Saturday, December 23, 2006

Good News from Afghanistan

A major Taliban leader has reportedly been killed. Military implications aside, the greatest thing about this story is the denial by a Taliban spokesman.

We strongly deny this. He is not present in the area where American forces are claiming to have killed him," commander Mullah Hayat Khan told Reuters by telephone.

"The American and NATO forces from time to time make such false claims. It's just propaganda against the Taliban."


The fact that Akhtar Mohammed Osmani is not present where he was supposedly killed in no way refutes the claims of the American military as his body could have been removed from the scene. Of course, the fact that he is not present is only meant to be considered if we fail to be convinced by the fact that Khan is strongly denying Osmani's death, as opposed to simply denying it. If he had been on tv when making his remarks, he probably would have pointed his finger sternly as well. "The Americans . . . did not . . . drop . . . a bomb . . . on that man's car. Mullah Osmani."

Outrageous on So Many Levels

The Brussels Journal has a brief post on the increasing freqeuncy of rapes of Oslo women by Muslim immigrants and the disgraceful response of Norwegian authorities. Probably the most disgraceful part of the reaction of one Unni Wikan:

Two out of three charged with rape in Norway’s capital are immigrants with a non-western background according to a police study. The number of rape cases is also rising steadily. Unni Wikan, a professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo, in 2001 said that “Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for these rapes” because Muslim men found their manner of dress provocative. The professor’s conclusion was not that Muslim men living in the West needed to adjust to Western norms, but the exact opposite: “Norwegian women must realize that we live in a Multicultural society and adapt themselves to it.”
Now, it is true that men are sexually drawn to the sight of the female form and the sight of certain female body parts, and it is also true that if women dress so as to limit the amount of skin they show, particularly in certain areas, and limit the extent to which they accentuate certain body parts, it will lessen the amount of unwanted sexual attention they receive from men. However, it in no way follows that women dressing more modestly is the key to addressing Oslo's rape problem, even if it helps (so would granting citizens the right to keep and bear arms). The fact of the matter is that a man who will rape a woman simply because she is provacatively dressed does not belong on the streets of a free society. For the sake of maintaining an orderly society and for the protection of the general public, it is the responsibility of the state to remove those who would perpetrate these unspeakable acts from the general public and to lock them away for long periods of time.

Still, questions remain. Why do Muslim men rape native Norwegian women who are provocatively dressed, and what does it mean to say a woman is "provocatively dressed"? As to the second, I can't be sure of this, but I suspect to be dressed "provcoatively" is to be wearing less than the full traditional female Muslim garb (i.e. her head is uncovered). That leaves the question of why this happens. Three possibilities occur to me. The first is that these Muslim men are driven so crazy with lust by even the uncovered head of a woman that they cannot restrain themselves from immediately engaging in sexual intercourse with the object of their lust, whether or not the woman consents to it. The second possibility is that they are of the opinion that these women are dressing like whores (not necessarily an incorrect opinion) and thus deserve to be treated as such. The third possibility is more disturbing. It is possible that these Muslim men are raping Norwegian women in an effort to bring coerce a change in how Norwegian women dress. Indeed, it is possible that they are doing so with the approval, if not encouragement of radical imams. If the first is the case, these men belong in prison because they only know how to behave as animals, not as human beings. If the second is the case, these men belong in prison because they have neither regard for the rule of law nor the inherent dignity of man. Just because a woman dresses like a whore, it does not mean she deserves to be treated as one. If the third is the case, then not only should the rapists be imprisoned, but the imams encouraging this should either be imprisoned or deported for inciting violence.

This situation is not something to be papered over or accepted in the name of multiculturalism. It is a direct challenge to the rule law and to the inherent dignity of the human person. Norway should take such steps as are necessary to bring this problem to an end, including imprisoning the rapists for long periods of time (at least 20 years with no possibility of parole), and permit their citizens to carry conealed weapons in public. One of the most vital human rights is the right to self-defense, and a people deprived of the ability to defend itself is a people that will find itself subject to oppression from violent factions seeking to increase their power, in this case, radical Muslim men using violence to force a free society to adopt its values. And on the purely practical level, I'd be willing to bet that many of these Muslim men who are tempted to rape "provocatively dressed" women would think twice if they thought there were a pretty good chance it would get them shot.