Keep saying it, you might actually convince someone
Now, listen and watch as they scream “Allahu Akbar!” during their Stone Age mob rampage. Over what, exactly? Oh, yeah. A bunch of cartoons. Cartoons.
Oh, yeah, that’s right, Malkin. These riots are about cartoons.
Like the Rodney King riots were about a single act of police brutality. Like soccer or basketball riots are about sports. Like the Watts riots were about Marquette Frye. Like the Zoot Suit Riots were about fashion sense.
I love the mock indigation teh Malkin feels. So full of it.
I just disovered this cove of the island of blog, but mucho gusto. If I could suggest one thing, it would be headers of Malking making odd faces. And Kitty Kattwood, just because. And a brief mention of cobag. Small list… ;)
Comment by robola — February 5, 2006 @ 1:44 pm
she keeps on changing her titles…earlier this morning her posting was titled…”the religion of peace at work”…she is an inflammatory bigoted douchebag…why does she find it impossible to do some deep investigatory research and nuanced analysis
Comment by neil — February 5, 2006 @ 3:25 pm
On one level I agree with Malkin. The riots are despicable and inexcusable; being offended is no justification for violence. And the Netherlands does face a problem of how to tolerate the intolerant.
But what bothers me about Malkin is that she seems to be upset because we are using this event as call to arms against Muslims: Malkin wants us to go to war. She’s mad because we aren’t hating Muslims enough.
See, despite Malkin’s criticism that “the left” doesn’t appreciate the threat that theocratic Islam represents, there is a level of criticism for Islam that she herself cannot reach.
I see the riots as the logical extension of the Muslims faith, and as atheistic humanist, I view faith as an invalid and irrational way of basing beliefs and action. Malkin, on the other hand, herself a person of faith, can’t make this critique. She can only instead say that the Muslims have the wrong faith. Which is historically has lead to sectarian strife, which is what makes Malkin’s posts on this subject disconcerting to me.
There is no question (in my mind, at least) that one of the greatest crimes against humanity is the Islamic world’s laws against apostasy, with some making it an offense punishable by death.
Comment by Hume's Ghost — February 5, 2006 @ 5:37 pm
That should have read “But what bothers me about Malkin is that she seems to be upset because we are NOT using this event as call to arms against Muslims”
Comment by Hume\'s Ghost — February 5, 2006 @ 5:39 pm
Politics aside for a moment, the new site looks really good! Congrats on your new digs.
Comment by John — February 5, 2006 @ 10:41 pm
I like the new look. Very classy
Comment by scout prime — February 5, 2006 @ 11:00 pm
You tell me, is the hypocrasy?
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/002459.htm
Comment by Hume's Ghost — February 6, 2006 @ 1:30 am
The bloodthirsty mobs are just Islamic Coulters and Malkins and Michael Savage Weiners, are they not?
Comment by No Blood for Hubris — February 6, 2006 @ 3:45 am
Thanks, scout and john and everybody. Welcome all.
Comment by Auguste — February 6, 2006 @ 4:39 am
Looks good, folks.
As far as the riots go - If’n you keep poking at a wasp’s nest, don’t be shocked when they fly out and sting you. The West has been doing a real good job of poking over the last few years and, well, karma’s a bitch and she just ordered the lobster.
Comment by Pere Ubu — February 6, 2006 @ 4:50 pm
Anyone ever been to Thailand? The king there is revered to such a degree that if similar cartoons lampooned or insulted him in the foreign press there would be bloody murder in the streets.
Comment by Taco Grande — February 6, 2006 @ 6:40 pm
I’ll bite: What are the riots really about?
Comment by Brainster — February 6, 2006 @ 6:48 pm
I’ll bite: What are the riots really about?
Well, Juan Cole says they’re likely about more than just cartoons, and strangely enough, I trust his view more than I would that of LGF or Malkin.
Comment by Pere Ubu — February 6, 2006 @ 7:09 pm