Things That Piss Us Off About This Morning's Guardian Article (7) - Oh Come On. That's Not Even Credible Moral Equivalence
It's like they just say things that sound liberal, and they assume that they don't have to prove them because everyone will be too scared to bust the open secret and admit that maybe - just maybe - one of the three monotheistic religions in the world has been a little bit of a grumpy gus lately:
An elderly Catholic nun has already been killed in Somalia, perhaps in retaliation for the Pope's remarks; churches have been attacked in the West Bank. How is this papal stupidity going to play out in countries such as Nigeria, where the tensions between Catholics and Muslims frequently flare into riots and death? Or other countries such as Pakistan, where tiny Catholic communities are already beleaguered? Or the Muslim minorities in Catholic countries such as the Philippines - how comfortable do they feel this week?
Gosh, we don't know you terrorist appeasing sacks of Guardian... paper scraps. Sacks of paper scraps.
Seriously, we don't know. Muslim minorities in Catholic countries - they have to be really on edge this week. Especially in all the countries outside the Philippines where there might be organized attacks. Like. Uh. Well, you know, all those rampantly Islamophobic countries, with their lunatic Christian governments that persecute Muslims, like... whatever, stop asking questions. The world persecutes Muslims. They only riot when they're persecuted by the world and they're rioting now. QED.
Other fun stuff about this paragraph:
(1) It's in the same article that has the sentence "It was a gratuitous reawakening of the most entrenched and self-serving of western prejudices - that Muslims have a unique proclivity to violence, a claim that has no basis in history or in current world events (a fact that still eludes too many westerners)." Let's see if we can come up with a basis. In countries where Christians are the minorities, nuns are getting murdered and Churchs are getting bombed. In countries where Muslims are the minorities, Muslims are being made to feel "uncomfortable" Check us on this because maybe the mental anguish is clouding our ability to reason, but isn't that, you know, kind of basis for suspecting a proclivity. It doesn't have to be a good basis - remember, the Guardian says NONE.
(2) Is it just too much to point out that they're blaming the Pope because temper-tantrum inclined Muslims shoot nuns? That's how far we've gone. The Guardian does not think that it is either analytically or socially or rhetorically problematic to belittle the Bishop of Rome - to refer to him "this man", to call him and his Church "bigots", and to talk about "papal stupidity" - because it's being done in the context of explaining why there is no basis (none (!!!)) for suspecting that contemporary Islam has proclivities towards violence. None!! They even make of you if you think so - it's a prejudice. If you think so, it's because the fact "elude" you.
Under Sharia the Guardian wouldn't have a web license, right? Why are we asking? Uhh... no reason.
An elderly Catholic nun has already been killed in Somalia, perhaps in retaliation for the Pope's remarks; churches have been attacked in the West Bank. How is this papal stupidity going to play out in countries such as Nigeria, where the tensions between Catholics and Muslims frequently flare into riots and death? Or other countries such as Pakistan, where tiny Catholic communities are already beleaguered? Or the Muslim minorities in Catholic countries such as the Philippines - how comfortable do they feel this week?
Gosh, we don't know you terrorist appeasing sacks of Guardian... paper scraps. Sacks of paper scraps.
Seriously, we don't know. Muslim minorities in Catholic countries - they have to be really on edge this week. Especially in all the countries outside the Philippines where there might be organized attacks. Like. Uh. Well, you know, all those rampantly Islamophobic countries, with their lunatic Christian governments that persecute Muslims, like... whatever, stop asking questions. The world persecutes Muslims. They only riot when they're persecuted by the world and they're rioting now. QED.
Other fun stuff about this paragraph:
(1) It's in the same article that has the sentence "It was a gratuitous reawakening of the most entrenched and self-serving of western prejudices - that Muslims have a unique proclivity to violence, a claim that has no basis in history or in current world events (a fact that still eludes too many westerners)." Let's see if we can come up with a basis. In countries where Christians are the minorities, nuns are getting murdered and Churchs are getting bombed. In countries where Muslims are the minorities, Muslims are being made to feel "uncomfortable" Check us on this because maybe the mental anguish is clouding our ability to reason, but isn't that, you know, kind of basis for suspecting a proclivity. It doesn't have to be a good basis - remember, the Guardian says NONE.
(2) Is it just too much to point out that they're blaming the Pope because temper-tantrum inclined Muslims shoot nuns? That's how far we've gone. The Guardian does not think that it is either analytically or socially or rhetorically problematic to belittle the Bishop of Rome - to refer to him "this man", to call him and his Church "bigots", and to talk about "papal stupidity" - because it's being done in the context of explaining why there is no basis (none (!!!)) for suspecting that contemporary Islam has proclivities towards violence. None!! They even make of you if you think so - it's a prejudice. If you think so, it's because the fact "elude" you.
Under Sharia the Guardian wouldn't have a web license, right? Why are we asking? Uhh... no reason.
