Perigo smeared

Peter Cresswell's picture
Submitted by Peter Cresswell on Sun, 2006-04-09 20:44

A local blogger has attacked Lindsay Perigo's 'Death to Islam' editorial as "bigotry" and "hate speech." Says the blogger: "I reluctantly link to the essay "Death to Islam", because the author is not just some random nutjob, but well known in New Zealand - especially for his viciously expressed, and often patently absurd opinions... This is the same person who published a giant swastika on the cover of said journal a few years ago," smears the blogger, displaying her intent.

While her blog does not accept comments, you may wish to post a comment on her smear at New Zealand's most widely-read blog, which linked to the attack yesterday with only a weasel-worded and insipid comment on it.

I urge you you to post. Never has activism been more like shooting fish in a barrel. I link here to what I've said on my own blog this morning.

( categories: )

Well it's obvious the real

gregster's picture

Well it's obvious the real war should be on irrationalism (religion).
Downer is correct but the remark is inflammatory if not expanded upon.


Andrew Bissell's picture

Utility Belt's prescription for the skirmish/disagreement/tiff between Islam and the West appears to be:

1. Purchase snorkel and shovel, and find a decent-sized patch of sand.

2. Use shovel to bury hole in the sand approximately two feet deep.

3. Place snorkel firmly over one's head, nose, and mouth, and bury head in the sand.

Hat tip to South Park.

After 9/11 there was no shortage of moron academics telling us that the Muslims who hated us did so, not because of their religion, but because we are so rich and they are so poor. But this new idea--they hate us because we're not afraid to point out that they hate us--scales new heights of mind-boggling idiocy.

You have at best

Utility Belt's picture

You have at best demonstrated that the arguments in question are valid. You have not attempted to refute the assertion that they invite not just a clash of civilisations but the broadening of support for terrorists, in other words, that publicly proclaiming such statements is likely to do more harm than good for all concerned. If Muslims are as dangerous as you believe, why goad them? The tragic irony here is that it is indeed true that many Muslims hate the West, and it becomes more true every time a Westerner says so.

Apparently the woman didnt

John M Newnham's picture

Apparently the woman didnt take the time to read the piece Lindsay wrote. Death to Islam, by exposure to the light of reason is not bigotry.

It is hate speech. Not

John M Newnham's picture

It is hate speech. Not bigotry, but well thought out argument based on facts. I applaud it. I applaud Lindsay for writing it. It takes balls to explicitly state what mosts are afraid to say. Is there anything about Islam that a decent person should *not* hate with all his being?


Peter Cresswell's picture

Yes. This from Dr Wafa Sultan on Al-Jazeera last month:

The clash we are witnessing around the world is not a clash of religions, or a clash of civilizations. It is a clash between two opposites, between two eras. It is a clash between a mentality that belongs to the Middle Ages and another mentality that belongs to the 21st century. It is a clash between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality. It is a clash between freedom and oppression, between democracy and dictatorship. It is a clash between human rights, on the one hand, and the violation of these rights, on other hand. It is a clash between those who treat women like beasts, and those who treat them like human beings. What we see today is not a clash of civilizations. Civilizations do not clash, but compete...

And this, from my blog this morning.

"You're welcome over here Rick,"

And you're welcome to him.


Utility Belt's picture

I'd love to live in a village with such a smart idiot. You're welcome over here Rick, you can crash on my couch until we sort you out a shack or a hovel.

Does anyone have any non-schoolyard criticisms of the statement that "To characterise this fight against terrorism as a fight against Islam is to invite not just a clash of civilisations but the broadening of support for terrorists."?

Deprived village

Rick Giles's picture

I'll be back to living at the end of your block once again soon enough. Why you rushing me?

Rick really does deprive a

Peter Cresswell's picture

Rick really does deprive a village of an idiot, doesn't he.

Death to The Salvation Army

Rick Giles's picture

"Death to Destiny Church!"

"Death to Scouting New Zealand!"

"Death to Shinto!"

"Death to The Salvation Army"

Death to St Stephens Anglican Church!"

"Death to St Bedes Colledge!!"

"Death to Parnell Christian Woman's Knitting Circle (meets every second Sunday at Jubilee Hall, bring your own wool and scones)!! Yahh!"

Just some of the possible Free Radical title-issues to come? Well why not!? While perhaps not as urgent these are no less rational.

Alexander Downer rightly said this at the end of February,-

"To characterise this fight against terrorism as a fight against Islam is to invite not just a clash of civilisations but the broadening of support for terrorists."

Do the rest of us, and yourselves, a favor- those who want to put an end to bad doctrine. Learn a new word: Islamist

Editorial doing its work

Richard Wiig's picture

Linz, gets smeared everyday doesn't he? What peeves me more is that someone like, David Farrar, can make the stupid comments he makes. He needs educating, urgently.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.