Seems like a ripple of awarness of Islams menace..
It will pass soon enough it it not deep understanding.

[b]doing nothing about the jihadist cancer eating away at their religion[/b]
this kind of thing is always a dead give away.

Posted by: KAOSKTRL at May 19, 2005 5:14 PM

Yes, it is not so much that the jihadist cancer is eating away at their religion: it is that the traditional disease of Islam is once again becoming geopolitically metastatic.

We are seeing an Islam Redivivus, after a few centuries of submersion due to the astonishing ascendancy of Western superiority, which due to 2 crucial factors of the 20th century began to show cracks of hope to recidivist Mohammedans:

1) the discovery of oil in the Middle East and its potential for leveraging power

2) the dismantling of Western Colonialism and the chain-reaction of excessive Western self-criticism and PC multi-culturalism that came in its wake.

Posted by: metaxy at May 19, 2005 5:38 PM

I'm pleased to see that someone in the MSM voices such an opinion. Maybe the tide has turned...

OT: The BBC have George Galloway on their Question Time programme as I'm writing this. To most of the audience he seems to be a Saint and he's currently condemning the Bush government and its flimsy majority. Hard to believe that a radical like him gets a forum on one of the major programmes of a state broadcaster but, well, that's the BBC for you.

Posted by: disillusionised_german at May 19, 2005 5:57 PM

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/londonnews/articles/18726381

Respect to fly Palestinian flag
19 May 2005

Tower Hamlets could be twinned with Jenin in Palestine if George Galloway's Respect party is successful in next year's local council election.

The MP spoke out after he received a rapturous welcome at a packed rally last night following his showdown with US senators. He said Respect intended to try to win control of Tower Hamlets and Newham councils next May - and vowed if his twinning plan went through, the Palestinian flag would fly over the town hall.

Posted by: KAOSKTRL at May 19, 2005 6:21 PM

Jacoby is a gem, he writes many excellent columns. Being fairly conservative, he is a rarity at the Boston Globe. The typical coverage of Islamic issues at the Globe is bend-over-backwards "sensitivity." In one recent article about possible ties between officials of the Islamic Society of Boston and terrorist groups, the local reporter quoted a CAIR official. Talk about tainted sources!

I'm disappointed in Condi, I thought she would be a tough cookie. Better than Powell, but not as tough and principled as I thought. What would Jean Kirkpatrick have said about this kerfuffle? We need another Kirkpatrick.

Posted by: kelley at May 19, 2005 6:24 PM

An article in similar vein.

The Smug Delusion of Base Expectations -Andrew McCarthy

http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200505171307.asp

Yes islam should be disrespected, but not solely for the actions of some of its insane members but for the vile content of the koran itself. It is this text that is the cause of so much mayhem through the centuries and continues to the 21st century.

I for one sincerely hope that muslims continue to riot at every little imagined or real pretext, for nothing disillusions people about islam, muslims among them, as riots such as these by muslims in Afghnaistan and Pakistan.

Posted by: DP111 at May 19, 2005 7:02 PM

This incident concerning the allegedly flushed Koran should "seal the deal," as it were, in the mind of any rational person that Muslims -- not just the radicals and the terrorists, but average Muslims -- ultimately value their own group identity than truth or morality. Seventeen innocent people die and about 100 are injured because of a quesionable report and no member of the Muslim religious establishment offers sanctions against those imams who energized the riot?

As far as Galloway goes, he is the 21st century equivalent of Oswald Mosley or Lord Haw Haw. He deserves the latter's fate.

Posted by: Joseph D'Hippolito at May 19, 2005 7:52 PM

I oft wonder why it is that muslims get so upset for the most trivial or even imagined slur against their religion. It just does not make sense. Why do we not take offence at even real slurs against Christianity or Western civilisation? The answer is that we are confident in the vast corpus of our civilisation. Hugh Fitzgerald started a thread, "Whats at stake", which illustrates this to some degree. We thus have no need to murderous riot at insults of any sort.

It is somewhat different for the muslim. In trying to understand this, I tried imagining that I was a muslim, heir to the "noble" koran, a book that decries all that went before it and has nothing but contempt for anything that comes after it. Thus muslims have nothing but the koran, which not only gives them their sole identity but their place in the world. It is everything, quite unlike the vast corpus of our civilisation.

Can we from our perspective, imagine something like this? In 1939 the Nazis burnt books in a clear repudiation of the past, which to some degree resembles the attitude of islam. Let us suppose that Nazism was victorious in WWII, (it was a close run thing anyway), and had lasted for a 1000 years and had become a religion. We would then be in the same position as muslims are now. All we would have then is the noble Mein Kampf, as written by the last messenger Hitler (peace be unto him). In Mein Kampf we would see that Jews have to be exterminated at every opportunity, as does the koran. Now what would be our response if some alien civilisation cast slurs or desecrated our "noble" Mein Kampf. Our whole identity would be under attack. I suppose we would riot.

I feel a kind of detached sympathy, akin to pity for muslims, who have nothing but the koran. To compensate for the lack of any real value in islamic culture, they show two abiding characteristics

1. To claim inventions or discoveries of other civilisations, as their own.

2. To take affront at real or imaginary slurs on the koran.

It seems to me that educating muslims is going to be the task of the 21st century. Shame, as we could have devoted our energies to more gainful enterprises.

Posted by: DP111 at May 19, 2005 8:01 PM

Yes, I often feel pity for many of the billion or so Muslims. Living such a pointless, meaningless, bleak life, all the while deluded that their cult is perfect even though there is little, if any, evidence of it. When I read what some Muslims say about how Islam is a perfect life, or sharia is great, or that dhimmitude is a good thing, I shake my head and don't know whether to laugh or cry at such astonishing ignorance. Then I thank my lucky stars I don't have to live like such a laughably deluded, blind fool.

For me Islam is disrespected because it does not act in a way that garners respect. I learned that you have to earn respect, not demand it. Islam demands respect while acting in an atrocious manner. Not just the Koran toilet riots, but all the continuous examples of barbarity throughout the world. And the way they infiltrate our countries and demand we change things to suit them. Islam is like a spoiled rotten, demented, teenaged thug.

Posted by: feralee at May 19, 2005 8:21 PM

''disrespect for the Holy Koran is not now, nor has it ever been, nor will it ever be, tolerated by the United States."

So, Madam Secretary, when exactly has this right in your own words, "not now, nor has it ever been, nor will it ever be, tolerated by the United States"? I must have missed that particular civics lesson.

Posted by: Hulegu Khan at May 19, 2005 8:24 PM

Hulegu Khan,

"...I have a right..."

That is the bottom line, isn't it?

The struggle for the individual's right of expression, determination and freedom is what is at stake.

I listened to an NPR segment while driving home from work today. The terms, "mishandling" and "desecration," abounded throughout the report.

Wondering if I have outlived my usefulness and concluding that I had not, I screamed, "WTF is being reported here!?!"

For me, "mishandling" means putting a box labeled, "THIS SIDE UP", that side down.

"Desecration" is an alien word because there has been no cognition of the term. "Desecrate"? What is so sacred that I am capable of desecrating?

Posted by: Skeet Street at May 19, 2005 8:44 PM

Hulegu Khan:

Agrre with your sentiments.

This fear of hurting muslim sensitivity and thus igniting murderous riots, is one that is used by mullahs around the world to get their way with the West. The abject dhimmi postures of Secretary Rice to the false report of the desecration of the koran is a perfect example. I would have thought that it was not the business of a high official of the US government, of all governments, to say what she did. So has she got what she hoped for? Far from it, as most muslims do not believe her abject "apology". They want more obeisance. All that has transpired is that the US government has been humiliated for nothing gained. Dhimmi attitudes such as these are what encourages terrorist attacks against the dhimmi.

Posted by: DP111 at May 19, 2005 8:46 PM

EXCELLENT point, Hulegu.

Of course, Condi was most likely being rhetorically diplomatic and didn't mean it literally, legally.

I guess we are at a moment in history where we must carefully assess how much hideously irrational reactions from insane Muslims we want to trigger by our enlightened & rational actions.

(US military would be entirely rational to desecrate a Koran -- because of the nature of the Koran and the inimical fruit it grows -- in order to facilitate their interrogation of fanatically steeled prisoners whom Senator McCain himself called "the scum of the Earth"; but doing so in ways not securely covert might trigger counter-reactions we are not pragmatically prepared to digest for now... etc.)

Posted by: metaxy at May 19, 2005 8:47 PM

Hulegu Khan-

I emailed my disgust to Bush [president@whitehouse.gov) about C. Rice's abject performance and her failure to understand the secular nature of our government or the Bill of Rights' guaranteed freedoms (to flush any book down any toilet we like).

Through her behavior, and those around her, they cut the legs (and balls) off our miltary's ability to response seriously.

Not too swift.

Posted by: BigSleep at May 19, 2005 9:28 PM

Big Sleep,

Bush & Rice have been hampering out military's effort to wage war since the invasion of Iraq -- not because they want to, but because they HAVE to, in our profoundly PC cultural climate.

It's frightening to contemplate, but I don't think we could wage a war the way we did in WWII any longer -- unless perhaps if jihadists committed a tragically disproportionate terrorist act which would finally wake us up and slap the PC doldrums from our Body Politic.

Posted by: metaxy at May 19, 2005 9:37 PM

Condi wrings her hands and swears to investigate these appalling charges but says nothing about Saudi Arabia shredding Bibles, or Palestinian thugs despoiling the Church of the Nativity. After many harrowing days of terrorizing an old priest and his staff and defiling his church, these poor, persecuted, Palestinian pigs were whisked off to Greece for some much-needed R&R in a luxury hotel.

I detest much of today's cultural protocol, but nothing incenses me more than Islamic appeasers, apologists, and ass-kissers like Condoleeza Rice and her boss. The double standard is blatantly apparent, yet the groveling and brown-nosing never cease. Muslims are a pestilence that wreak chaos, death, destruction, litigation, civil unrest and misery wherever they reside, but their VICTIMS are expected to apologize and truckle to THEM.

I can easily understand why muslims have become so bold, aggressive, and ambitious. All they have to do is what comes naturally to them-----riot, scream, wave their fists, kill each other in the uncontrolled chaos, then accuse the U.S. of insulting Islam, and they can get anything they want. How clever they are! Of course, muslims are more highly evolved than we are, so that explains their ingenuity and our pathetic idiocy. Maybe when Bush imports his next wave of muslim primitives, he'll give them an entire state all their own. That would be fair; after all, the U.S. gave Israel muslim land, or so the story goes.

Posted by: Susanp at May 19, 2005 11:11 PM

Condi Rice needs to make an apology...but not to Muslims. Rather, she needs to make an apology to the people of the United States for implying that US citizens do not have the right of free speech. She needs to apologize for acting as a Dhimmini. Finally, Condi Rice should resign or failing that, be fired for her sniveling performance in quest of Muslim forgiveness.
Condi Rice has disgraced the United States of America.

Posted by: MJ at May 19, 2005 11:33 PM

Enough with the apologies nonsense already. Were any riots called for in the areas of [especially] Lebanon, Iraq, et al.? I want to know if the Democracy Project is working out...

Posted by: urthshu at May 19, 2005 11:51 PM

...because I'd love to see Mr. Spencer have so much good news he has to start a new 'watch' site, at long last.

Posted by: urthshu at May 19, 2005 11:53 PM

Such an article in the Boston Globe is not a good sign,it is an excellent sign.
It may very well be the begining of the end of dhimmitude in the mainstream media.
Until now,no matter what the attrocities comitted by muslims,they were given a pass by the MSM.
Now the situation has changed,and the reason for the change is the fact that one of their own is in the crossfire,the Newsweek magazine.
I don`t think that the MSM`s attitude towards islam has changed,i just believe that in this particular situation they had to chose between defending islam and defending one of their own,and they circled the wagons and decided to stick with NW...
But this could be good,for it may be viewed by the rest of them(MSM) as a green light to start calling islam by its real name.
There won`t be long until islam does it again,because they can`t help it,it`s in their blood,it`s in their mind and in their koran...and then we`ll see if the MSM really means business.

Posted by: adela at May 20, 2005 12:25 AM

Several radio and television programs have picked up on the Jacoby piece, and have discussed it in the spirit in which he wrote it.

Good PR for the Globe, too. They needed to make up for that porno fiasco last year.

The administration walks a fine line. Rice could have just as easily stated the truth about the stupidity of rioting over a rumor (if HER boss approved of the message), but they are trying to win a combined military/PR war. A real fine line. Discretion is the better part of valor.

I, as a citizen have certain rights, which include desecrating a book if I so desire. The 'clerics' who whip the unwashed masses into a frenzy couldn't care less about my inalienable rights, and any statements from the Secretary about the right to flush that and any other book on this side of the pond would not have been beneficial (IMO) at the time. Their minds are already programmed. They know what they think they know, and they do what they do. I believe the Secretary intended her statements to reflect a kind, gentle, CYA, U.S. policy.

Military personnel, on the other hand, must adhere to other standards. If the policy is 'don't flush', that's the law. When they're back home, out of uniform, and off the base, then they can flush just like the rest of us.

Posted by: PRCS at May 20, 2005 2:31 AM

Whoa...whoa....whoa, Doctor Rice-- just you wait a minute!

"Disrespect" for the holy Koran will not be tolerated?

Uh, does that mean we are we also going to enact formal, government-prescribed intolerance of "disrespect" for the Bible, or any other holy text that Madonna chooses to rub betwixt her skanky loins?

Much as I love Dr. Rice, I don't like the ominous portent of that position. She has ipso facto declared that either Islam itself is out of bounds as far as criticism is concerned, or worse still that any religious (if we're to infer any equality of application here) criticism is forbidden as a matter of policy.

Count me out for that one, Doctor.

I'm all for examining the influence of any religious doctrine cited as justification for killing. I don't care whether that doctrine is Confucianism or Scientology-- I want to know what's the motivation behind it.

Meanwhile, I'm still enduring life as the only conservative in Philadelphia PA (with the exception of Dr. Pipes), and hoping our government will wake the heck up and adopt some serious exegisis of the situation at hand as the basis for some sort of plan for dealing with the phenomenon of Islamism.

Nothing is to be gained by wishful thinking, well-intentioned "dialogues", and pious platitudes about the equality of intent, and the equality of purpose of the world's major faiths.

Posted by: LC TripleNeckSteel at May 20, 2005 5:10 AM

Flushed down the toilet?....I think they should all be burned, if not outright banned in the U.S. If any American wrote such a text it would be called hate literature.

Posted by: Infidel One at May 20, 2005 5:40 AM

"Disrespect for the Holy Koran is not now, nor has it ever been, nor will it ever be, tolerated by the United States."...

So if there is a new exhibition of "piss Christ" along with a new exhibit called "piss Koran" in the US the right thing to do is send a bunch of "religious enforcers/police" who will promptly liberate the Koran while letting the image of Christ swim in the yellow stuff?

I have great ideas about the uniform that could be used for such "religious police". They could wear a suit that has a bit of the Darth Vader look mixed with that of the Gestapo... but don't forget it has to be black with a turban on top.

Posted by: obl r us at May 20, 2005 5:45 AM

I'm going to join the crowd and write to the White House over the SecState's remarks. She should've stopped at a formal, "it's not our policy; and we inculcate respect for other people in our public institutions."

Way back in the late 1960's, the late Saul Bellow wrote a marvelous novel called _Mr. Sammler's Planet_, embodying a very realistic assessment of what humanity's all about and, in so doing, marking a real break with the author's Trotskyite past and tarnishing a few New Left shibboleths as well. The critics screamed that Bellow was racist, misogynist, disrespectful to working class people, and everything else--when, in fact, he had simply written a novel in which everyone (even the main character) was shown warts and all--but which Left-wing critics insisted on making their own _Piss Christ_ a bit before the fact. Yet Bellow, a pro in every sense, was willing to take his lumps from critics who couldn't kiss the soles of his feet if they stood on tiptoe.

Maybe it's just because the books of the prophets and letters of Paul are highly critical of the community for which they were written; but I think it's high time we dusted off the free speech clause.

Posted by: Kepha at May 20, 2005 6:12 AM

The administration walks a fine line. Rice could have just as easily stated the truth about the stupidity of rioting over a rumor (if HER boss approved of the message), but they are trying to win a combined military/PR war. A real fine line. Discretion is the better part of valor. Posted by PCRS

The administration does walk a fine line and I know that most of their platitudes are probably designed to facilitate the war in Iraq. But their sycophancy, whether genuine or not, sends the wrong message not only to muslims, but to all Americans! They are elevating Islam to the level muslims already believe it deserves. When the time comes to confront Islam head-on, what are they going to do? Will they say, "Oh, sorry, we were wrong about Islam, it's really a death cult in disguise?"

Again, I believe that the most inimical aspect of their blatant lies and fawning tributes to Islam is the message Americans are getting, those Americans who are totally ignorant about Islam, and there are more of them than us. When average Americans should be learning the truth about Islam and the deadly threat it poses to all of us, instead they are being fed lies and propaganda from the highest levels of our government. I'm not one of them, but many Americans believe that when somebody like Ms.Rice makes a statement, it is the indisputable truth.

The lies only encourage and inflate muslim hubris and mislead the American public. It is a dangerous and irresponsible practice.

Posted by: Susanp at May 20, 2005 10:06 AM

SusanP,

In the long term, yes.

The administration, as most do, thinks short term.

I don't want to gum up their short term goal in Iraq (as long as troops are there), but long term...

P.S. I went to co-jet and downloaded a couple of their flyers. Nice.

I have an order in for 1000 business cards. They should be available on Monday.

We have a lot of college age folks here from Australia, NZ, South Africa, South America, and increasingly from Caribbean countries during both ski and summer season. They spend a lot of time at the public library using the Internet computers. I intend to leave many in plain sight, and many more in books.

Posted by: PRCS at May 20, 2005 2:02 PM