…yet another window into the soul of Islam. The prosecutor probably used the “uncovered meat” gambit at the trial….

As to the Steyn quote, I remember reading about an odd cultural feature, the 21st Century meets the 7th: Saudis subscribing to a cellphone texting list to be notified of the time and place of beheadings.

…it’s like givin’ a chimp a laser pointer…doesn’t do the chimp any good, and somebody’s gonna get hurt….

Puritan1648 on November 3, 2006 at 11:36 PM

AP,

I think the whole ‘middle-east nuclear proliferation’ thing needs it’s own thread. And hey, where’s tonights BSG thread? Dang, I’ve been waiting all evening. LOL

~V5

V5 on November 3, 2006 at 11:44 PM

nuke mecca?

dougless on November 3, 2006 at 11:45 PM

A beer?

Kevin on November 3, 2006 at 11:55 PM

Those people live in Superman’s Bizarro World, where everything is backwards. I’m not the least bit surprised by any of this. Is anyone? Truly, I am not the least bit appalled or taken aback by this news. Long ago I’ve come to expect this from the Muslim World every bit as much as I expect the Sun will rise and the Earth will spin each day.

I used to be depply appalled by this sort of thing, but now, it’s little more than a sad epitaph in the day in the life of a 21st Century Muslim. “Most Muslims” would rather do nothing about this sort of thing, and it’s not happening in America, so why should anyone give a damn… other than to put our hearts and souls into keeping that sort of thing from our soil. Let the Muslims fix their own problems, if they dare.

No, really… “Most Muslims” are okee dokee folk… really

Believe it or else!

SilverStar830 on November 4, 2006 at 12:22 AM

I’ll say it again: I blame Islam. A backward religion that oppresses entire populations, forever holding them back from progressing beyond their opressive lifestyles. Of course, it’s a woman so naturally, it’s her fault. Typical Muslim response. The reason their societies are so backward, impoverished, and ignorant.

thedecider on November 4, 2006 at 12:35 AM

The barbarians are at the gate, gibbering and drooling.

Good times, good times.

spmat on November 4, 2006 at 12:42 AM

thedecider, it does seem like an Onion article, but at MEMRI?

Kevin on November 4, 2006 at 12:53 AM

Let’s nuke Mecca from orbit, it’s the only way to be sure.
Maybe we could use the new skynet.

Bryce on November 4, 2006 at 1:00 AM

Speaking of possible spoofs, The Australian article on the word “multiculturalism” is a hoot, Allahpundit.

Mr Soliman said he had attended with Mr Robb the discussion about alternatives to the term “multiculturalism”. “Our understanding was there was a lot of effort to find an alternative name to the multiculturalism policy because it carried negative connotations,” he said.

“I suggested ‘multiculturalism II’ because it implies that it was evolving.” Another suggestion was the “integration policy”.

Multiculturalism 2: The Integrator. So, in Australia, you can create antonyms by appending the number 2 after a name?

CMA members at the dinner had challenged Mr Robb to use the word multiculturalism more frequently because it was government policy, Professor Stannage said. [...] “I expect references to unity and diversity will be lost from the new policy because of the diversity thing going out.”

Makes sense.

Kevin on November 4, 2006 at 1:11 AM

When is someone going to get some balls and declare war on Islam?

God willing.

Gregor on November 4, 2006 at 1:18 AM

Apparently, the Saudi’s really like nookie.

NPP on November 4, 2006 at 1:35 AM

The problem is so bad in Sweden and Norway, the locals have developed a belt.

Want to get your wives or daughters a great gift this season? Take’em to the range and help them find the handgun that works best with them.

AZ_Redneck on November 4, 2006 at 2:03 AM

As Steyn famously said, “It’s at the intersection of apparently indestructible ancient ignorance and cheap, widely available western technology that the dark imponderables of the future lie.”–Allahpundit, quoting Mark Steyn

Mmm, dark imponderables, now with 65% cacao. Here’s one: Environmental activists who hate “urban sprawl” and real estate speculators who love urban sprawl would both do well to try to imagine the effect that two terrorist nukes in close succession will have everyone’s choice of address.

Kralizec on November 4, 2006 at 3:48 AM

Why do you have a ban on comments about nuking Mecca?

That’s a serious question. Why the ban? What’s the rationale for it?

I don’t support nuking Mecca. I think it’s a daft idea. But this blog discusses military matters, responses, etc., all the time.

Why the ban on one such option?

Christoph on November 4, 2006 at 4:43 AM

Why do you have a ban on comments about nuking Mecca?

That’s a serious question. Why the ban? What’s the rationale for it?

Think of it as a “Howlers Unwelcome” sign. You know how every time the muzzies do something stupid, comment boards start filling up with “Nuke Mecca” and “Kill them all” rhetoric? This one doesn’t.

Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 6:50 AM

Nuking Mecca isn’t the answer. Sure, it would be fun, we might even feel better for a day or two. The idea of the savages praying towards a glowing burned out hole in the ground makes me all warm and happy inside too.

However, to say “Nuke Mecca” is dumb. It’s like saying Catholics are evil, lets nuke the Vatican. Nuking the Vatican doesn’t solve anything. It just pisses them off.

Mecca, like the Vatican, is just a symbol. And as a symbol it’s not the problem, it’s just associated with the problem. The problem is the 1st Century AD, misogynistic, violent teaching from the backward religion of peace.

Islam needs to either reject violence as a tenant of religion, or it is going to boil down to them against the world. (not that we aren’t close now)

E L Frederick on November 4, 2006 at 8:05 AM

The answer is clear, and something I’ve been advocating since the start of the GWOT: We need to be dropping crates filled with bacon, booze and porn all over the Muslim world. Let the average Ahmet on the street get a taste of what he’s been missing. Once he’s kicking back in his barcalounger washing a bacon cheddar burger down with a frosty Sam Adams, and watching a naked, undulating Jenna Jameson, I don’t think he’s going to take the Friday “Death to America” sermon quite so seriously.

Farmer_Joe on November 4, 2006 at 8:39 AM

We seem to be on the same page Farmer Joe

Oilpatcher on November 4, 2006 at 8:52 AM

Every time I read about some dumb Arab thing, I want to eat a pork chop sandwich and some crab legs, drink three beers, and read a Playboy.

Black Adam on November 4, 2006 at 9:32 AM

Until the American people finish the war here at home we will never finish the war there. The biggest change in all western governments is the change from ‘the people are responsible for their own governments’ to ‘we are against the regime but not the people’.

Technology has given us a false reliance on ‘the surgical strike, smart bombs, perfect intelligence.

Hollywood has given us the false impression that ‘real-men’ can fight wars without hurting innocent people.

Sorry….war is death, destruction, chaos. Either yours or your enemies.

Here we have two sets of people. The first set want to give George Patton a green light. The second set think that Jack Bauer will save us all.

We don’t have to nuke, but we do need to be willing to inflict enough damage on an enemy society to cause that enemy to waiver and fall. It isn’t pretty, clean, neat.
We do not want war, but if we are going to fight it then we need to be able to accept the results. Right now America can’t. Until it can there will be no victory.

Limerick on November 4, 2006 at 10:06 AM

Every time I read about some dumb Arab thing, I want to eat a pork chop sandwich and some crab legs, drink three beers, and read a Playboy.

Black Adam on November 4, 2006 at 9:32 AM

Personally I think crowd control should include high pressure water cannons, using 50/50 water & pig blood. Or at least water dyed red and called 50/50 pig blood.

That’ll make ‘em think twice.

E L Frederick on November 4, 2006 at 10:41 AM

I still say that the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad cartoon contest would be a great answer to the problem. Saves nukes, saves excessive waste of effort…

And if that doesn’t work - Perhaps we could run Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for office in America, seeing as we seem to have so many of his supporters and apologists here.

Humor aside, realize that we are in a war to save our values, culture, and civilization..all that makes us - us!

Emmett J. on November 4, 2006 at 11:15 AM

Why must we continue to maintain relations with these barbarians, Its like a broken glass enema week after week..

Viper1 on November 4, 2006 at 11:31 AM

day after day, hour after hour………………

when will it end?

when will we finally clean the the giant litter box that they call home and either refill it with new sand or make it a really large reflective glass bowl telescope?

Emmett J. on November 4, 2006 at 11:43 AM

“…where is NOW and other feminist groups?”

Why, they are putting all their efforts towards defeating the REAL “enemy”, those evil republicans who want to stop them from murdering the innocent unborn…

NRA4Freedom on November 4, 2006 at 11:52 AM

Is this our future? Our own teenage, and younger, girls desperately trying to protect themselves? OR, the victims being tortured punished more than the rapists?
Do nothing, they will slowly take over. That IS THEIR PLAN!!!

shooter on November 4, 2006 at 12:16 PM

Victims already are punished more than the perpetrators of their crimes here. The future’s arrived, and it isn’t always pretty.

“…where is NOW and other feminist groups?”

Why, they are putting all their efforts towards defeating the REAL “enemy”, those evil republicans who want to stop them from murdering the innocent unborn…

NRA4Freedom on November 4, 2006 at 11:52 AM

Sad, isn’t it, that we, who won World War II, have created a death apparatus (and mind set) that would have made Hitler and the rest of his henchmen proud - and that it’s done in the name of “rights”.

We don’t need eugenics - we’ve been doing the enemy’s work for them by destroying ourselves from within - morally and otherwise. All while being overrun from without - just like Rome “back in the day”.

A kinder phrase would be collective societal suicide.

Emmett J. on November 4, 2006 at 12:30 PM

That would be positive fusion, right?

Emmett J. on November 4, 2006 at 1:17 PM

I got a “Thomas” whose homepage linke is “http://international-lawyers.org/” on my comment page in regards to my reporting of Saddam’s execution:

The verdict of guilty, like the trial, itself is farce and an abuse of justice. It sends a clear message to the Iraqi people: if they want to defend themselves they cannot look to law, they cannot look to the US government, they cannot look to the occupation government the US setup in Iraq…they must defend themselves using all necessary means by which national liberation movements are permitted to defend themselves.

The trial has been declared unfair by every independent expert who has reviewed it. It constitutes the worse form of “victors’ injustice.”

While the verdict was written by the occupying powers thousands of Iraqis have died because these same people can’t provide basic security in the country they illegally invaded.

The arrogant abuse of the law is part and parcel of the illegal invasion of Iraq and the US supported oppression of the Palestinian people for decades, and the US supported invasion of Lebanon. All of these were attacks on Arabs, on Muslims, on the people the US administration believes are their enemies. All of these are unmitigated violations of international law killing thousands of unarmed innocent Arab Muslims.

The trial of Saddam Hussein violated human rights to so serious an extent that no trial in modern history tat has been so prominent compares to it.

First, the trial was the direct result of multiple violations of international law, especially the illegal crime of aggression perpetrated against the Iraqi people.

Second, the trial was undertaken by a court set up and controlled by the United States, an occupying power. This violates the express provisions of international humanitarian law in the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Third, the trial was plagued by insecurity that saw defense lawyers, judges, and witnesses killed or intimidated. When the defense lawyers complained they were told there was nothing more that could be done. They were told not to complain about the murder of four defense lawyers by person allegedly connected to the Iraqi government.

The defense was given no time and no facilities to prepare a defense, even the President’ money was stolen from him when he was captured by the Americans. All exculpating evidence was withheld from the defense; defense witnesses were threatened by court officials; defense lawyers were assaulted by US officials; and the defendants we not given the charges against them until eight months after the prosecution had started presenting evidence and the day the defense was required to start its case. The list of violations is long and undoubtedly the reason why every independent expert has found the trial unfair.

Most notably, on 1 September 2006, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the body tasked by the international community to determine when and if a fair trial has been held or a detention is arbitrary, decided that the trial was unfair and that a fair trial could not take place before the Iraqi Special Tribunal.

In my Haloscan comment on:
http://kokonutpundits.blogspot.com/2006/11/saddam-hussein-found-guilty-hanging-is.html

Kokonut on November 5, 2006 at 10:11 AM

click on http://international-lawyers.org

the above won’t link correctly.

Kokonut on November 5, 2006 at 10:27 AM