We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Saying it the way it is We live in a world of terrorism where evil acts are being regularly perpetrated in the name of your faith and because it is your faith that is being invoked as justification for these evil acts, it is your problem. You can’t wish it away, or ignore it, just because it has been caused by others. Instead, speak up and condemn terrorism, defend your role in the way of life that we all share here in Australia.
– Andrew Robb, a spokesman for the Howard government in Australia, speaking to an audience of 100 imams.
Can you imagine Bush or Blair having one their spokesmen saying anything even remotely like that?
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
It is not enough to condemn the terrorism itself: they must condemn the motivations that lead to that terorrism, i.e. the idea of the one-world Ummah, the concept of spreading Islam by the sword, the paranoid complex that the West is waging war on Muslims.
DK
Any word on the imams’ reaction ?
Did they isssue a fatwa against Andrew Robb ?
What I really like is the implication “or else” is implicit in the remarks. “Instead, speak up and condemn terrorism, defend your role in the way of life that we all share here in Australia.”
It will only take one western country to make the move to start mass expulsions of Muslims for the taboo to be broken and these guys had better get their mind around that while they still have time.
DK: We need to use honesty and sincerity. Propose valid, reasonable concepts that they cannot reject without declaring themselves as evil, hypocrites, moonbats or combinations thereof.
I doubt anyone will get them to recognise, at this stage, the wrong that is the one world Ummah or even the paranoia. First, though, is to present stark choices such as these with little room for vacillation.
I also think we need to have a “T&K Police” in the media to flag up all these weasel worded wormouts such as the previous MCB head gave about being opposed to the “killing of innocents” wrt 7/7, knowing this is coded as being “we don’t regret the killing of non-innocents (kafir)”. That was utterly shameful response. It went over the heads (or past the fingers in the ears) of many but straight into the limbic systems of the impressionable, deluded and weak.
Jacob – no, they said “We *are* speaking up against terrorism. You’re just not listening!”
Uh huh. Perhaps if every condemnation didn’t end in a “but”, or if Oz’s supreme Islamic leader didn’t go to Egypt and give sermons calling for the extermination of Israel and the establishment of a caliphate, we might be a little more receptive.
Jacob – no, they said “We *are* speaking up against terrorism. You’re just not listening!”
And I bet the couch it in such a way to mean “terrorism” to be the West against Islam…and only in that direction.
Anyhow, they are “permitted” to lie hands down if it suits the cause.
Is there any suggestion that any politician in this country would dare to do this?
Would they not even run the risk of being accused of inciting racial hatred?
Can you imagine one of Tony’s buddies saying the following?
“Because if we, in this movement, are going to ask the decent, silent majority of Muslim men – and women – to have the courage to face down the extremist bullies, then we need to have the courage and character to stand shoulder to shoulder with them in doing it.
So when the terrorists or their loud-mouthed sympathisers tell me that we won’t be allowed to raise our arguments in this or that part of our community, my answer is simple.
Yes we will. This is Britain.”
Much to agree and disagree with here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5389542.stm
Reminds me of Harry Potter and the unwillingness of almost every character in the stories, to mention evil by its name (Voldemort). All of them lower their voices and refer to Voldemort as “you-know-who” or something of the sort.
Harry Potter, the hero, who is brave and personifies the values for which the West stand for (bravery, chivarly, honour, honesty, loyalty), stands out from the crowd, for he is never willing to bow down and always calls evil by its name.
Surely this story should be entitled “Muslim anger grows over Australian polician”, and start with the sentence “Moves were afoot to calm growing anger worldwide as…”.
It should also include vox-pops from “Muslim leaders” and include a stock photo of some arse burning an Israeli flag.
Most importantly, it should not actually include direct quotations from Mr. Robb, except perhaps the phrase “evil acts are being regularly perpetrated (by) your faith”, and it should draw a parallel between this and some ghastly atrocity that was almost certainly committed today in Baghdad or Gaza.
Finally, you forget to mention that Howard’s government are supportive of the “war on terror” (in quotation marks) and have therefore provoked Australia’s Muslim community.
Come on Samizdata – what are you playing at?
Nice to hear a politician with the guts to say something so boldly. Tiptoeing around Muslim radicals because they shout loudly just doesn’t work. For that matter, it’s about time people became more strident on some deeply disturbing aspects of Islam itself.
That, of course, is the huge problem. The so-called moderates respond to statements like these by saying “you don’t understand Islam, it’s a peaceful religion”. Then again, these are the same sorts of people who think the Crusades are racist but the winning of an Islamic Empire wasn’t by the sword but by the merits of their faith.
The one thing that sticks in my craw about the “you have to understand Islam” crowd is the sheer hypocrisy. They don’t understand any other faith at all; Muslim parents remove their children from RE lessons; they socially ostracise anyone who questions the agents of control.
The best part about all this is that he’s the government’s “multicultural spokesman.” It makes me feel better that there is, somewhere in the world, someone holding this (ridiculous) office who has something better to do than provide endless excuses for criminal behavior. Right on.
[T]hey are “permitted” to lie hands down if it suits the cause.
From my experience in the Middle East, it seems that they are also permitted to lie hands down if it means getting an engineering contractor to absorb additional project costs caused by a fuckup on the part of the client company.
The spokesman probably ran afoul of the arabian shame/honor mentality there.
More and more I can. Perhaps the Pope broke the ice.
The question should be: Can you imagine Islamic leaders responding positively to a Bush or Blair spokesman saying anything even remotely like that?
The more I read and learn about Islam, the more and more I cannot imagine that happening. Islam’s core belief is not written by man, but directly dictated by God…and therefore is perfect. A true Muslim must work toward Dar es Salaam or he cannot be true to Islam. To live peaceably with neighbors that are not Muslims is not allowed by the book unless those neighbors are Dhimmi.
They cannot change the book. We will not submit. The best we can hope for are separate societies periodically rubbing painfully against each other…until one is spent or the other submits.
You’re not going to see 5 billion people of ancient faith submit to a new one. How many faiths have become extinct in human history? Perhaps the only difference this time will be in the scale.
There is no easy way out of this….now or another 400 years from now. There can only be a temporary truce.
Amen to that. Oh, wait, by saying Amen did I unwittingly assert my belief in the superiority of Christianity to the detriment of Islam?
If you are filled with hate you can find a bone to pick with anyone for any reason.
Jaime,
If Harry Potter personifies Western values we are truly screwed.
I also heard Reid’s speech. He, of all in the toadying government of the UK (cowards and bullies at once), will not let that ranting humiliation go unpunished.
Thing is, he should not just be saying that “we” stand shoulder to shoulder with them…why not say that they should be standing shoulder-to-shoulder with everyone else? By us going to them they can be passive and blameless. If they have to step up to the plate their actions or lack of can be clearly seen.
ps
If Harry Potter personifies Western values we are truly screwed.
As in “Libertarium Rationalatus Buggerosa”?
I’m sure Harry Potter is how many westerners not in government would like us to behave, but the Ministry of Magic and its bumbling megalomaniacal incompetence is legion in every western nation.
“Need to wipe out a fascist dictator and his stalinist party from Iraq? Sure, but you can only have half the troops you need.”
“Need to catch this nasty bloke wearing a towel on his head? Sure, but don’t you go violating the human rights of any of his henchmen while doing it, even though none of his henchmen actually believe in the existence of human rights.”
“We’d love to put a stop to all the violence, but that would make the Death Eaters angry and would threaten and insult their culture, no, its much simpler to confiscate everybody elses civil rights.”
Actually, I thought the Harry Potter character, a good analogy. He is a bit bumbling and not very quick on the uptake, much like most governments, but he has a strong moral backbone, unlike any government.
It is totally unrealistic to expect any government to be anything other than bumbling, but we can but hope that some do get some moral backbone. Now if only we could get the Pope to stop apologising and lead the way, there might be a chance.
Canada’s Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, stood up to the La Francophonie meeting in Bucharest. They wanted to issue a resolution pitying the Lebanese victims of the recent fighting in Lebanon. Harper objected and insisted that Israeli victims be mentioned as well. It was changed. Finally Canada has a Prime Minister with courage and steadfastness. The rest of the world please take notice.
Pitying the Lebanese…
I pity the fool…
Bush, Blair, of course no one would ever dream of Chirac or Sarkozy (who call themselves “right wing” in France) requiring anything of any imam, not even monogamy, nor work since they can live their on children allowances, in addition to the “single mother allowances” of their concubines.
I believe that the English speaking countries will cure the muslim and immigration problems radically as soon as the riots begin.
We live in a world of terrorism where evil acts are being regularly perpetrated in the name of freedom and democracy and because it is your freedom and democracy that is being invoked as justification for these evil acts, it is your problem. You can’t wish it away, or ignore it, just because it has been caused by others. Instead, speak up and condemn terrorism, defend your role in the way of life that we all share.
See how easy that is? You really think this “demonization of the other” by Mr. Andrew Robb is somehow new or novel?
Spark, evil acts aren’t being perpetrated in the name of democracy. There is nothing evil about getting rid of Saddam and the Taliban. Nothing. fabulous acts are being performed in the name of democracy. Your attempt at the reverse pike fails to convince.
But spark, I am quite happy to justify violence against all manner of people who threaten me. In many ways I have more respect for Muslims who simply do a ‘Khrushchev’ and say ‘we will bury you’ and make no pretense that their ideology can coexist with mine. Let them demonise me, I care not a bit.
But what we also see in the west is Muslims and their useful idiots acting as if everything is okay with Islam…never mind that these ‘poor demonized people’ hold to an ideology which demands death for any who decide not to be Muslims anymore and which demands violent repression of gays or folks who are critical of them or who poke fun of their mass murderous founder. Oh no, anyone who says ‘mean’ things about them must be a ‘racist’ (as if Islam was a race) or some equally cretinous remark.
You see Spark, if some Muslim people who support my enemies have to die to defend my freedom, I really have no problem with that.