of expression.
All across Europe, debate on Islam is being stopped. Italy’s greatest living writer, Oriana Fallaci, soon comes up for trial in her home country, and in Britain the government seems intent on pushing through laws that would make truths about Islam and the conduct of its followers impossible to voice.
Those of us who write and talk on Islam thus get caught between those on our own side who are increasingly keen to prosecute and increasing numbers of militants threatening murder. In this situation, not only is free speech being shut down, but our nation’s security is being compromised.
Since the assassinations of Fortuyn and, in 2004, the film maker Theo van Gogh, numerous public figures in Holland have received death threats and routine intimidation. The heroic Somali-born Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali and her equally outspoken colleague Geert Wilders live under constant police protection, often forced to sleep on army bases. Even university professors are under protection.
Europe is shuffling into darkness. It is proving incapable of standing up to its enemies, and in an effort to accommodate the peripheral rights of a minority is failing to protect the most basic rights of its own people.
The governments of Europe have been tricked into believing that criticism of a belief is the same thing as criticism of a race. And so it is becoming increasingly difficult and dangerous to criticise a growing and powerful ideology within our midst. It may soon, in addition, be made illegal.

Because I love you all and do not want you to leave without some amusement, here is a recently televised frank and honest exchange between a sane woman and an Islamist bigot, care of MEMRI [Hat tip: LGF]

The Head of the Arab League Agrees with Me !

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Tue, 28 Feb 2006 20:56:00 +0000

What an honour to have one's views supported by none less than Amr Moussa, Head KleptoLoony of the Arab League.

Arab League chief says cartoons part of anti-Islam battle

(DPA)27 February 2006 AMMAN - Arab League Secretary General Amr Mussa on Monday considered the Prophet Mohammed’s cartoons as part of a “battle against Islam” rather than a symptom of conflict among civilizations, and urged Arab parliamentarians to put pressure on the United Nations to come up with a “strict” solution to this problem.

As I said before, our most important weapon is our freedom of speech, because without it we cannot bring the others to bear. Amr understands this too. This is why he would like our freedom of speech taken away by an enlightened UN.

“I don’t think the issue pertains to an inter-civilization conflict. We have to mention the issue in its real perspective - it is a battle against Islam,” Mussa said at the opening session of the Arab Parliamentary Union (APU) conference at the Dead Sea resort in Jordan.

We agree again ! Amr thinks that there is a battle against Islam, at least its unreconstructed, literalist mainstream Sunni and Shia varieties. Well, the nasty anti-Western militant kind of Islam certainly seems to be doing its best to create a battle against itself at the moment, and poor ole moderate Muslims are being forced to choose sides. It is an interesting matter to investigate how much closer the Muslim mainstream is to their militants than they are to us... Amr does not think that this is a clash of civilisations and I agree, the clash is between Civilisation and Islamic Barbarism. We agree on so much, but we just support different teams.

A war with Islam. All those poor moderate Muslims caught in the middle...

This also goes back to the old question "what is a moderate Muslim anyway" ? Red Ken Livingstone, Mayor of London (currently suspended for making anti-Semitic comments, but back in the saddle in a month's time) invited this guy to England as his personal pal. Sheikh al-Qaradawi is a moderate muslim because... Ummm... Well... He thinks that there should be no suicide bombing except in "Palestine". And homosexuals should be killed. And so should apostates. Never mind, he is still best friends with Anti-Semitic Leftie London Mayor Ken. This may be because the definition of "moderate" has never been nailed down unambigously, and still leaves much to be desired. It is in fact merely a means of rehabilitating an ideology which is extremist in the broad sense, while marginalising some token members, the most extreme of the extreme. The more numerous, influential and still very dangerous ones are thus rehabilitated. The key question is:

Moderate with respect to what ? - Moderate with respect to Islam is not the yardstick we should be using. Moderate should be with respect to Civilisation. The yardstick is actually quite simple: Does the candidate for the label "moderate" agree that the rule of law of a secular state takes precendence over Islamic Law in all matters? Simple. How many moderates do we have now ?

Back to Sheikh Qardawi, Here is what the dear moderate has been saying lately:

They fight us with Judaism, so we should fight them with Islam. They fight us with the Torah, so we should fight them with the Koran. If they say "the Temple," we should say "the Al-Aqsa Mosque." If they say: "We glorify the Sabbath," we should say: "We glorify the Friday." This is how it should be. Religion must lead the war. This is the only way we can win.
<...>
Everything will be on our side and against Jews on , at that time, even the stones and the trees will speak, with or without words, and say: "Oh servant of Allah, oh Muslim, there's a Jew behind me, come and kill him." They will point to the Jews. It says "servant of Allah," not "servant of desires," "servant of women," "servant of the bottle," "servant of Marxism," or "servant of liberalism"... It said servant of Allah."When the Muslims, the Arabs, and the Palestinians enter a war, they do it to worship Allah. They enter it as Muslims. The hadith says: "Oh Muslim." It says "oh Muslim," not "oh Palestinian, Jordanian, Syrian, or Arab nationalist." No, it says: "Oh Muslim." When we enter under the banner of Islam, and under the banner of serving Allah, we will be victorious.

Nice. Remeber, this guy is a "moderate", a key face of international Islam . And then they complain about some war being declared AGAINST Islam...

Meanwhile, in "Moderate" Turkey with its now established Islamist government, Mein Kampf is a best-seller, and the anti-Semitic, anti-American film "Iraq-Valley of the Wolves" is the number one film, the most expensive Turkish production even made. Viewers in Germany have jumped up at the end of the film and shouted "Allahu Akbar".

In "Moderate" Indonesia new laws are tabled to placate a growing Islamic movement (all moderates ! really!) that will clamp down on public displays of affection, adultery and revealing clothing. If it passes, say goodbye to the Bali holiday...

Irving Shows Some Scary Insight

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Mon, 27 Feb 2006 10:00:00 +0000

Yep, he is actually a Left Winger and so is Hitler. And he likes the Guardian too. [Hat Tip: Talleyrand]

For My Russian Speaking Friends

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Mon, 27 Feb 2006 09:56:00 +0000

Otherwise find a Russian friend of your own and get them to translate it for you. Worth it.

Good Morning From Keith

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 23:13:00 +0000

Keith must have been reading something other than Jyllands-Posten this morning...

- Ben Ze'ev

It's 5 in the morning and I'm into the third coffee of the day. Lots to do this weekend but an hour or two reading newspapers first seemed like a good idea.
Nope--madness lies in that direction.

Headlines:

"Global warming the biggest worry, Clinton tells forum "
Former American president Bill Clinton told 600 of New Zealand's top business people their greatest worry in the world was global warming.
Not a looming recession. Not a tax system which steals from the productive and gives to parasites. Nope, that damned .0001% rise in average temperatures is some places. Maybe.

"Drought-hit Britain may face water rationing "
See above.

"Tamahori ordered to clean-up Hollywood "
Is that clean up as in: pick up the garbage or clean up as in exterminate self-absorbed lefty moral relativist film makers who can't bring themselves to say anything good about their own culture? Is there a difference?

Air NZ to slash almost 500 more jobs as profit plummets ››
Never mind the mortgage payments--see Bill's advice.

Teachers: Report card ban challenged (by New South Wales government)
Heaven forbid that parents should be allowed to know how their kids are doing--report cards would let them know how their teachers are doing too and we couldn't possibly allow that.

Village flooded by manure
Sounds like Bill Clinton is visiting there too.

9.46pm President 'leading Uganda poll'
Amazing.

Killing of Jew 'not anti-Semitic'HE calls himself the "Brain of the Barbarians". But France's most wanted man, gang leader Youssef Fofana, has denied accusations anti-Semitism motivated the kidnapping, torture and killing of Ilan Halimi, a Parisian Jew.Not amazing.

Turtle lost at sea
Riiight......

£150m teenage pregnancy failureI knew IVF was expensive, but 150 mil?

Beijing warns cardinalChina has warned the newly-appointed Cardinal Joseph Zen of Hong Kong, a leading critic of Beijing, not to mix religion with politics.
But it's apparently ok to mix politics with religion.

Blair to create minister for social exclusion
words fail me.

-Keith

Blasphemy Law in Action: German Dhimmitude / Talleyrand's Lazy Butt Kicked

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Thu, 23 Feb 2006 17:31:00 +0000

Insane. The German blasphemy laws that is, not the poor anti-dhimmi on the wrong end of them. I have for some time now wanted to see the entire Koran printed on toilet paper. Looks like someone had a similar idea.

DUESSELDORF, Germany (Reuters) - A German court on Thursday convicted a businessman of insulting Islam by printing the word "Koran" on toilet paper and offering it to mosques.
The 61-year-old man, identified only as Manfred van H., was given a one-year jail sentence, suspended for five years, and ordered to complete 300 hours of community service, a district court in the western German town of Luedinghausen ruled.

Here is a recent debate on freedom of speech and offence laws at Silent Running involving yours truly. Pitch in. Talleyrand, this means you ! (And lets see some articles too!)

[Update: 24/2/2006] The butt kicking worked beautifully. Talleyrand may be many things, but it will be a while before I call him lazy again. Here is a sample of his Napoleonic-era Gallic genius:

Irving is scum but he should be freed.
Austria, Belgium, Czech Rebublic, France, Germany, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Switzerland all have laws against denial of the Shoah. Is this a good idea?
I could give some purely practical objections of course.Firstly, court cases like this provide the majority of all of Irving’s publicity, and he gets free worldwide airtime for weeks everytime some new action against him is started. Secondly, of course these laws don’t stop holocaust denial, they just push it underground. Thirdly, as Ben Ze’ev points out, these laws in fact fuel conspiracy theories about the Jews. Fourthly, in most of the countries that ban such speech, it is primarily a way of merely avoiding embarassment about their history. Fifthly, when you ban books like Hitler’s Mein Kampf, you in fact make it more difficult for anyone to actually understand what happened, i.e. you reduce historical comprehension by covering over history.

And then of course in the current situation, the ban is most annoying: the reason the Iranian newspaper called for a cartoon competition on the holocaust was because they knew that by calling attention to this subject, they could all have a laugh at the European’s claim to be supporters of free speech. They are trying to say, look, if you guys believe in free speech, then
why is it that suddenly we aren’t allowed to say certain things when it is about the Jews? Sounds like a) a conspiracy b) like you guys are hypocrits when you go on about freedom of speech.

Free speech is worth recommending to all of the above countries, speech that would include even the right to make quite wild-sounding claims about certain historical events. These countries mess around much more with free speech (and even with speech on the internet) than
one is generally aware of. The reason you see people like Chomsky also supporting the right of holocaust deniers for example is that he knows that the kind of speech in which he engages (calling every President since WWII a war criminal) is possible only in a society that radically supports freedom of speech. The left relies on this freedom just as much as the right: in how many countries in the world could you imagine someone running a film nationwide basically slandering the President for 2 hours in the runup to an election? And yet Michael Moore was able to do this without retribution in the US. And then even sit in the Republican get-together in NY in the weeks before the election with a shit-eating grin on his face. And what happened to him? He made a lot of money. That’s the kind of freedom of expression that we believe in, and it is a freedom of expression that all sides of politics get something out of.

Of course, Tony, the people of Austria or France or whatever have the right to decide that they want to live in a land without radical freedom of speech, but our job here is to tell them why we think they should change their minds…

Talleyrand's next challenge:

SEND SOME FUCKING ARTICLES TO SIX DAYS !!!

Or I will publish that film of you, Dominique de Villepin and the donkey...

Antidote

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:43:00 +0000

This is one way to deal with the grim tone of the previous article... Yes, the tragicomic tradition at Six Days continues, and we have had a few too many heavy articles of late ! So:

First of all, sometimes it takes a purple Hell-cow called Reginald to tell it like it is. (Assisted by a cute, sign-waving Hell-slug) Turn up the sound, and do not play this one at work ! [Hat Tip: Silent Running]

Secondly:

(I recognise Miss Piggy, Porky Pig and Piglet, but who the heck is the pig on the left, anyway? Does anyone know?)

Then there is this.

As has now been well established by the Western press, five months ago a vicious right-wing propaganda rag in Denmark, possibly edited by a cryogenically preserved Nazi collaborator, sought specifically to denigrate Islam by commissioning a series of unspeakably horrible caricatures that baselessly portrayed Islam as having a tendency towards violence and intolerance.
Now, Muslims are not normally a people to congregate in mass protest and burn flags, hurl stones or break things. But this unprovoked act of cultural aggression (coming, as it did, out of the blue and occurring in Islam’s heartland, Denmark) was simply too much to take. Therefore, after five months of consideration, it was decided to make an exception for this case, and spontaneous protests broke out.
So it’s settled then. Had not the Jyllands-Posten newspaper committed its unforgivable violation of Sharia law, everything would be peaceful in the world. What we have here is a clear case of direct cause and effect, well isolated. That’s why the protestors targeted their anger narrowly at the newspaper in question and did not use the occasion to let loose a general pogrom of anti-Western, anti-Jewish, anti-Christian, anti-American and anti-Moderate rioting.
Oh wait, now that I think about it, that’s exactly what happened. After a suspicious pause that lasted longer than Joe Biden’s first set of hair plugs, the offended masses erupted in anger at the newspaper, Danish foods, the Prime Minister of Denmark, all the rest of Denmark, France, Germany, Norway, the principle of Free Speech, Israel, the Red Cross, the European Union, Christian churches, their own governments, Catholic Priests, the United States, Christian children, Ronald McDonald, and (of course) Kentucky Fried Chicken.
What? The United States cannot be on that list! Our brave State Department, always at the tip of any retreating spear, issued a condemnation of the cartoons and declared that free speech carries with it the responsibility not to say anything controversial. Plus, 99% of America’s media refused to even show the cartoons without more pixilation than they would provide for a daytime broadcast of “Caligula, The Larry Flynt Cut.”

Read it all. Go on.You know you want to...

Meanwhile, I need not remind you of this! I for one found the tune rather catchy, and was quite disappointed that it ended just before a rather sweet, female vocal piece, also partly in Italian. Yes, am still a sucker for that stuff... Imagine then my joy at finding the entire song, lyrics and all! Alas, no self-beating mullah, just the finest Europop beat, in English and Italian with the Rumanian word "haiduk" thrown in for good measure. Yes, I have been blogging to it. Got a better soundtrack? Send me the link!

Finally, if you read the Ashura link you will notice some belligirence towards a thankfully long passed St Valentine's day. Well, someone out there has decided that some quid pro quo is in order. I wonder if the Muslims will think of a lame arse reason to ban March 20 too. Even better if it falls on some Shia Imam's martyrdom day, or Ramalamadingdong or Eid-al-Goatfuck or something...

More from Keith: Title Edited

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Wed, 22 Feb 2006 10:45:00 +0000

The Greatest Weakness

It is notably ironic, a tragedy of classical proportions: the greatness of the West is such that only we ourselves can do ourselves in, and we appear to have collectively decided to do so. To Talleyrand: any discussion of Western strategy should start here. As I said in the previous article, this is our greatest, and possibly only problem. I am reminded of Bismah in the Hindu epic tale Mahabharata. Bismah, a noble warrior blessed by the Gods is given the gift of choosing the moment of his own death. He is thus unbeatable in battle. Finally, at the entreaties of his enemies the Pandava whom he admires, Bismah agrees to be killed on the battlefield the next day. Arjuna, the Pandava archer takes advantage of the opportunity and brings the old man down. The allegory is ugly, and painfully true to our present situation.

I cannot bring myself to include the title that Keith gave to the next article, which my heart wants to refute as my head cannot. If Keith insists I will include the title after all. I do hope that Keith will agree that however grim things are, however obsessed the postmodern bastard children of the West are with enabling their own humiliation and however deep the grave that the suicidalist monsters have dug for us all, we cannot but maintain our love for the West, our heritage, achievements, culture. We cannot but maintain faith in our victory and we cannot but persevere in opposing the enemies of the West, internal or external, weakened or ascendant. To do so in times of triumph is nothing. To do so in darker times is the true moral test. This is the only lesson that our enemies have to teach us.

-Ben Ze'ev.

Title Censored for Reasons of Morale, To be Restored at Keith's Request

Coalition forces have been spectacularly successful in Iraq and Afghanistan, whatever impression the MSM may prefer to convey. There has been no attack on American soil since 9/11 and Australia has so far escaped terrorist attacks on the home front.

But the truth is that the radical islamists don't need one.

A quick look at the leading European countries will demonstrate why.

Britain: Islamists have infiltrated local councils and schools, gnawing away at freedoms once taken for granted. They dictate what is taught about Islam to children and insist on special treatment for the children of Muslims, even when that "special treatment" affects all kids in the school. Radical Muslims take to the streets to protest the Danish cartoons in clearly illegal (for other Britons) terms while the police stand by and do nothing. Local councils ban patriotic demonstrations by people who demand an end to appeasement yet either allow or at least turn a blind eye to other ethnic groups demonstrating against..Whatever is flavour of the day.

France: Violent demonstrations, intimidation, thuggery, robbery.....The list goes on. The answer from French politicians is to call for more talks with the Muslim community.

Germany: Numerous radical islamist terrorist cells are uncovered.

Norway: Over 80% of rapes are committed by Muslim youths yet the media is strangely silent.......

I could go on, but the picture is clear.

Why is this so? The answer is at once both simple and unfixable, in this writers opinion.
At least three decades of leftist schoolteachers have succeeded in producing generations of kids with no real knowledge of--or pride in-- their culture and it's achievements. They teach a history of the white European male as a colonising oppressor, as a creature who should apologise for his culture which is inferior to any other.
These teachers have learned to parrot whatever academic Marxist/feminist bullshit is currently in vogue and to inflict it on their students. Integrity, courage, loyalty, honour....Are all to be derided, sneered at by the smug and superior.
The smug and superior by virtue of never having to have earned an honest living or look true evil in the eye. One assumes.
And the Western media is complicit in this. They can be no other way, since they're largely the product of the same morally bankrupt worldview, mired in moral relativism and what in an age when Men walked the earth used to be called cowardice.

-Keith

Western Strategy 101 : The Patient is Suicidal

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:24:00 +0000

Talleyrand has recently asked "what is our strategy?". Stated in this manner, this question introduces a couple of unwarranted assumptions. The analysis of those assumptions and a qualified restatement of the question will be a topic of a later article, one of an ongoing series that will attempt to provide an answer.

However qualified the question, it is even more important to identify the problem before any meaningful answer may be provided. This in itself is a complex matter, and here we need to look at ourselves, our adversaries, any other parties to the conflict and the strengths, weaknesses, resources, ideologies, strategies, tactics and agendas of all involved. These issues will be topics for later articles which I keep promising and delaying for various reasons. In the meantime, some very powerful articles have been recently written about the key, perhaps only real problem faced by the West, the one problem that if solved would grant immediate access to the only resource lacking in the West, will. The key problem is one of the West's self-hatred, its intellectual and moral collapse, its "Suicidalism".

One of the most succinct and cutting analyses of what ails us is the brief article "Suicidalism" by "Armed and Dangerous". This article is usually my opening shot to any leftie or "mainstream centrist" (unwitting leftie dupe) that I may be debating.

The most important weapons of al-Qaeda and the rest of the Islamist terror network are the suicide bomber and the suicide thinker. The suicide bomber is typically a Muslim fanatic whose mission it is to spread terror; the suicide thinker is typically a Western academic or journalist or politician whose mission it is to destroy the West's will to resist not just terrorism but any ideological challenge at all.
But al-Qaeda didn't create the ugly streak of nihilism and self-loathing that afflicts too many Western intellectuals. Nor, I believe, is it a natural development. It was brought to us by Department V of the KGB, which was charged during the Cold War with conducting memetic warfare that would destroy the will of the West's intelligentsia to resist a Communist takeover. This they did with such magnificent effect that the infection outlasted the Soviet Union itself and remains a pervasive disease of contemporary Western intellectual life.
Consider the following propositions:
There is no truth, only competing agendas.
All Western (and especially American) claims to moral superiority over Communism/Fascism/Islam are vitiated by the West's history of racism and colonialism.
There are no objective standards by which we may judge one culture to be better than another. Anyone who claims that there are such standards is an evil oppressor.
The prosperity of the West is built on ruthless exploitation of the Third World; therefore Westerners actually deserve to be impoverished and miserable.
Crime is the fault of society, not the individual criminal. Poor criminals are entitled to what they take. Submitting to criminal predation is more virtuous than resisting it.
The poor are victims. Criminals are victims. And only victims are virtuous. Therefore only
the poor and criminals are virtuous. (Rich people can borrow some virtue by
identifying with poor people and criminals.)
For a virtuous person, violence and war are never justified. It is always better to be a victim than to fight, or even to defend oneself. But "oppressed" people are allowed to use violence anyway; they are merely reflecting the evil of their oppressors.
When confronted with terror, the only moral course for a Westerner is to apologize for past sins, understand the terrorist's point of view, and make concessions.
These ideas travel under many labels: postmodernism, nihilism, multiculturalism, Third-World-ism, pacifism, "political correctness" to name just a few. It is time to recognize them for what they are, and call them by their right name: suicidalism.

"Armed and Dangerous" has now followed up his earlier efforts with "Gramscian Damage" ,an even more brilliant exploration of the theme of Suicidalism, and the development of Western self-hatred. He also provides some predictions of likely consequences. This article goes some way towards addressing Talleyrand's question regarding strategy. This article is also a great one to throw at lefties that buy into cultural relativism, but still think of themselves as Marxists. It challenges them to address the problem of sustaining a society based on cultural relativism, even if one is desirable. The simple argument is that such a society is doomed to be eaten alive by the most aggressive, uncompromising form of absolutism that it tolerates.

The most paranoid and xenophobic conservatives of the Cold War were, painful though this is to admit, the closest to the truth in estimating the magnitude and subtlety of Soviet subversion. Liberal anticommunists (like myself in the 1970s) thought we were being judicious and fair-minded when we dismissed half of the Right's complaint as crude blather. We were wrong; the Rosenbergs and Alger Hiss really were guilty, the Hollywood Ten really were Stalinist tools, and all of Joseph McCarthy's rants about "Communists in the State Department" were essentially true. The Venona transcripts and other new material leave no room for reasonable doubt on this score.

...

The first step to recovery is understanding the problem. Knowing that suicidalist memes were launched at us as war weapons by the espionage apparatus of the most evil despotism in human history is in itself liberating. Liberating, too, it is to realize that the Noam Chomskys and Michael
Moores and Robert Fisks of the world (and their thousands of lesser imitators in faculty lounges everywhere) are not brave transgressive forward-thinkers but pathetic memebots running the program of a dead tyrant.
Brittingham and other have worried that postmodern leftism may yet win. If so, the victory would be short-lived. One of the clearest lessons of recent times (exemplified not just by kaffiyeh-wearing western leftists but by Hamas's recent clobbering of al-Fatah in the first Palestinian elections) is that po-mo leftism is weaker than liberal individualism in one important respect; it has only the weakest defenses against absolutist fervor. Brittingham tellingly notes po-mo philosopher Richard Rorty's realization that when the babble of conflicting tribal narratives collapses in exhaustion, the only thing left is the will to power.
Again, this is by design. Lenin and Stalin wanted classical-liberal individualism replaced with something less able to resist totalitarianism, not more. Volk-Marxist fantasy and postmodern nihilism served their purposes; the emergence of an adhesive counter-ideology would not have. Thus, the Chomskys and Moores and Fisks are running a program carefully designed to dead-end at nothing.
Religions are good at filling that kind of nothing. Accordingly, if transational progressivism actually succeeds in smothering liberal individualism, its reward will be to be put to the sword by some flavor of jihadi. Whether the eventual winners are Muslims or Mormons, the future is not going to look like the fuzzy multicultural ecotopia of modern left fantasy. The death of that dream is being written in European banlieus by angry Muslim youths under the light of burning cars.
In the banlieus and elsewhere, Islamist pressure makes it certain that sooner or later the West is going to vomit Stalin's memes out of its body politic. The worst way would be through a reflex development of Western absolutism, Christian chauvinism, nativism and militarism melding into something like Francoite fascism. The self-panicking leftists who think they see that in today's Republicans are comically wrong (as witnessed by the fact that they aren't being systematically jailed and executed), but it is quite a plausible future for the demographically-collapsing nations of Europe.

Finally, "The Adversary Culture - The Perverse Anti-Westernism of the Cultural Elite", a recent article by Keith Windschuttle, also addresses the problem of Western self-hatred and the postmodern penetration of our culture that has made such suicidalism possible. This article is a great analysis of the scholarly roots of this disease, with a strong Australian perspective. The only issue I have with the article is that it really should have been two articles. The first part deals directly with Western self-hatred. The final third of the article deals with the related, but separate problem of Islam and its recent confrontation with Western freedom of speech.

Windschuttle offers no direct answer to Talleyrand's question, but underlines the importance of finding one, and quickly.

Today, we live in an age of barbarism and decadence. There are barbarians outside the walls who want to destroy us and there is a decadent culture within. We are only getting what we deserve. The relentless critique of the West which has engaged our academic left and cultural elite since the 1960s has emboldened our adversaries and at the same time sapped our will to resist. The consequences of this adversary culture are all around us.
The way to oppose it, however, is less clear. The survival of the Western principles of free inquiry and free expression now depend entirely on whether we have the intelligence to understand their true value and the will to face down their enemies.

Finding the way to oppose suicidalism is the most difficult and important goal we have, perhaps the only real goal. Once this goal is achieved all the other issues of the day are minor headaches, easily solved with our enormous and growing wealth, genius and and military might.

Why I am not Celebrating Today's News from Austria

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 22:28:00 +0000

A friend emailed me this link today with the subject line "heh heh heh". I do not share his joy. Why would I not be pleased that a Holocaust denier of David Irving's calibre is put away ? Ok, I am a little pleased at an emotional level. Neverthelss, it is important to recognise that Irving's conviction is a step in the wrong direction.

This is because freedom of speech is the most precious weapon in the Western armoury. Without it, we cannot bring the other weapons to bear. I will not reiterate the dismal state of freedom of speech in The UK and other parts of Europe, as well as in Victoristan, ostensibly still a state of Australia (expecting some serious Sydney-bashing from Nilknarf and other Melbournabad bloggers here :) )

Freedom of speech is also vital because it shows our enemies for what they are. Forcing them to moderate their speech does not moderate their agenda, it only makes it smoother and more effective.

As Blair's Law (named after uber-blogger Tim Blair) takes greater hold, and the moonbat leftists, Islamists and Holocaust-denying (or Holocaust-celebrating, or, strangely, both simultaneously) Nazi fascists all congeal into a grand anti-Western alliance, it is important for the world to hear their increasingly dissonant and insane rhetoric, and for us to be able to say exactly what is wrong with their ideas, and the people who hold them.

Irving's conviction is a sop to those otherwise sane, sensible people who know the Holocaust for what it is, but whose pain and sense of justice may blind them to more immediate and frightening threats, and force them to forget the value of key freedoms and institutions. Those who applaud Irving's conviction provide political capital to those who would try Oriana Fallaci for insulting Islam, ban the publication of the Jyllands-Posten cartoons or convict Daniel Scot and Danny Nalliah in Victoristan.

I could find no better case against the jailing of Irving than this recently taken picture:

I would rather Irving was not jailed, but instead photographed marching alongside these ladies, or freely attending Holocaust-denial conferences in Iran. The important thing is not to punish him, but to discredit him. Noone can do this better than Irving himself, but only if he is given the key human rights of free speech, and freedom of association.

Hi Thought Police!

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 07:18:00 +0000

They are at it again, even as I write this !
Hi regulators of supposedly free speech! Care to leave a comment for a change ?

proxy.dcita.gov.au (Department Of Communications And The Arts)
Australia, 0 returning visits
Date
Time
WebPage
20th February 2006
18:11:14
Six DaysNo referring link
20th February 2006
18:13:21
Six DaysNo referring link
20th February 2006
18:17:44
Six Days: Cousin Josh sixdaysmore.blogspot.com/
20th February 2006
18:18:16
Six DaysNo referring link

Honesty in Advertising?

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 00:14:00 +0000

The Aussie "Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs".
DIMIA for short.
A fitting homophone of the adjective "dhimmier", which according to the Six Days Dictionary means "More Dhimmi than Thou". Won't a Certain Demographic be pleased.
They probably do not get the joke, which is well and truly on them regardless...

Another Look at Europe

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Sun, 19 Feb 2006 23:09:00 +0000

Europe may be waking up quite nicely after all. Perhaps Eurabia is not as foregone a conclusion as Oriana Fallaci and Bat Ye'or suggest in their despair. The theory is that while European leaders pontificate about responsible limits to freedom of speech, a revolution in underway in political attitudes, immigration policy and the management of existing Muslim communities. The argument is that recent dhimmitude on the part of European leaders is Western taqiyya, an attempt to get our own hudna while we sort out what needs to be done. Lets see where this goes. Colour me "cautiously optimistic".

The Muslims refused to assimilate. They were expelled. This was the story in Europe 400 years ago. We are watching the sequel today. Europeans are rarely welcoming to outsiders, even when the outsiders are blond and blue-eyed and come from the country next door. When the outsiders are un-European, swarthy and Muslim, they are tolerated at best. When some Muslims also insist that Europeans stop acting like Europeans, on pain of death, European tolerance comes to an end.
In the clash of cultures between secular Europeans and extremist Muslims, there can ultimately be no compatibility or compromise, only loss by one side or the other of the absolute values it holds dear. European capitulation on European soil, where they remain the dominant majority, is unlikely: Europeans revel in their liberty to mock religion, to poke fun at sacred cows, to be outrageous, even to offend.
European leaders have reacted to the Muslim upset over the cartoons two ways. publicly and to buy time, they seek to calm the protesters by deploring the abuse of freedom of speech. More significantly, they seek to preserve their societies by legislating Western norms, by tightening or ending immigration from Muslim countries, by enabling the expulsion of radical imams and other Muslim activists, and by raising the spectre of mass deportations.

Downunda's very own John Howard has also launched an assault against extremist Islam. He distinguished Muslim culture from that of previous waves of migration, criticised the practice of jihad as unique to Muslim culture, and the level of misogyny well above that of other migrant groups. All well and good. Even if he mentions that Lebanese have integrated well in Australia, without the important qualification "Christian", while most Muslim-related problems in Australia, such as the recent Sydney riots seem to be generated by the Lebanese Muslims.
Of course, Howard was compelled to once again mention that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are nice, moderate, yadda yadda yadda. Ameer Ali takes issue with Howard's comments, and notes that the proportion of Jihadis is quite tiny. This puts him at odds with compatriots who estimated the proportion of Salafi/Wahhabi Muslims in Australia at 10%, hardly a tiny or irrelevant minority.

Interestingly, this would also make Aussie ROP followers quite different to their British counterparts, 40% percent of whom support Sharia law in the UK. This is all well and good, you might say, Sharia is just a harmless cultural artifact. Bullshit. Two points: they are free to follow Sharia anyway. What they want is an official imposition of Sharia law.
It comes as no surprise then that Patrick Sookhdeo, a leading British analyst, believes that
'The day is coming when British Muslims form a state within a state' in the UK.

The cartoons, you see, have not been published in this country, and the Government has been very critical of those countries in which they were published. To many of the Islamic clerics, that's a clear victory.
"It's confirmation of what they believe to be a familiar pattern: if spokesmen for British Muslims threaten what they call 'adverse consequences' - violence to the rest of us - then the British Government will cave in. I think it is a very dangerous precedent."
Dr Sookhdeo adds that he believes that "in a decade, you will see parts of English cities which are controlled by Muslim clerics and which follow, not the common law, but aspects of Muslim sharia law.
"It is already starting to happen - and unless the Government changes the way it treats the so-called leaders of the Islamic community, it will continue."

More frighteningly, a very similar percentage (37%) of UK Muslims agree that UK Jews are valid targets in the "struggle for justice in the Middle East" (ie destruction of Israel.). 37% of UK Muslims support targeting their fellow countrymen, women and children purely on the basis of their race, as part of a campaign against a completely different country ! (Yes, most Jews, like yours truly are NOT RELIGIOUS AT ALL. We are a RACE, the religion is OPTIONAL ! Some of us are Buddhists, for Chrissake...).

While the call is made in Britain, action has been taken in France. A Jewish man was kidnapped and tortured to death by a gang of Muslims. This gang who had attempted to kidnap Jews in the past, quoted passages from the Koran to the victim's family, and suggested that they "go to the synagogue" to get ransom money (which the gang rejected in any case. Perhaps money wasn't the issue).

Naturally, French authorities were quick to rule out anti-Semitism. It remains to ask whether the anti-Semitism so reflexively ruled out was that of the kidnappers, or their own.

The charge of anti-Semitism is invalid, you see, because the torturers were not pretending to be Palestinian jihadis. They were pretending to be Iraqi jihadis.

Looks like Le Pen has chosen anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism above the cancer eating away at his country. He has stretched out his hand to the Islamists. An anti-Semitic, fascist/Islamist alliance in France. And so soon after the Ramadan Intifada. Who would have thought. Le Pen has the support of 25% of France, and now plans to add the Muslim 10%. Sarkozy is now France's only hope.

Finally, Mike Jericho has printed a very interesting call for help from a woman in France. Read the comments too.

I am a French woman of European stock, an author, a Christian, whose freedoms are threatened by the invasion into France of millions of Muslims who are imposing their laws and their violence on our society. This urgent appeal is to save my homeland, its culture, its centuries-old civilization and its European population, all in peril because of the treasonous conduct of our leaders. We did not fight Nazism, we did not sacrifice our men in the French Resistance, only to abandon our country to this new, more virulent form of Nazism.
I am a woman living in a country where women are veiled or raped. I am an historian who has been persecuted by the police for writing of our Celtic ancestors, while our President hammers away that we are of Muslim origins! I am a novelist, but today it is wrong to prefer Flaubert or Proust or Victor Hugo. In America, many of you have seen 'Les Miz' based on Hugo's novel. Did it not inspire you to preserve your freedoms?
I come from poverty, worked hard at school and never committed an act of violence. The grand-daughter of a Spanish immigrant who fought at Verdun, daughter and niece of WWII resistance fighters, one of whom was in General Leclerc's 2nd Armored Division at the time of our liberation from barbarity, I sing our national anthem and I honor our flag which has been replaced in some French cities by the Algerian flag! I point with pride to our Celtic, Roman and Frankish origins, our kings, our knights, our heroes, our cathedrals, our Christian faith, our writers and musicians and artists and scientists. They are trying to make us bend to Islamic law. In school I studied our constitution, not the Koran!
I am sorrowfully aware that many of you feel that France deserves her lot. I beg you not to confuse our leaders and our appeasers who have sold out their country with patriotic Frenchmen who love their country. If Jacques Chirac did not help you in Iraq it is because one cannot serve two masters, and in France Islamic law is master. We have reason to believe that Chirac's daughter Claude is married to a Muslim and that Chirac himself may have converted! We have been muzzled for decades, cowed into silence, as we watch our country move towards
extinction. If France is lost, the Western world is lost. Americans! Your brothers, those of European origin, those whose roots and civilization are the same as yours, are being killed all over Europe: in France, England, Holland, Belgium, Spain, Scandinavia, even in Australia! Here in France, if you speak of preserving Western civilization you risk imprisonment. If you say you are a victim of anti-white racism, you are told there is no such thing.

I Take It All Back!

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Wed, 15 Feb 2006 11:53:00 +0000

A clarification of the last post, and some apologies, retractions and corrections.

Point 1: Islamist pronouncements can be helpful, interesting and persuasive. They can change one's mind about religious issues, the defamation of historical figures, Kuffar festivals and the public display of haram behaviour. Case in point below.

Point 2: It pays to actually read the stuff one links to in one's blog.

Point 3: St Valentine would have kicked both Santa's and the crippled Mullah's asses from the North Pole to the Holy City of Qom and back again.

Point4: St Valentine was an anti-dhimmi reconquisatador mensch! St Valentine's Day is thus celebrated rather inappropriately, except in as far as it flaunts haram stuff the ROP don't particularly like. Perhaps this just as well !

Muslims Advised Not To Celebrate Valentine's Day
KUALA
TERENGGANU, Feb 13 (Bernama) -- Muslims in the country, especially lovers, have been advised not to celebrate Valentine's Day tomorrow.State Islam Hadhari Development Committee Deputy Chairman, Muhammad Ramli Nuh said celebrating the Day could be regarded as recognising the enemies of Islam because Valentine or Valentinus took part in planning and attacking Cordoba, once a well-known centre of Islam in Spain, causing its downfall.He was speaking to reporters after opening the seminar on Understanding of Tasawwuf Nusantara at Universiti Darul Iman, Malaysia, here, today.Muhammad Ramli said although not many couples
celebrate Valentine's Day in the state, the state government wished to remind that the celebration should not be held including in hotels.He reminded hotel managements to be sensitive to the religious beliefs of the people.

Anti-Dhimmi Reconquistador Mensch !!! (Assuming the Islamists are telling the truth of course)

Non So Che Fare A Diventare Cosi - Shiite Ashura Rave Party - The Six Day Whine

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:32:00 +0000

That Rave Party

Everyone else is linking to this, so why not! In the absence of more profound or structured comment, essay or pieces of news, please enjoy crippled Shiite self-flagellation and ad-nauseum anguish at the slaughter of Imam Hussein in Ad 700 something by those mean Sunnis (What? it wasn't the Jooooooos?).

Clash of Civilisations

A thought occurs: who would win a fight to the death between Santa Claus and a self-whacking crippled Mullah on speed ? And could you even tell the difference between combatants after the hats come off ?

A Stalemate

As Henry Kissinger once remarked: "It is a pity that they cannot both lose". And before Talleyrand launches into one of his protracted probing inquiries: no, I do not give a shit about Santa either! Hah ! Now go stick THAT in your Jyllands-Posten and numerous sympathetic outlets worldwide !

Readers Possibly Offended

Offended? Good. Gonna issue a Christ-wah on my poor Jewish tush ? Go right ahead, turn-the-other-cheeksters ! I have insulted your Holy Gift Bringer ! So get with the program, no one gets to Father Christmas but past me first ! Come on, post-Christian Western consumerists ! Rebuke me to death !

Now stand back, and watch the streets of the West seethe with gullible present-addicted children and their guilt-ridden parents baying for poor old Ben Ze'ev's blood...

Three Way Struggle, Speculation on a Saint

Now, what if St Valentine were to join the battle? (Does anyone even know what he looked like, how adept he was at unarmed combat against menacing fat bald guys with large sacks or religious frenzy, or what the heck a Catholic saint would have to do with a smooch festival?)

And here I have offended a Great Religion. Whoops...

A Competition

To explore this and other topics haram in our decadent Kuffar culture, I am hereby declaring an anti-Santa and anti-St-Valentine cartoon competition right here on Six Days. Do your worst !!!! Bwa ha ha ha ha !!!!

Incidentally, it would appear that my dislike of St Valentine is shared by the most insistent sixth

of the world's population. Could it be that they would actually use their mighty super- powers of violent protest, boycott, terror, lies, hypocrisy and frenzied self-flagellation with metal implements for good rather than evil ? Could they put the horror of Feb 14 to rest ? If so, send me a turban and call me Ibn Dib.

So, feeling mighty pissed off and a tad anti-Semitic yet? Wanna tear the Jew a new one ? Don't bother, that is yet another literary and artistic field that we excel in....

... unfortuntaly this is far too true and not always funny...

Free Speech Bounded, Cultural Icons Explored, Italians Mentioned

Not going to allow any defamation of Jesus in the Competition though. I don't do that to family.

Surprisingly Christmas is even less relevant than St Valentine's day, but I will note that the last two have been the worst ever.

And yes, even brief snippets of dumb Italian lyrics in multilingual techno nonsense accompanying footage of Shiite self-harm still elicit way much more emotion than is appropriate, necessary or desired.

Damn those Italians. They build their cars well, and their women better. You don't forget either in a hurry. Happy fucking post-Valentine's day.

Kufr Aliekum,

Ben Ze'ev: clearly not at his best.

PS, on a more serious note, some seriously good news.

PRINCETON, NJ Following the election of Hamas as the Palestinian Authority's ruling party, Americans have grown more pessimistic that peace will ever be achieved in the Middle East, and increasingly sympathetic toward the Israelis. American opinions of the Palestinians had been improving in recent years, but now are among the worst Gallup has ever measured. Most Americans do not believe the United States should give any financial assistance to the Palestinian Authority regardless of its stance toward Israel and most say the United States should conduct diplomatic relations with the Palestinians (only) if they recognize Israel as a nation.
Hamas secured a majority of seats in the latest Palestinian parliament, raising worldwide concerns about what the militant organization, considered by many nations to be a terrorist group, might do with governing power. By a 2-1 margin, Americans now say there will never come a time when Israel and the Arab nations will live in peace, according to the annual Gallup Poll on World Affairs, conducted Feb. 6-9. The 65% to 32% split compares with a roughly 50-50 split last year. The current reading on this future peace measure, along with one other reading from August 2001, represents the most pessimistic Americans have been since the question was
first asked in 1997.

Keith Asks: Who Will Defend the West?

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 11:16:00 +0000

Today Crusader Rabbit aka Keith asks an important question, and uncovers some ugly truths. Six Days gets one, or possibly two new contributors, depends on how you look at it. The world continues to accelerate past rapid reruns of 1933, 1936 and 1938 towards Armageddon 1.0.

Rant Du Jour (Du Six Jours?)

Keith asks who will defend the West. Who indeed? As the world goes to hell, the leaders of the West fall all over themselves to apologise, show sensitivity and censor any criticism of a certain religion whose contribution to our society and general sensibilities are apparently worth sacrificing 300 years of Enlightenment and some of our core freedoms and values, as well as a functioning, prosperous and safe society with a future. Naturally, many of us feel despondent, though Tom Paine of Silent Running makes a very eloquent call to arms with "Paine's Theorem - It's All One War!". Lots of other goodies on this podcast, including an interview with a Real Moderate Muslim (Eureka!). It's a podcast. Listen to it.

Obscenity and banal hatred know no bounds when the ROP is not the object of derision. While Leunig may not be responsible for submitting the cartoon into Iran's horror of a competition, it is no fake. He certainly drew it.

Amid the gloom there is some good news today. Lets hope Ehud and Tzipi don't squander this one like they have all other recent opportunities.

I had almost succeeded in forgetting that today was St Valentines day, which has been crap for very sound personal reasons. Then again, there was this which amused me. Like I need a goyishe saint's day to feel rotten anyway.

Bienvenue Ã Six Jours,Monsieur de Talleyrand

I have a number of related issues for future discussion, some in answer to points raised by Talleyrand. This will appear in a while. Blogging will be sparse in the near future, for reasons that may also be revealed soon. Incidentally, if Talleyrand is reading this, I remind him that he is invited as a regular contributor. While he asks more questions than he answers, this is perfectly acceptable and welcome. In fact, Keith and I can be rather angry ranters, so a calm Socratic voice may be just what the doctor ordered. I remind Talleyrand that by accepting this welcome he performs the modern day equivalent of joining us behind the barricades, of standing up and being counted, of taking a side, even if he only chooses to question and ponder as he stands there.

Meet Ben Ze'ev

Six Days is now becoming crowded, so yours truly needs a nomme de blogge to distinguish him from Keith and Talleyrand. In the tradition of Semitic anti-dhimmis (Ibn Warraq, Bat Ye'or) I adopt the patronymic Ben Ze'ev. Six Days is the blog, Ben Ze'ev is the guy who isn't Keith or Talleyrand. "Ze'ev" means "Wolf". "Ben" means "Son Of". Hi.

And don't call me "Ben" cause that is just silly.

Enough, as they say, about me. Over to Keith:

Who Will Defend the West?

This is no finely crafted post in the manner of a Lileks or Mike Jericho, more some idle thoughts after a long day's work and more than a few beers. So bear with me.
Recently I started a new job and it involves working closely with a German guy--an immigrant to New Zealand--in his thirties. Nice person. Good at what he does and an asset to his new country in terms of his skills.
And my first real chance to listen to the "European view" of the world at first hand.

That view chills me to the bone.

This person (let's call him Klaus) has a constant refrain which consists of "it's the law" or "it's a safety issue". He sees almost everything in terms of what's "allowed" and what is safe. He sees regulation by government as the answer to every problem facing society.
Needless to say, he's also very good at the bureaucratic stuff that goes with the job and he hates the U.S.A. with a passion. Believes that guns have no place in the homes of citizens.
Klaus believes that a safe, law-abiding life is the ultimate expression of humanity, that those canine incisors he wears--the product of millions of years of evolution--can be made to vanish by a few carefully crafted EU resolutions. He doesn't just say these things, he believes them with all the certitude of the person raised in almost perfect safety and comfort. What the rest of the world, that part which doesn't share this Utopian vision thinks, is simply ignored.

In other words, he's the Perfect European, subservient to the State and an individual only in terms of his musical and cinematic tastes. (Although even those appear to be unremittingly mainstream for his age). The embodiment of the lemming-like mentality that's allowed a bunch of unelected bureaucrats to trash a thousand years of European history and impose Orwellian thought control on the citizens (subjects?) of the member States.

So who will defend the West? Who will go to the barricades if necessary to defend free speech? Who will die if necessary to ensure liberty for future generations?
The rows of white crosses at Normandy, those heartbreaking rows upon rows upon rows of young lives given for freedom are a historical aberration, apparently.
Klaus will man no barricade. Will stand against no enemy. Will always find a law or a justification to look the other way when the trains roll with their human cargo to the gas chambers or the gulag again. And I don't think for one minute that Klaus is an exception. He represents Man made in the image of the bureaucrats and intellectuals and petty functionaries who have grabbed control of most Western societies, the same people who would just as happily shuffle paperwork for another Stalin or another Adolf.

The Precipice: will the EU fall ? / Egyptian Cartoons:The Blogosphere's Greatest Scoop ?

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Thu, 09 Feb 2006 10:28:00 +0000

Very Bad News

The only thing with this picture is that the guys up the back should be EU bureaucrats. Not terrorist assholes, but their most willing stooges. This is what I fear most. Who could believe that our gagging was so near ? [Hat tip: Tim Blair's merry band of commenters]

All because of some dangerous, ignorant, smug, miseducated, decadent, self-destructive, blind, cowardly, pompous, sycophantic, spiteful, self-hating fascist bastards.

You are thinking that this is not "our" gagging because it is the EU?
First they came for the Europeans...

Plans for a European press charter committing the media to "prudence" when reporting on Islam and other religions, were unveiled yesterday.

Franco Frattini, the European Union commissioner for justice, freedom and security, revealed the idea for a code of conduct in an interview with The Daily Telegraph. Mr Frattini, a former Italian foreign minister, said the EU faced the "very real problem" of trying to reconcile "two fundamental freedoms, the freedom of expression and the freedom of religion".
Millions of European Muslims felt "humiliated" by the publication of cartoons of Mohammed, he added, calling on journalists and media chiefs to accept that "the exercising of a right is always the assumption of a responsibility". He appealed to European media to agree to
"self-regulate".
Accepting such self-regulation would send an important political message to the Muslim world, Mr Frattini said.

Very Good News

The EU's monstorous dhimmitude almost, but not quite spoils my glee at what may just be the greatest scoop ever grabbed by the blogosphere. This scoop is orders of magnitude more significant than the cartoon fraud perpetrated by Danish Imams, and should invalidate all the rage that the ROP has been directing our way for the last few weeks. It is bigger than Rathergate. It may also place the intrepid Egyptian Sand Monkey in all kinds of danger. Lets make sure he stays safe by protesting loudly if the Egyptians do anything to him.

The story is: An Egyptian newspaper published the cartoons in October, during Ramadan to boot! Was anyone boycotting Egypt ? No. Were there riots, protests, anger ? No. Then Egypt boycotted other people for letting their newspapers do pretty much the same thing. Hmm. Does anyone see a problem here ? Murbarak is going to look pretty bad, and may take it out on the Egyptian blogosphere to prevent a repeat . I worry for the poor little monkey, he is a gifted blogger, and one of Egypt's minority of sane people. I hope he skips the country soon.

Lets also hope that this story helps Europe regain its self-respect, and tell Frattini where he may insert his media regulation proposal.

Kufr Aleikum, I leave you with the strangely inoffensive Egyptian Cartoons...

Kudos Tim, Kudos Janet, Kudos...Andrew ????

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Wed, 08 Feb 2006 11:12:00 +0000

Today I decided to add some new cartoons that between them span my thoughts on the current crisis. Perhaps the newspapers that were too "sensitive" and "nuanced" to print the original twelve might consider printing some or all of these.

Exhibit A to the left is a new Mohammad cartoon that has appeared in the French press, in the Weekly Satirical Charlie Hedbo. [Hat Tip: The Dumb Ox]

The cartoon caption reads "Mohammed overwrought by the fundamentalists", The old pedophile is crying, saying "It's hard to be loved by such idiots". Fatwa pending.

[Update 9/2/2006 : Chirac, walking proof that the entire Eurabia thesis is correct, never misses a chance to play the dhimmi while another French newspaper prints the cartoons! This is a major victory. We all remember what happened to the editor of France Soir...]

The next one speaks to the hypocrisy of what passes for business as usual in the government controlled Middle Eastern press. Want to see some real ones ?

Want to see some more ?

Still not convinced ?

In light of the above, we are fortunate indeed that such difficult times have not prevented newspaper editors from maintaining their strict codes of ethics, and upholding the key values we associate with the best practice of the journalistic profession. Yes, we are talking the bedrock values of Western Culture here. Indispensable values. Values that allowed the Enlightenment to blossom forth from the shackles of oppression and ignorance. Yes, those values are apparently tolerance, sensitivity, respect for religion, compromise and cultural understanding. All those things that the founding fathers of the Enlightenment showed to the Kings and Church of their time. Or perhaps there is another explanation for all this?

To be fair, it is all well and good for anonymous amateur blogger Six Days to say what he likes. The lives of editors and journalists are threatened. They are prominent, and risk their jobs, lives, and families. Nevertheless, some journos still stand up for what they believe. Tim Blair published the pictures on his blog. This is an act of great courage. My respect for him continues to grow. Sadly this is not enough. It is important that his actions be recognised for what they are, and Australia be seen as taking a stand. Sadly, the arbiters of this are the offended Muslims themselves. Unless the Muslim world is condemning us over the cartoons, we have not done enough to stand up and be counted! They seem to think that governments are responsible for what newspapers print, but they have chosen to ignore the blogosphere.

Janet Albrechtsen has also taken a clear and principled stand. (and is blonde and Danish to boot!) She refers to the Caliphate of Victoria as "Victoristan" in the article, when all the other blogs call it "Brackistan". Hmm... Hi Janet!

Closer to home, Victoria's religious vilification laws are working in ways that make the place look like an Islamic state-in-waiting. Recall the two Christian pastors hauled into a Victorian court and threatened with jail time for daring to criticise Islam. Publish these cartoons south of the Murray in Victoristan and you too might be charged with religious vilification. It's a state overflowing with rights. But freedoms - such as free speech - are thin on the ground.

Andrew West of all people has shown an unusual degree of sense. (Cannot find a link to his article, but it makes me want to hug the annoying leftie) [Update: Thanks for the link, Manny!]

The cartoons that have so offended Muslims around the world were not worthy of publication in the first place. They're not really funny and are little more than a gratuitous provocation. But the violent opposition of Muslim zealots now demands that the media in western liberal democracies publish and be damned.
There is an uncompromising first principle at stake here: Muslims, and the adherents of any other faith, living in liberal societies must accept that, in such societies, a critique of religion, however juvenile and insulting, is not only permissible but intrinsic to democracy. You must have the right to tell me that what I believe is bunkum (as so many do on this site so often!).

But no Aussie newspaper will publish the cartoons. Nope, not the Australian or the Bulletin. Not the Daily Telegraph or Herald Sun. Nor even Quadrant. At least not yet.

I urge Tim Blair, Janet Albrechtsen, Andrew West and all other good folk of the journalistic profession that still have a shred of integrity to take out a full page ad in a major newspaper, and publish the cartoons IN THEIR NAMES. If refused, write an article about it. OR BETTER YET:

Here is what the staff of one newspaper did when the editor pulled the cartoons

[Hat Tip: Pajamas Media]

The editorial staff of the alternative weekly New York Press walked out today, en masse, after the paper's publishers backed down from printing the Danish cartoons that have become the center of a global free-speech fight.
Editor-in-Chief Harry Siegel emails, on behalf of the editorial staff:
New York Press, like so many other publications, has suborned its own professed principles. For all the talk of freedom of speech, only the New York Sun locally and two other papers nationally have mustered the minimal courage needed to print simple and not especially offensive editorial
cartoons that have been used as a pretext for great and greatly menacing violence directed against journalists, cartoonists, humanitarian aid workers, diplomats and others who represent the basic values and obligations of Western civilization. Having been ordered at the 11th hour to pull the now-infamous Danish cartoons from an issue dedicated to them, the editorial group consisting of myself, managing editor Tim Marchman, artseditor Jonathann Leaf and one-man
city hall bureau Azi Paybarah, chose instead to resign our positions.

Read the whole thing. If only there was more of this.

I leave you with something that is unfortunately not a cartoon at all, but so clear, twisted and bizarrely comical that it qualifies as one. If I showed it to you six months ago you would not have believed me,particularlyy if I said it was a photo from the centre of London. The scariest bit is not the terrorist (yes terrorist. Read the placard. A terrorist is one who promises unexpected deadly violence if his demands are not met. This guy definitely qualifies.). Watch what the copper on the left is doing. That's right. Nothing...

Kufr Aleikum.

[Update 9/2/2006] Egyptian Paper Printed Cartoons in October!

Yep, it gets even more bizarre!

Looks like Dar-al-Islam should also... Boycott Egypt ??? [Hat Tip: LGF] Egyptian Sandmonkey has found that prominent Egyptian newspaper Al Fagr had printed all of the cartoons all the way back in October, during Ramadan to boot ! So where were the rampaging mobs ? Sad thing is, Murbarak probably will apologise to his co-religionists and punish the journalists responsible... A principled stand in support of Al Fagr should be organised NOW.

Al Fagr should be lauded by the free press of the West, and their example followed. Yes, I do realise that they probably had no intention of being brave, and are probably regretting their decision and shaking in their boots. Nevertheless, this precedent must be exploited, and these people protected as best we can manage.

Goodbye, Kufr Aleikum, Happy Ashura

So goodbye for the day, Kufr Aleikum good readers and, Happy Ashura, The Shia commemoration of the slaugher of Imam Hussein and his companions. With Shia, your Islam is even martyrer ! (Is that a word?)

Six Days is celebrating Ashura by blogging and going to work (bugger I am running late...).

Others celebrate it in more traditional ways. I leaves you with these piccies of Ashura festivities. They can't drink, they can't mess with loose women but these guys sure know how to mass-self-mutilate in a frenzied rage, and they have all these cool implements!

Its good clean family fun ! Kids and mums can join in too!

Дадим отпор душителям всех пламенных идей!

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Ze'ev) — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 23:21:00 +0000

Russia: a stand is taken.

This reaffirms that Russia is part of the West, something that the West needs to remember better in future. They were successful enough to penetrate through to America, but they are 100% European, Western, Judaeo-Christian, and have contributed to Western science, art, technology, literature, philisophy, music and other edifices of our civilisation. So what if Russia lagged behind the West in leaving Feudalism, and then totalitarianism. Was Germany any less a part of the West under the Nazis ? Politics can change quickly. Culture changes very slowly. A shared history does not change at all.

As for what the title means: see here for words to a WWII song that is even more relevant to the West now than it was to Russia then.