Sunday, April 26, 2009

Dutch television show finds Bin Laden not guilty--MPAC-UK impressed

According to Times Online:
Yesterday 12 children were killed in Dir [Pakistan] when a bomb hidden in a football exploded. Villagers said that the football had been left lying near the compound wall of a girls' school. Among the dead were seven boys and five girls aged between 5 and 13.
These are seemingly not good times for Muslim Moderation. MPAC-UK, however, is trying to fight Islam's extremist image, but coming across as rather extreme themselves in their embrace of 9/11 revisionism:
[...] Although this is only a television programme, it caused somewhat of an uproar when it was aired earlier this month in the Netherlands. I remember hearing Colin Powell saying "in the near future we will be able to put out a document that will describe quite clearly the evidence that we have linking Bin Laden to this attack."

This evidence was never produced.

In a court of law, it falls onto the accusing party to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty. Yet the only result we have seen was not only the war in Afghanistan, but also under a cloud of lies, the war in Iraq.

Muslims are often accused of having conspiracy theories, but there wasn’t a single Muslim in the jury that tried Bin Laden on Devil’s Advocate.
See there, the TV jury didn't contain a single Muslim!
The truth about what happened on September 11 2001, is not in the public domain.

Perhaps one day all will become clear, but I don’t think we will like what we find out. [...]
In the meantime, someone much slicker, writing in the Guardian, offers a cutesy piece about the vicissitudes of being a moderate Muslim who is always under suspicion:
. . . here are a few suggestions for how to help the police, airport immigration and anyone else who finds it hard to differentiate between liberal and extremist Muslims. All Muslims who consider themselves liberal and tolerant could apply for a special card which when presented would show the holder was a "pre-approved Muslim", thus saving time at airports. Sure, some may say that such a card would represent a gross violation of human rights but I think it could be marketed like a credit card: membership has its privileges – in this case not being indiscriminately arrested or held up when travelling. Those who feel uncomfortable carrying a card could be offered an alternative – a white girlfriend perhaps, someone to vouch for the fact that they have successfully ­integrated into society and have no immediate plans for a holy war.

Perhaps I could carry a sandwichboard with the slogan "I [heart] John Stuart Mill". That may prove too subtle, maybe something more permanent is needed to convince the sceptics. How about all moderate Muslims having "Don't panic – I'm Islamic" inked on their forearms by a government-approved tattoo artist. [...]
Does he really love John Stuart Mill? What has he done for him lately?

Crossposted on Soccer Dad

No comments: