Thoughts on the latest signs of the end of journalism, from Mark Steyn.
Sri Lanka and New Zealand are not the same.
16 thoughts on “Taqiyya In Sri Lanka”
Comments are closed.
Thoughts on the latest signs of the end of journalism, from Mark Steyn.
Sri Lanka and New Zealand are not the same.
Comments are closed.
Stein notes the problem of what cannot be plainly said but there is always an effort to ignore root causes of these world wide attacks and instead claim there is no agency or larger purpose behind them and that they are always just a reflexive reaction to some other event or to American policies in general.
America could not exist and Islamism would still be a thing and still be responsible for mass death and suffering around the world.
Our friends to the left like to go off on us because we think America is all that but then always take an stance on blaming America for everything as if we are all that and other players have no autonomy or motivations of their own.
Well America does bear a huge responsibility for the Crusades. What the 13th New York and 87th Alabama regiments did during the siege of Jerusalem in 1099 was beyond the pale, and the American left has never forgotten it.
Agreed, George.
Also, it must be remembered that Islam only attacks when provoked. For example, the Muslim sacking and looting of Rome in 856 was most clearly a response to the first Crusade in 1096.
The same goes for the Muslim conquest of Iberia in 711-788.
The terrorists/murderers in Sri Lanka and New Zealand have one thing in common, and with respect to their killings it’s the most important thing about them as it’s what drove their actions, it’s identitarianism: seeing the groups as more important than seeing people as individuals and hating any and all members of those groups, in the case of the killers enough to murder them. Roger Simon overlooks this elephant in the room because Roger Simon is also driven by identitarianism.
Bloody leftists/fascists and their identity politics.
You can stop it any time Andrew. Begin with yourself, as an individual, to quit grouping people.
So shallow Leland.
People form groups, the secret is not forgetting that the members of groups are still a bunch of diverse individuals, not part of collectives, if you read Simon’s article it’s obvious he believes that Muslims can’t be separated from Islam, which is true, but then he relies on his interpretation of Islam to define Muslims, as with any religion that’s been successful across many centuries and many societies, Islam (and Christianity and Judaism) has many interpretations. Only a fanatic or an idiot would think that Islam can easily be categorized as Simon does, he claims that he’s referring to Islamism, but then he claims there are “hundreds of millions of adherents and sympathizers across the globe, vastly more than Nazism at its height.” so he’s encompassing far more than the extremists, if there were “hundreds of millions” keen to impose Islam on everyone else where are they all? I can go walk through all but a handful of countries and have no fear of Islamists, and even in those few countries the danger is only found in dangerous pockets usually fueled by conflict created by others.
I think you missed Roger’s point. Until the Islam religion undergoes a reformation then it is virtually impossible not to define Muslims by Islamism. Convince me to change my mind.
The Protestant Reformation was a split in Christianity, it wasn’t a sudden change in Catholicism, Christianity, Judaism and Islam take on the nature of the societies they exist in as much as or more than they impose their nature on society, so we see Judaism in American society differently weighted in its members politics to Judaism in Israel, Christianity in Africa adheres to African culture with its followers emphasizing different aspects of their Christian beliefs to Europeans in Europe, the same can be said of Islam with Muslim practices and the opinions of its adherents in Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, the US and Albania taking on the mindsets of the cultural practices of their countries. There was no ISIS in Syria and Iraq prior to the chaos that the group was born from just a few decades ago, chaos brought about through the intervention of outside forces. Christianity in the West is today accepting of far greater diversity than Western Christianity just a generation ago. Christianity is following the cultural changes in the West, not imposing changes, the changes to liberalism that happened with the Reformation were peanuts compared to the recent evolutionary in Christian thinking, and the Reformation itself was a faction of Catholicism splitting away because the imposed form of Catholicism did not fit with what the local people now wanted in their religion because of evolving cultural changes.
Wow, and I thought that the Reformation was a result of people being able to read the Bible for themselves instead of having it interpreted by a corrupt elite.
People form groups
Ah, so Andrew doesn’t actually believe what he preaches, but then we knew that when he used the term “identitarianism”.
I can go walk through all but a handful of countries and have no fear of Islamists
What are those countries? And which definition of Islamist are you using when you used the word? Do you not fear fundamentalist; as you suggest Roger Simon means by the word Islamism/Islamist? Or do you use the more common understanding of the word Islamism/Islamist as the “cause of Islam” or “supporter of the cause of Islam”, and thus don’t fear Muslims?
It is hard to tell, because you keep throwing around so many group names to make a vague point about individuality, but you don’t stick to your point or back it up. It is also pathetic that you don’t consider Americans individuals and typically are here lumping us all together as a group based on what the US media says about us; a media that around a third of Americans trust. e.g. “ Isn’t it the same in the US, a murdered visiting Brit gets more news coverage than an American murdered in NY or London?“; why gauge by news coverage? Again, most Americans are wary of news coverage, particularly are own. Think about that as you read George’s response to you.
By the way, the only person using the word fear around here when referring to groups or individuals is… you, Andrew. Do you have a phobia of certain people? I’ll note the Christians in Sri Lanka showed no fear of their attackers, but you may not understand that if you read “The Age”.
[sarc]The far-right Christian fringe might claim to be subject to attacks and persecution, but what’s that got to do with Sri Lanka, where the attacks hit Easter Worshipers? You know, those Islanders who make those huge funny looking stone heads? I didn’t realize they were still around, but apparently they’re still suffering slaughter and persecution, probably at the hands of Baptists, Catholics, Episcopalians, or some other radical right-wing Christian sect.[/sarc]
If I got my news from the mainstream US press, that’s what I’d be thinking about now. In contrast, The Arab News of Saudi Arabia covered the story far, far better than the NY Times, WSJ, or WaPo, showing more outrage at the perpetrators and more sympathy for the victims than Democrat media figures can seem to muster.
They make no bones about it. Their take is that peaceful, innocent Christians happily celebrating Easter, many of them children, were slaughtered by Muslim jihadists who believe in Islamic supremacy, want radical Islam to conquer Sri Lanka, and want to cover the place with mosques and make women wear burkas.
If the Saudi Arabian press can print that, why can’t the American press? Apparently our press is more anti-Christian and pro-Islamic supremacy than the Wahabist press in a country that beheaded 37 people just the other day.
When it’s someone in our tribe that acts unlawfully against members of another tribe it’s human nature to be angry with them, even more so than the actions of foreigners against our own. If a Kiwi is murdered in a foreign lands we’re upset for them and their family, if a foreigner is murdered in New Zealand we’re mortified, we instinctively feel it’s our responsibility to keep safe those from other tribes that we want good relationships with. Isn’t it the same in the US, a murdered visiting Brit gets more news coverage than an American murdered in NY or London?
Ah, that would explain why the press went nuts denouncing the radical Democrat who nearly killed Steve Scalise, and wounded many others, at Senate Republican’s baseball practice.
Oh wait, they buried that story almost before the ambulances had pulled away from the ER.
So they bury stories where one of their own commits a heinous crime against Republicans, and they bury stories where Islamic jihadists commit a heinous crime against Christians, and that tells the rest of us whose side they’re on.
This is probably because they’ve grown up indoctrinated in hatred against “Jesusland”, and they’ve grown up indoctrinated in a hatred of the West for European colonialism and American exceptionalism, so “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” would apply.
The enforcement mechanism they have for their own group think is that anyone who in any way indicts Islam or Muslim thought for jihadism gets branded as a racist hater and banned from the airwaves, and all of them lack the courage to say otherwise. One of the hallmarks of totalitarian thought is that everyone knows the truth, everyone can see the truth, and everyone is afraid to speak the truth.
Heh, I edited my comment in a way I now regret, the earlier version said: “When someone in our tribe acts against another tribe that we want to maintain good relations with” rather than “When it’s someone in our tribe that acts unlawfully against members of another tribe it’s human nature to be angry with them,”
I guess the US media has given up on maintaining good relations with Republicans. (Incidentally, the attack at the baseball game got solid coverage here).
Why in the world would the US media want to have good relations with subhuman Nazis like Republicans?
The US media gave up on maintaining good relations with Republicans in the 1970’s.
I’m sure you got good coverage of the baseball shooting, but over here, that seemed to stop a few days after they realized the shooter was a Bernie Sanders supporter driving to extremism by listening to heroes in the leftist press like Rachel Maddow. I doubt one in ten Democrats would even recognize the shooter’s name because they only heard it spoken aloud for a few days before they disappeared him. “Steve Scalise is recovering from the wounds he suffered when he was shot (passive voice), by a bullet [come on, keep going!], fired from a gun, [yes? yes?], at a baseball practice [here it comes!], and in other news, Jeff Bezos says Amazon stocks are up in the third quarter.”