Wednesday, December 29, 2010

They keep on trying . . .

ACCORDING TO THE INDEPENDENT'S Tony Paterson, in his article, "Five suspects arrested over Danish cartoon 'massacre plot'", there are members of the Umma who are still plenty chuffed over the Mo cartoons, five years after their publication.

Jakob Scharf, the head of Denmark's intelligence service, told reporters that the militants had apparently planned to storm the Copenhagen offices of Denmark's Jyllands-Posten newspaper, which published the controversial Mohamed cartoons in 2005. Once inside, they planned to fire automatic weapons at random, he said.

There have been at least four plots to attack Jyllands-Posten and Kurt Westergaard, the artist who drew the most contentious of 12 cartoons, which were published by the daily in 2005 in an attempt to challenge perceived self-censorship. Mr Westergaard described the foiled plot as a direct attack on democracy and freedom of the press. In an interview with the German tabloid Bild, he said: "We may not and will not allow anyone to forbid us to criticise radical Islam. We must not allow ourselves to be intimidated when it comes to our values."

Ah, poor ol' multi-kulti: as much as the politically-correct would like to believe in it, multi-kulti never worked. It was dead from the get-go, as a decadent medieval tribal culture burdened with a fundamentalist, intolerant religion could never fit into mainstream Western culture. It's even a problem in secular Islamic countries, where their security forces are in a continuous, nasty struggle with various "Muslim Brotherhoods" which strive to make the world just like it was before their ancestors met Charlie Martel, aka "Charlie the Hammer" at Tours in 732.

18 comments:

croghan27 said...

Certainly am glad the Mooslems do not have to contend with some nutzos in Wacko, or folks like Tim McVeigh: Christian inspired "decadent medieval tribal culture burdened with a fundamentalist, intolerant religion could never fit into mainstream Western culture." or perhaps those civilized folks that are calling for an assassination of Julian Assange, even as Obama tries to bomb an American citizen off into nothingness.

Would you consider that all cultures and religions have some extremists?

psa said...

religion is a disease of the mind. the local brand of religious nuts wants to approve your sleeping arrangements, censor your entertainments, enshrine their right to torment those who differ and murder a doctor every now and then. same product different package.

Edstock said...

"religion is a disease of the mind" — YES!!!!

Rev.Paperboy said...

the fact that muslim extremist whackjobs cause problems in more secular islamic states, just as our own society has its problems with Christian extremist whackjobs I think disproves the notion that multiculturalism is somehow to blame. Tolerance is not a weakness, extremism is.
And it isn't just religious extremism either, or Mao's cultural revolution wouldn't have happened. Nope, the problem is a lack of tolerance on the part of people with the willingness to use force to make other people do what they want, instead of tolerating that which does them no harm. It is fear of the "other" and the will toward authoritarianism that is in us all to one degree or another.
It isn't a product of every religion - you don't see a lot of taoist or quakers running around blowing shit up to get people to do things their way and punish those who don't - but many religions do bring out the authoritarian impulse and cultivate a fear of "others" to keep the flock in line. We would certainly be better off without it, by and large, but we would still find things to fight over.

Edstock said...

"I think disproves the notion that multiculturalism is somehow to blame" — you're entitled to your opinion; mine is that it made things worse in Europe.
Instead of stressing "melting pot" assimilation, "multi-kulti" encouraged "ghettoization", as these medievals clung to their ways, demanding the institution of Sharia law, for example. It makes the politically-correct upset, but, like the Huey Lewis and the News song goes, "Sometimes, bad is bad", and sometimes, there are cultures that need changing, so we don't have women taking driving lessons in deep water, like in Ontario (love those Islamic "honour" murders). "Multi-kulti" doesn't get this done.

croghan27 said...

"Tolerance is not a weakness, extremism is."

Well said, Rev.

Yes, there are some islamic nutcases that have no time for alternate ideas .... but then the rational George BUSH could kill off a dozen of them before breakfast.

Rev.Paperboy said...

Edstock,
A strong secular society of laws and strong civil liberties are essential for an inclusive multi-cultural society. If the domininant culture is permitted to discriminate against cultural or racial minorities due to fear, those minorities often become radicalized. Multiculturalism doesn't mean replacing civil law with Sharia or the Talmud or any other religous law. Laws in most of Europe and North America while originally based on judeo-christian teachings, have become sufficiently secularized in most places so as to accomodate a broad spectrum of beliefs and practices while still ensuring a common set of rules of conduct. There is no western country I am aware of where Sharia has the force of law. The closest it comes in some regions - Ontario being one place it was proposed and rejected - is having religious authorities adjudicate in cases of family law on a voluntary basis, with their decisions subject to approval by civil courts.
I agree that Sharia is very very outdated, but no more so than the rules the amish live by (though being pacifists, they don't have a lot of honor killing) and multiculturalism does not make murder acceptable or politically correct. Killings of any stripe are still murder.
Multiculturalism, as I have always understood it, means that people are not forced to assimilate in terms of their ethnic and cultural heritage and you cannot discriminate against people on the basis of race, religion or ethnicity.
That means you can't refuse to hire someone or serve them in your restaurant or rent them an apartment just because they are X and not Y like "everyone else"
It means you can't force people to speak another language in the privacy of their home, or to dress a certain way or to not eat certain things simply because they clash with the practices of the dominant culture.
There is an agreed upon line where behavior and practices are not tolerated and that line is civil and criminal law, some of which is still medieval is some places in the western world on some matters (ie abortion and divorce in Ireland, circumcision almost everywhere) and some areas where we have made progress toward more secular laws (the prohibition on Sunday business openings has been lifted in recent memory, and laws governing sexual conduct have stepped out of the Victorian era and dragged society forward). Clearly we still have a long way to before we achive true social equality, but we are getting there slowly. And multiculturalism is a big part of that progress

Rev.Paperboy said...

Zeus on a pogo stick, but that is one longwinded damn comment, my apologies for being verbose.

Catelli said...

I agree with Rev that multiculturalism is not to blame. We live in a multicultural world (which we can blame for our problems; whatever good that blaming would do us) and in a world where those cultures migrate, grow, evolve and intermix there can and will be points of tension. The extremists in all camps will exploit and exacerbate the situation in search of a pure society in their image.

So what do we do about it? We can continue to try teaching and living by the rules of tolerance for one another, or we can try to break society into "pure" enclaves of cultures. In the latter case welcome to a world of 25,000 individual nations....

I am the first to admit that I am not as open and tolerant as I would like to be. I feel most comfortable around white males, its part of my conditioning growing up. But I also realize that trying to return to a white male dominated society like the early 20th century is completely impractical, (not to mention grossly unethical and detrimental to those that are not white males.)

I don't see how we can achieve a "melting-pot" of a single culture. By definition that means that all cultures melt together and form a new all encompassing culture. The way I see it, the American Melting-Pot is a myth. Every country is multi-cultural, just some cultures mix better than others.

So the true question is, how do we handle those cultures that don't mix as well?

Edstock said...

"The way I see it, the American Melting-Pot is a myth. Every country is multi-cultural, just some cultures mix better than others."

Yes, you're right, it is a myth, visit New York, and there's the Italian section, the Puerto Rican section and others. However, the US has emphasized the importance of being "American" (however that might be defined), and getting on in the country by adopting its pastimes and interests.

This contrasts with "multi-kulti" as practiced in Europe, where immigrants were officially encouraged to retain their homeland culture, instead of adopting the pastimes and interests of their new homeland. So we get Islamic ghettos, like in the District 13 movies.

Time will fix this. It will take another 50-75 years of patience and tolerance, and cumulative effect of things like rock and roll and the web. This is already happening in the US with American Islamic youth.

For example, check out http://www.taqwacore.com/

Punk Islam rocks!

M@ said...

...immigrants were officially encouraged to retain their homeland culture, instead of adopting the pastimes and interests of their new homeland. So we get Islamic ghettos, like in the District 13 movies.

So the immigrants were "officially encouraged" to live in ghettos, be unable to find work, and generally be second-class citizens... and it's the fault of the immigrants for not learning their new country's culture quickly enough?

When you have to twist your logic that much to find the conclusion you want, you're just rationalizing.

...the US has emphasized the importance of being "American" (however that might be defined), and getting on in the country by adopting its pastimes and interests.

Yes, which is why there's never been any racial tension or strife in the USA. Maybe someone should inform the millions of Mexican non-citizens that they ought to be adopting better pastimes and interests if they want to stop working menial jobs for slave wages.

Polyorchnid Octopunch said...

Not to put too fine a point on it... well, actually, I am going to. Ed, you sound like an eliminationist. What's your proposal? Forcibly convert all the muslims in Canada? As used to be said about natives... fuck 'em white? Deport them all? Kill them all? Deny them their civil liberties, such as association and religion?

Your post is just ranting, with no solutions in sight. Come on back when you've got something constructive to say that's not just demonization.

Edstock said...

"Ed, you sound like an eliminationist. What's your proposal? "

No, I'm not an eliminationist. We have to change their culture, that's all.

You might have missed this, posted earlier, above:

"Time will fix this. It will take another 50-75 years of patience and tolerance, and cumulative effect of things like rock and roll and the web and cell phones."

I am entirely serious about Taqwacore. It's an amazing phenomenon. The kids in Iran are already there, IMHO.

M@ said...

We have to change their culture, that's all.

Tribal minds will be obstinate like that.

Rev.Paperboy said...

Whoa, now hang on a minute.
Edstock is no eliminationist. He is saying we need to change the culture of radical Islam, which is hardly a call for ethnic cleansing.
I agree that we do need to change "their" culture (whoever "they" are in this case) I'm not saying we need to turn the entire world into poutine-scarfing, beer-guzzling, materialistic, socialistic, hockey-loving, Trooper fans (but, to quote Sam Cooke "What a wonderful world that would be") No. Nein, Non, Nyet, Yadda! Monocultural societies get dull and insular and the bad bits get rancid. Infusions of fresh outside influence are always necessary.
What we need to do is talk the radicals down off the ramparts and let them join the party and realize that the things that they think they hate us for, aren't really so bad. Edstock's theory on the transformative and seductive power of rock and roll is spot on. Add in the additional influence of women's rights - a genie that is not going back in the bottle - technological advances that enable rapid and diffused communication that it is tough to block and it becomes clear to anyone with an eye on history that the radical muslims and christians are both fighting a rear-guard action against modernity.

croghan27 said...

Long ago and far away I read an essay by an American union organizer. (He was actually a Canadian, but employed by an American union). He detail the arrival of immigrants to N. America .... as in beginning with the Scottish ... (who were rather dull, slow and had a violent culture). Eventually they rose above being janitors and hewers of wood and entered the mainstream culture .... but that was okay as then came the Irish. Now everyone knows the Irish are rather slow and dull and often violent - but would you believe it, they eventually hauled themselves out of the 'shovel jobs' they had and ... well .. into the culture ....

Next came the Italians ... and they are, as everybody knows ...... (did'ya get the idea.)

I live in the middle of what is called Chinatown ...even if there is a strong representation of Arab, Iranian and Viet Namese .... they are a delight to deal with - made all that more delightful in that they are Canadians.

(Even if fewer fireworks on New Year's eve just after I got to sleep would be appreciated.)

Edstock said...

"we need to turn the entire world into poutine-scarfing, beer-guzzling, materialistic, socialistic, hockey-loving, Trooper fans"
Marvelous, Rev, what a scary thought, just add Don Cherry.

thewoodcutter said...

yes, it's the empty european policies of mc and culture-retention that are to blame! Let's forget all about the importation of cheap labour from the colonies during the post-war boom years, the subsequent denial of citizenship to such labourers and the resulting lack of access to health, education and affordable housing.

People (usually brown and muslim) are resentful and sometimes violent because they're consistently denied the rights enjoyed by other citizens and are forced to watch as their 'inferior culture and religion' are used as scapegoats for everything from terrorism to unemployment.

no amount of time will result in a more harmonious society if the laws and customs of that society are bent against minorities. I.e. the banning of minaret construction and religious clothing, the publishing of racist cartoons in major newspapers and the deportation and torture of muslim citizens. yep, no cause for resentment in any of this, just a problem of religion.