I don't suggest that you go and read
this whole editorial in the
Orlando Sentinel. It's pretty slimy. (Sample--he refers to Terri Schiavo's parents as "wanting to maintain her mindless body." Nice guy.) Pamela Geller eviscerates it
here, and while I can't entirely approve of her language (though it could be worse) and wish she'd ease off on the boldface and caps, I approve of her passion. It's about the Rifqa Bary case. The author, Mike Thomas, is a toady for the Muslim lobby. The ending is pretty striking though. As in, horrifying. I kid you not, this is how it ends, word for word, cut and pasted from the editorial:
Fortunately, we have a rule of law to protect individuals from the political passions and religious doctrine of others. It is what separates us from Iran and Saudi Arabia.
The rule of law blocked Gov. Jeb Bush from imposing his personal beliefs in the Terri Schiavo case.
The rule of law sent Elián González back to his father.
And ultimately, the rule of law will send Rifqa back to Ohio.
Oh,
that rule of law. Gotcha.
Posts
4 comments:
Thomas is a reliably lightweight liberal flak. Thus, I never read him. It only takes a couple sentences to figure it out. Remember some time ago when me and the mayor wrestled a pit bull that had attacked and would not let go of a neighbor's little dog? All Thomas could do was make jokes about the mayor, who's a Democrat and gets no sympathy from me on that score. But he at least had the guts to jump in when he was needed. I'd like to see if Thomas would do the same. I think he's more comfortable sitting before a computer cultivating a superiorly ironic distance expressed in the most mediocre prose imaginable.
Re his current column, I like the comment of the guy who left a tiny url to a google search page packed with links to stories of honor killings that have transpired...in the West.
God help her if the "rule of law" is followed as this writer thinks it ought to be.
I should look up that url, as awful as it is to read about these. It helps sometimes to have the evidence at hand.
I was struck by the irony of the examples he chose. In the one case, a little boy was sent back against his will to a totalitarian country. In the other case, a young woman was killed. Either one of these fates could befall Rifqa, and Thomas seems to want that to happen. It's like he has a rhetorical tin ear. He can't even hear the obvious answer: "Oh, so you want her to be dragged back to Sri Lanka and have all her freedom taken away or to be killed?" And he can't even hear the unintentional irony in his talking about the "rule of law" to protect individuals from others' religious passions! Who is the individual here who needs to be protected by the law from others' religious passions? Obviously, it's Rifqa. His attempt to turn her father into a victim is ludicrous.
Yup. I guess the ideology has to come first. What the ideology is I have no idea, unless it's the "Muslims are just like us" variety, or that what we are doing to the father is tantamount to racial profiling. Imagine profiling a race or religion to save a girl's life. Horrors.
Post a Comment