You have to wonder if they want to be stereotyped

 Anti-American fury sweeps Middle East over film

Embassies of U.S. and Allies Under Siege In Muslim World

etc etc etc.

Is there some faction in the Islamic world that wants to make "violent fanatical" a redundant qualifier to "Muslim"? I'm quite sure these riots are reinforcing that perception.

There's so much to be said about this, too much for me to manage. One relatively minor observation that occurs to me, though, is that one reason for the outrage, where it's genuine outrage over the "film" and not ginned-up political violence, is that these people have no conception of a free society, in the sense that we know it. If the government says it's ok, you can do it. If the government says it's not, you can't, or if you do you'll be punished. There seems to be little concept of an unwelcome or deplorable but not criminal act. Therefore, if someone does something and is not punished, the government approves it. And therefore the United States government and all its allies are responsible for some stupid movie that would have been seen by very few people apart from those who made it if the fanatics, or their manipulators, hadn't decided to make something of it.

Disturbingly, some American and European liberals want to change our laws to accomodate them. One hardly needs to point out the contrast between the liberal reaction to this and to the many, many insults handed out to Christianity and Christians in the West. In those cases, free expression is an absolute value, so fundamental that the government ought to subsidize the offending stuff and museums exhibit it.

Update: "they" in the title of this post refers to the rioters, al-Qaedists, etc., not to Muslims at large, many or most of whom are probably embarrassed and horrified by this craziness.

Update 2: And here is the 13-minute video that is at least partly responsible for the frenzy. I referred to it earlier as "some stupid movie," though I had not seen it. Now that I have, I can confirm with emphasis that it is a stupid movie. It's even worse than I had heard. I laughed out loud at several places. I kept expecting several of the actors to start sentences with Dude!.


19 responses to “You have to wonder if they want to be stereotyped”

  1. Therefore, if someone does something and is not punished, the government approves it.
    I’m really glad you said that Maclin, because I’ve been scratching my head over the whole thing. Of course, I still wonder how much of it had anything to do with the film at all.
    AMDG

  2. My guess, for what it’s worth, is that it’s a mix of pre-planned attack, deliberate agitation, and mindless rioting.

  3. I think I may remember this as the event that made me quit looking at Facebook for the next 6 weeks.
    AMDG

  4. Really? Why? I’m not seeing anything particularly annoying or distasteful about this there.

  5. You are blessed.
    AMDG

  6. I think extremists do want Islam to be identified with their extremism. In the eyes of other Muslims, in the first instance.

  7. Yes, I suppose they do, but what of the masses who are not necessarily extremists in principle but are genuinely outraged by what they’ve heard of this movie? Well, maybe that’s not an accurate characterization of many of the rioters.

  8. I wondered if a Muslim made the film

  9. As an excuse to start the rioting?
    AMDG

  10. Like the Rimsha Masih case: they recently arrested an imam for faking the evidence of her having burnt pages from the Koran. I haven’t seen the details, but assume it must involve the imam burning pages from a Koran at some point. What got less media play was that another imam was instrumental in getting the girl released and the wicked imam arrested.

  11. Janet, yes. Auberon Waugh used to hypothesise an amusing conspiracy theory and then conclude, ‘that way, madness lies.’ But I must admit when I read that the director of the film has kept his name secret, and so forth, the way to madness did suggest itself. I almost added to my comment above, ‘not seriously,’ but then again…

  12. Paul, I have known several Muslims who were good eggs

  13. You’re not the only one to wonder that, Grumpy. Yes, as an excuse, Janet. I don’t think it’s the case, but you do have to wonder.
    There have been a number of incidents here where a black or homosexual person has faked some sort of harrasment–dorm room defaced with racist slogans, etc.
    I hadn’t heard that, Paul–neither that the evidence was fake or that an imam was involved in freeing her. Good to know.

  14. I cross-posted with you, Grumphy. I quite agree with A Waugh about conspiracy theories, but one of the things that makes them seductive is that conspiracies do exist. The agent provocateur technique is definitely not fiction. Interesting sidelight: Sidney Reilly, the British spy for whom Caryll Houselander had a desperate infatuation, was lured to his death by a fake anti-communist group run by the Soviets.

  15. What a hilariously bad movie! I just watched it. Whoever
    Made it has no sense of humour at all

  16. Or else a really good one.
    Nor did they have a desert handy, apparently. One of the funniest things to me is the way the characters are pasted onto that desert background image. And the charge of the terrible horde: four guys.

  17. I had the impression it was unconscious of its own hilarity. The scene where mo’s wives chase him beating him with slippers has me in tears just thinking of it

  18. It’s funnier than monty python

  19. I’m pretty sure it is unconscious, but I did wonder at several points. The old -movie-style villainous heh-heh-heh of some of the henchmen, for instance, as they contemplated atrocities.

Leave a reply to Grumpy Cancel reply