Good one!
Click on the image for a bigger version.
Therefore there is a strong case for saying that the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, and those who have reprinted its efforts out of solidarity, are affirming the right to criticize not merely Islam but religion in general. And the Bush administration has no business at all expressing an opinion on that. If it is to say anything, it is constitutionally obliged to uphold the right and no more. You can be sure that the relevant European newspapers have also printed their share of cartoons making fun of nuns and popes and messianic Israeli settlers, and taunting child-raping priests. There was a time when this would not have been possible. But those taboos have been broken.I agree with all of the above - word-to-word!Which is what taboos are for. Islam makes very large claims for itself. In its art, there is a prejudice against representing the human form at all. The prohibition on picturing the prophet-who was only another male mammal-is apparently absolute. So is the prohibition on pork or alcohol or, in some Muslim societies, music or dancing. Very well then, let a good Muslim abstain rigorously from all these. But if he claims the right to make me abstain as well, he offers the clearest possible warning and proof of an aggressive intent. This current uneasy coexistence is only an interlude, he seems to say. For the moment, all I can do is claim to possess absolute truth and demand absolute immunity from criticism. But in the future, you will do what I say and you will do it on pain of death.
I refuse to be spoken to in that tone of voice, which as it happens I chance to find “offensive.”
Here is a Canadian Muslim professor who merited my dusting off this category after a long, long time - TorontoSun.com - Salim Mansur - Islam’s worst enemies. We need more like you to speak up, Mansur. People like you serve two purposes - you allow more moderates of your ilk to come out and speak up about the atrocities being committed in your name, you also are a blow to those who would lump all your co-religionists in one monolithic lump and treat you all like potential terrorists. Kudos!
Well, that was really my paraphrase of the “Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism”. They seem to be a pretty fair and interesting group of people as you can see by their positions on different current issues. I am glad to see this organization which is one of many to try and refute the argument that Islam is not conducive to democracy. I wish them all luck.
(Link to site via Dean Esmay, who loves their position on elections in Iraq where they call for fair represenation of the Sunni Muslims while hoping to see free elections for all other oppressed Iraqis too).
Trust Scrappleface to come up with the best way to talk about the so-called “Turkeygate” scandal for what it really is - a pathetic attempt to clutch at straws while there might be bigger issues elsewhere going unnoticed - ScrappleFace: Troops Demoralized by Bush Turkeygate Scandal.
Freaking hilarious - maybe the Washington Post should now mobilize people to impeach Bush since gasp “Bush lied and the turkey died” ;) This is what makes me so mad about so-called journalists and their inablity to get beyond stupid, sensationalistic crap like this and get down to serious business - it isn’t like this was in the National Enquirer - Shame on Washington Post!
The only nit I have to pick about the article quoted below is their definition of “Fisking” - it means the destruction of an idiotic column or post point-by-point - not a description of what Fisk’s columns are like…I like everything else about it ;) Go on and read it - it has a funny juxtaposition of Robert Fisk’s various proclamations and his dramatic turnabout on them every time they were proved wrong.
The dangers of FiskingIn the www arena where the world speaks invisibly to itself, a new word has appeared: “fisking”, meaning the selection of evidence solely in order to bolster preconceptions and prejudices. Just as cardigans or mackintoshes are named after an inventive individual, so fisking derives from the work of Robert Fisk, the Middle East correspondent of the Independent, stationed these many years in Beirut.
Sandeep fact-checks TOI’s butt in this post - sandeep.blog-city.com :: One More Moron :: - of course, if us bloggers had editors, we would probably be as error-filled as the newspapers themselves ;)
Trust Lileks to come up with the best fisking of idiotarian George Clooney's remarks - he never raises his voice - still manages to pummel Clooney senseless in today's bleat.
Go there for the fisking and stay on for his slashing to bits, a guide to "peacable parenting".
All I could think of after reading this post from her was - "Conservatives and wanna-bes for Sex - a whole lot of it"!!! LOL!
A really funny article in the Guardian about "Celebrity peace-protesters" - you know, the ones like Sheryl Crow who support wars when they luurv the administration (Sheryl was very pro-war during the Clinton Administration) -
Silly show-offs against Saddam!
But I'm not prepared to wear the pro-war straitjacket I've been handed without having a good old hissy fit. And a bit of name-calling never goes amiss, either. So may I just single out for salutations, on the "anti-war" side: Pop Stars For Appeasement, Dancers Against Democracy, Actors For Apathy, Fashionistas For Fascism and Jugglers For Genocide. All of them united under that flaccid flag of convenience, Show-Offs For Saddam.Absolutely Hilarious!Remember the 1980s? Leg-warmers, shoulder-pads, poking fun at Ronald Reagan because he was a dumb-ass actor who had the gall to pronounce on politics? Those were the days! Back then, the left thought it fantastically funny that entertainers dare open their useless yaps about important issues. But now, it seems the testimony of a jester is automatically worth twice that of what Liz Hurley so charmingly called "civilians" (ie, people who do something other than raiding the dressing-up box for a living).
(link via My Blog Grandpa (?))