Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Here's a helpful little idea from a Lebanese blogger, suggesting Arabs put a box on their sites saying they're not for terrorist. The comments that follow are interesting. Some people approve. Others think that Arabs shouldn't have to apologize for terrorism because they "have nothing to do with it" and it "stigmatizes" them to apologize. Needless to say, I find that a weak argument. First of all, it's the terrorism that stigmatizes them. Apologizing might clean up their image a bit. Second, when people are murdering innocents in your name, it kinda behooves you to say, "Hey, whoa, there, Jack, I don't really appreciate what you're up to, there." Kind of, you know, the way many Americans demonstrate against the Iraq War and others of us tried to fire the guy responsible for it...

I know some readers wish I'd stick to the screenwriting stuff, but screenwriting is all about words and images standing for big ideas, so I consider it on topic. (Anyway, it's still a free country, and it's my blog.)

Via Martine.

6:35 PM

4 Comments:

What's the old saying?

"Every revolution begins with someone saying "this isn't right."

If more people just stood up (or put a block on their blog) and said that, the world would be a much less confusing place.

By  Cunningham, at 8:46 PM  

You should definitely stick to the screenwriting Alex but not for the reasons outlined in your post.

Muslims have to 'clean up their image'? When I think of foaming at the mouth fanatics I'm more likely to conjure up images of fundamentalist Christians that Muslims. I’d rather see them out on the streets with placards apologizing for helping reelect George Bush.

You mention freedom of speech. Well, people have the right to keep their mouths shut too. The same way you don't have to post up a banner on your site condemning terrorism. It’s a personal choice. Conversely, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with a show of solidarity if that's what you feel impassioned to do. That kind of affirmative action is inspiring.

You talk about innocents being killed in ‘their’ name. How many innocents have been killed in Iraq or in Palestine? In whose name is that? In Italy certain sections of the press are calling for governments to take the fight against their own Islamic communities. To purge the cancer within. Far right groups in London are targeting Muslim communities and not everyone is complaining. And this is democracy? Thanks for perpetuating the sentiment on your blog.

By  Matthew Reynolds, at 12:04 AM  

Actually, the first thing Prime Minister Tony Blair did after 7/7 was to defend British Muslims, pre-emptively, from accusations and attacks. Ditto George Bush after 9/11. Muslim leaders don't seem so quick to disapprove of hate attacks, except in Britain.

And there have been PLENTY of demonstrations in the West AND in Israel against the deaths of civilians by the US Army and the Israeli Army. During the Intifada (but not so much during the suicide bombings), Peace Now used to get hundreds of thousands of Israelis protesting the war with the Palestinians.

Not so much among the Muslims...

By  Alex Epstein, at 8:15 AM  

Yes, and of course this is an EXCELLENT reason to murder women and children in the West.

What I take away from this is that people like you think it's okay to murder civilians in the West because the West has done Bad Things in the East.

Personally I think murdering civilians in either place is a Bad Thing. And I think the attitude of "terrorism is naughty but I understand it because" is barely a notch above terrorism itself: less reprehensible, but more craven.

And incidentally, the children died because Saddam didn't want to take the UN's Oil for Food deal -- he didn't appreciate being told to spend his oil money on medicines, not guns.

By  Alex Epstein, at 9:30 PM  

Post a Comment

Back to Complications Ensue main blog page.