Desecrating the Koran

Much fuss lately about the alledged 'desecrations' of the Muslim Bible in the Guantanamo prison facility. Someone needs to enlighten me on this, I've always wondered at what point exactly does a piece of paper become holy?

Trees are felled, through a long process made into paper. Some of it goes to newspapers, some to books, some maybe even into toiletpaper. Some of it goes into printing Korans.

Every single page. Is it holy before there's any writing on it, but when its designation is clear, namely Koranic scripts? Or does it take at least one Arabic letter? Or if more, how many? When it's full, is it then holy? Or does the Koran not become sacred until it is complete?

What if the Koran were printed onto rolls of toilet paper? Still holy? I guess it would then serve at least one actual purpose.

Of course the real question is why do Muslims get so 'upset' (read: Go into murder mode) after a (perceived) trespass against the Koran? I don't expect them to be happy about it, but only a barbarian would hurt, let alone kill a person over something as trivial as an object, thousands of which can be (and sadly ARE) printed every day.

Just another sympton of what is wrong with these people. They simply need to get a life in this life, instead of being so obessed with the next one.

Resistance to the occupation

With some help (well, a lot actually) I've figured it out.

The 'resistance' in Iraq is not trying to oust the US forces. It is doing everything it can to make them stay.

Let me explain.

It is terrorism in one of its purest form. Throughout history people have used provocation of a stronger opponent as a tool. Vietnam is one of the best examples of this. The North-Vietnamese and the VC managed to provoke the US forces into the use of disproportionate force, thereby often killing and wounding people that up until then had been friends or even allies of the US.

The 'Palestinians' use the same tactics. Murder a few Jews, and hope the IDF strikes back in such a way that more Arabs get involved one way or another, building momentum for the terrorists' cause.

What do the terrorists operating in Iraq have to gain by tying down the Americans?

Well, everything, really. If the US left now, Shia Muslims would be in control, and there would be no democracy. Shia's would receive all the suport in the world from Iran. Worst case scenario for the Sunni Muslim terrorists.
If the US stays and democracy breaks out in Iraq, Shia Muslims would again be in control. They are by far the majority in Iraq, and Sunni's would loose the control they've had since before Saddam was boss. They could still terrorize the country, but it would then become an internal strife (which it is now in all but name, they're murdering other Iraqi's in much greater numbers than they are Americans), which they could never win.

By tying down the US, the terrorists can make it appear as though they are still fighting the Americans, and obscure the fact that what they're actually resisting is something only a psychopath or a religious fanatic loaths: Democracy. But the Americans have learned a lesson or two. They are operating much more surgically than ever before, and making more friends than enemies. The tactic of provoking the US into blanket strikes is not working, but the terrorists have nothing to lose by persisting. The very least they are achieving is instability, and the chance that perhaps Iraqi forces overreact and estrange (parts of) the general population by retaliating indiscriminately.

Like I said, I had some help in figuring this out. Help from an Arab: MEMRI translated this article, and the Washington bureau chief of the London Arabic-language daily Al-Hayat, Salama Na'mat exposes the truth:

When the Saddamist terrorism in Iraq targets the elected, the security forces, the army, and the [Iraqi] National Guard, its aim is to prolong the [U.S.] occupation by thwarting the process of building national, political, security, and military institutions that can protect the country and ensure its stability. The terrorists and their supporters in the region and worldwide know that the Iraqi government cannot demand that the foreign forces leave before it can handle the security situation - and that is precisely what they are trying to thwart.

Al-Zarqawi and his "brave freedom fighters" must be killed. There's no other solution. They will not stop waging war, just as the 'Palestinians' will not stop, so long as most - if not all - Arab countries support and finance their wars. Iraq can be the first Arabic country to join the democratic world, and start a trend. But as long as dozens of people are murdered weekly, destabilizing the fledgling society, there's no chance of that.

So far, it seems, the terrorists are maintaining the status quo. But the US forces may capture the key leaders, and who knows what happens then.

These are interesting times alright.

Islamization of Amsterdam - Next Step

Amsterdam's coat of arms used to be this:

(Note the three prominent Andreas crosses)

But the borough of Amsterdam-Zeeburg has recently redesigned its coat to this:

Note the new abstract symbol beneath the three Andreas crosses. It's an Arab motif, and it represents diversity and innovation. Seriously, that's what the design agency says.

I can reliably predict the version for 2010:

Nice, isn't it?

Why Muslims bash gays

I wrote earlier about Chris Crain, a prominent American gay, who got beat up in Amsterdam by a gang of Moroccans. Human Rights Watch knows why they did it:

Human rights organisation Human Rights Watch said the assault of Crain is the result of ethnic tension in the Netherlands. It said gays are the victim because immigrants take revenge for the injustice they encounter themselves.

The fact that the Koran, and most Imams in the Netherlands preach that homosexuals must be put to death of course has nothing to do with it.

HRW fails to explain why ethnic tension would lead Muslims to attack gays, of all people. They also fail to name, let alone show the 'injustice' encountered by them. Why don't gays bash Muslims? Gays encounter lots of injustice! But then, reality is never a criterion for groups like HRW.

But Atef Salib, an official with the foundation Habibi Ana, a gay café for immigrants in the city centre has a thought:

You have good and bad people, but it is known that homosexuality is difficult to harmonise with the Arab mentality.

Straight from the horse's mouth

Gays, Muslims, PC

In the Dutch daily Het Parool, an extensive report (in Dutch) about a gay-bashing incident in Amsterdam. Interesting detail is that one of the victims is Chris Crain, editor-in-chief of the influential gay magazine Washington Blade. Lots of details, quite violent and scary. Not a word about the perpetrators, who beat up Crain and his companion. Only in foreign publications do we Dutch get to find out that the men assaulting Crain "had Moroccan features". This is what Crain looked like days after the attack:



But Crain thinks there was no religious motivation. Dunno why he thinks he knows what may or may not have been the 'reason' for the attack (other than sheer bloodlust and insanity), but it's nice to see that this type of denial is carried through so consistently.

UPDATE: here's Crain's first-hand report, from his own blog.