April 19, 2004


MAMAS operative Lee Christofis reviews a local production of The Producers:

The bomb-blasting production number Springtime for Hitler, with its high-kicking, goose-stepping chorines and glossy officers whirling in a swastika pattern on the stage was guaranteed to offend every sensibility across the US, and then the world. Getting away with it now, on stage where it carries a sharper sting, is a miracle in an America where a little boy can be charged with assault for kissing a girl in pre-school, or an anti-Bush or pro-Muslim opinion will mark you a traitor.

It’d be a miracle if Christofis actually believes this. In other dissonent news:

• Between September 11, 2001 and April 15, 2004, Islamic terrorists killed at least 7,085 people and wounded 10,132 in 393 attacks around the world, according to Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad. It’s obviously time, therefore, to stop the West’s murderous crusade.

• And in the Sydney Morning Herald, Eddie Raggett writes:

Is Israel out of control? Regardless of the provocation, the brutal and horrific slaying of the new Hamas leader, Abdel-Aziz al-Rantissi, clearly demonstrates that it has little regard for the sanctity of human life and ever-less regard for world opinion.

So much stupidity, and it’s only Monday. Going to be a long week.

Posted by Tim Blair at April 19, 2004 02:08 PM

More stupidity, Tim.

London-based Islamofascist cleric Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad is quoted saying:

"We don't make a distinction between civilians and non-civilians, innocents and non-innocents. Only between Muslims and unbelievers. And the life of an unbeliever has no value. It has no sanctity."

Why, oh why, is this man allowed to spread his venom in London?

Posted by: Jan Haugland at April 19, 2004 at 02:12 PM

And so now the Palestinians will kill some more Jews and the Jews kill some more Palestinians plus one and I'll turn off the TV, have a beer and go to bed. Who gives a shit either way? They're all savages.

When the last Jew kills the last Palestinian maybe then there will be peace.

Posted by: Nufty at April 19, 2004 at 02:17 PM

If you don't give a shit, Nufty, then why are you posting? That's got to be the most useless and pathetic thing anyone has ever written here. If you're going to be another pest around here, at least aspire to the level of troll.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at April 19, 2004 at 02:20 PM

Is that reporter called Eddie Ragget or Eddie Raghead ?

Posted by: Fool to Himself & Burden to Others at April 19, 2004 at 02:22 PM

Oh, it's a great week, and off to a great start...

Posted by: jsmith at April 19, 2004 at 02:23 PM

Brilliant opinion piece by Barbara Amiel in today's Telegraph (UK) of which this is an excerpt. It contains some history of "Palestinian" terrorism of which I wasn't previously aware. It's frightening.

The Palestinian cause is an honourable one, but Hamas and similar groups, such as Hizbollah, Islamic Jihad or Arafat's al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, have no interest in an honourable two-state solution. Apologists for these groups routinely condemn suicide bombers and then describe them as part of "the cycle of violence in the Middle East" which would stop if only Israel would address their grievances. No doubt. Their grievance is the existence of Israel.

Arab terrorism against the state of Israel began in 1948 and never stopped. Historian Martin Gilbert documents late 1954 as the formal establishment of terrorist groups in the Gaza strip and north-eastern Sinai, supervised by the Egyptian government. From 1951–1956, Israeli vehicles were ambushed, farms attacked, fields booby-trapped and roads mined. Syria, Lebanon (and Jordan, largely from 1968–1971) developed into bases for terror. This murderous assault continued up to, during and since the Oslo peace process. The only relationship to peace that terrorism may have is that it generally flares up at any sign of progress towards it.

During his life, Rantissi vowed to take every inch of Israel by blood, accused then-Palestine Authority prime minister Abu Mazen of thrusting "a knife" into the Palestinian dialogue by offers to restrain the intifada, and called for "convoys of suicide bombers" with "thousands of sophisticated explosive belts". One has much sympathy for the response of the father of a young suicide bomber who wrote to the London Arabic daily Al-Hayat: "But what tears at the soul, pains the heart, and brings tears to the eyes more than anything else is the sight of these sheikhs and leaders evading sending their sons into the fray... Rantissi's wife has refrained from sending her son Muhammad to blow himself up."

Posted by: walter plinge at April 19, 2004 at 02:28 PM

Don't be too hard on Nufty, Andrea. I think when people say that they don't give a shit, they mean that they really do, they're worried, scared shitless in fact.
"The world is very odd we see
we do not comprehend it.
But on one thing we all agree
God won't, and we can't
Mend it."


Posted by: kwol at April 19, 2004 at 02:49 PM

Today's SMH (Singing Marxist Hymns) also has an Insight article on Muslims in Europe "Continental Divide" by Peter Fray (avialable on the net but for a fee) which blames the public for anti-Islamic feeling. He closes with a blame-the-victim classic:

"True, but in Europe today, millions now associate the word terrorist with Islam - and make themselves and Muslims poorer for doing so."

You see, according to Peter Fray, it's not an Arabian desert death cult or adherents that's the problem, it's our word association skills.

Posted by: Peter Ness at April 19, 2004 at 02:54 PM

Rove: You know, Fearless Leader, zey call you Concentration Camp Texan!
Bush: Really?
Rove: Yes, you do ze concentrating, and ze theatre critics do the camping!
Bush: Do zey really call me Concentration Camp Texan?!? Vunberbar!

One of the many reasons I abandoned the Left was their utter lack of humour, especially two kinds:
1) Humour pointed at self (the Left is not to be laughed at)
2) "Dark" Humour, humour pointed at Evil. Martin Luther said "the Devil hates to be laughed at." The Left doesn't get this.

Posted by: Timothy Lang at April 19, 2004 at 03:14 PM

I don't know about the SMH Peter, but the article is available for free at the age

have only scanned it so far, and will get around to giving it a good fisking later today

Posted by: attila at April 19, 2004 at 03:15 PM

I suppose I should go and hunt up the exact reference, but one scan through the SMH is enough. However, if memory serves the main article on the attack asserts that this means that Israel has abandoned its policy of only acting pre-emptively to prevent a known strike. Buried somewhat deeper in the SMH is a brief reference to the bomb attack last week that caused 16 Israeli casualties.
I guess the SMH advocates a policy that would have the Israelis going
Israeli general "Hey, Hamas just blew up 16 kids on a bus."
Israeli intelligence officer "Damm. I thought they were going after a shopping centre".
Sharon "Oh well, call off the strike on Rantissi."

Posted by: Greg at April 19, 2004 at 03:18 PM

I think when people say that they don't give a shit, they mean that they really do, they're worried, scared shitless in fact.

They have no shit to give! Heh heh!

Posted by: Sortelli at April 19, 2004 at 03:36 PM

The Australian's editorial today is unequivocal and must have lefty staffers like Washington copy and paste merchant Roy Ecclestone feeling a little worried. Sample:
That ritual outrage greeted Mr Bush's endorsement last week of Mr Sharon's plan to withdraw unilaterally from the Gaza Strip and permanently annex some areas of the West Bank captured during the 1967 war. And it is already flowing in response to the weekend's assassination by Israeli security forces of Hamas leader Abdel Aziz Rantissi. Before joining in that outrage, however, Australians should try an experiment. Imagine if the Bali attack, which claimed 88 Australian lives and traumatised this nation, were not an isolated outrage but part of a consistent pattern of slaughter of innocents to which we had to wake day after day, week after week, year after year. And imagine that our government knew full well who the plotters of this terror were, and where they could be found. Would the Australian public expect anything less of our security forces than Israel's have managed to deliver?

Posted by: slatts at April 19, 2004 at 04:00 PM

I don't speak for Israel, but I must say Mr. Raggett has me pinned.

I really don't give a rip about the "sanctity" of the human life that was Rantisi. I don't consider his life sacred at all, and will not miss his presence on my planet one iota.

Nor do I have a drop of consideration for "world opinion." Frankly, I'd be happy if "the world" would keep its opinions to itself.

Posted by: E. Nough at April 19, 2004 at 04:17 PM

Well, I saw Peter Beattie (grinning idiot premier of Queensland) spruiking the virtues of new laws which will see saboteurs gaoled for 25 years. He said that this should 'discourage terrorists'. What he doesn't seem to realise that if a terrorist isn't worried about dying, why on earth would the threat of 25 years in gaol stop one?

Posted by: kae at April 19, 2004 at 05:01 PM

Careful Slatts, you'll make Niall Cook's head explode with logical questions like that

Posted by: Tex at April 19, 2004 at 05:13 PM

I do think that the sanctity of life demands that we get rid of mass murderers like Rantisi.

Posted by: maor at April 19, 2004 at 08:05 PM

"...brutal and horrific slaying"

Now that's priceless. I sincerely hope to hear about this reporter again.

Hopefully his name will coincidentally appear in the banner headline along with "Home Invasion" & "Riddled with bullets".

Posted by: Mike Jericho at April 19, 2004 at 08:29 PM

Hamas leaders could use the Mosque Hat, a portable personal mosque.

Posted by: Ron Hardin at April 19, 2004 at 11:07 PM

Is Israel out of control? Regardless of the provocation, the brutal and horrific slaying of the new Hamas leader, Abdel-Aziz al-Rantissi, clearly demonstrates that it has little regard for the sanctity of human life and ever-less regard for world opinion.

I read this shite over a Latte and almost sprayed those sitting near me. No wonder I only use the SMH to pick up dog shit in the street.

Imagine using Hamas and "sanctity of human life" in the same sentence!!

Go IDF, Sharon is stroking and whispering sweet nothings to Hellfire missile as we speak.

Posted by: Dog at April 20, 2004 at 01:08 AM

Ah, the vaunted "sanctity of human life" drivel.


Posted by: mojo at April 20, 2004 at 02:08 AM

Excuse me, does your "Sanctity of Human Life" come with chips?

Perhaps Sadr should be instructed by al-Rantissi's fate.

Posted by: Hudson at April 20, 2004 at 03:30 AM

In an alternate universe where newspapers had some sense of objectivity:

"Is Hamas out of control? Regardless of the provocation, the brutal and horrific slaying of the sixteen innocent Israelis clearly demonstrates that it has little regard for the sanctity of human life and ever-less regard for world opinion."

Posted by: Nathan at April 20, 2004 at 03:36 AM

Kwol: if you are at all familiar with my usual manner, you'd know that I was being unusually civil to Mr. Nufty. Be that as it may, I'm just sick of the bleatings of the Spineless Ones. They should shut up -- I'd gladly crush their dissent (and it would be so easy, they having no spines) -- because all they have to say is variants on "Look at me! I have no spine! See me take bitter solace in spouting faux-cynical clichés!" It's just... wearying.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at April 20, 2004 at 09:59 AM