Archconservative Attacks “Ay-Rab” Woman

Representative Michele Bachmann (MN6), noted archconservative and immigration hawk, notes this story from Belgium (via the NYTimes, a quote from which starts the excerpt):

Al Qaeda Warrior Uses Internet to Rally Women

BRUSSELS—On the street, Malika El Aroud is anonymous in an Islamic black veil covering all but her eyes…

She calls herself a female holy warrior for Al Qaeda. She insists that she does not disseminate instructions on bomb-making and has no intention of taking up arms herself…“It’s not my role to set off bombs—that’s ridiculous,” she said in a rare interview. “I have a weapon. It’s to write. It’s to speak out. That’s my jihad. You can do many things with words. Writing is also a bomb.”

Ms. El Aroud has not only made a name for herself among devotees of radical forums where she broadcasts her message of hatred toward the West.

Bachmann – who sounds a bit testy, like entering the world of blogging has caused her to let down her guard: 

This kind of s**t drives me bonkers—Ms. El Aroud hates the West? That’s grand. Whatever—that’s her right. Hell, there are some things I hate about the West. But if you hate the West so much, Ms. El Aroud, then what the f**k out are you doing in the West? Go. You’re not nailed you to the floor in Belgium. Let’s make a deal: You were born in Morocco. So you go back to Morocco and we’ll bring someone over that actually wants to live in the West. Perhaps a Moroccan lesbian. But if you long to live under sharia (you say you do), then maybe you should pick a s**thole country somewhere—Saudia Arabia, Nigeria, Gambia, Iran—where Islamists hold power and go and f**king live and blog from there.

Wow. I’m not used to that kind of direct language from Rep. Bachmann.  I’m kind of shocked. 

Still, she goes on.

But here’s the detail that really made my head explode:

That system often has been lenient toward her. She was detained last December with 13 others in what the authorities suspected was a plot to free a convicted terrorist from prison and to launch an attack in Brussels…. Now, even as Ms. El Aroud remains under constant surveillance, she is back home rallying militants on her main Internet forum and collecting more than $1,100 a month in government unemployment benefits.

Belgium, for crying out loud, you’re paying this woman unemployment benefits so that she can sit in her apartments and encourage people to blow up Belgians? Are you out of your minds?

One might wonder.

Of course, being that Rep. Bachmann is something of a paleoconservative, the only real surprise in the above is that she came to the defense of the “Moroccan Lesbian”. 

Well, dog bites man, I guess.

CORRECTION:  I can’t believe I bobbled this; the author was not famed social conservative Representative Michele Bachmann, but in fact überliberal gay sex-advice columnist and non-Bush-fan Dan Savage.

Who’d have thunk – Savage gets it.  Just goes to show you.

I regret any inconvience caused by this misunderstanding.

50 thoughts on “Archconservative Attacks “Ay-Rab” Woman

  1. I think I saw something Mitch did for the benefit of his readers, but maybe not.

    “dog bites man”… Mitch, you’re killin’ me!
    😆

  2. Wasn’t Dan Savage the idiot while working on a Republican Presidential candidates campaign, licking doorknobs in order to spread his sickness to the campaign staff?

  3. There is no mystery here.

    It’s not that Al Qaeda wants to destroy the US that has Savage’s panties in a wad…he’s all for that (he’s a lefty, you know).

    The problem for Savage is that Al Qaeda isn’t down with stuffing live gerbils up your cornhole…which is no doubt a favorite pastime of Dan Savage and his faithful readers.

    Right, AssClown?

    Sure I’m right.

  4. Swiftee, you might want to note that Savage was one of the pro-war liberals.

    Got anything else that suggests that Savage wants A Q to win, other than that he’s a liberal? At some point, that trope needs to be retired.

  5. Mitch,

    Most of the libs I know, even the smart ones, only read the first paragraph or two of anything. You may want to move the correction to the top of the post before this is attributed to Bachman in City Pages!

  6. /mock on

    Mitch,

    IF my comments here offend anyone who’s skin is too thin, I apologize in advance, after all, I’m just kidding.

    Blah Blah Ay-Rab blah –

    Mitch, you are so culturally sensitive, you may want to remember that people who don’t know, or don’t care about your personal history, might take the right impression from your use of slurs.

    Still, she goes on.

    But here’s the detail that really made my head explode:

    That system often has been lenient toward her. She was detained last December with 13 others in what the authorities suspected was a plot to free a convicted terrorist from prison and to launch an attack in Brussels…. Now, even as Ms. El Aroud remains under constant surveillance, she is back home rallying militants on her main Internet forum and collecting more than $1,100 a month in government unemployment benefits.

    Belgium, for crying out loud, you’re paying this woman unemployment benefits so that she can sit in her apartments and encourage people to blow up Belgians? Are you out of your minds?

    One might wonder.

    Of course, being that Rep. Bachmann is something of a paleoconservative, the only real surprise in the above is that she came to the defense of the “Moroccan Lesbian”.

    Well, dog bites man, I guess. – actually, IF Bachman had done so, it would be Man bites Dog.. but since Bachman never would do such a thing, well then I’m sure glad you confirmed for us what everyone KNOWS.

    CORRECTION: I can’t believe I bobbled this; the author was not famed social conservative Representative Michele Bachmann, but in fact überliberal gay sex-advice columnist and non-Bush-fan Dan Savage.

    “Who’d have thunk – Savage gets it. Just goes to show you.”

    Yeah- that a liberal (by the way, did you GET that he’s a sex advice columnist_ that a liberal might find pandering to Sharia whackos stupid – and here you are criticizing him – of course insincerely – you wouldn’t actually criticize someone for standing up to radicals – unless it suited your political purpose of course. If you feel this somehow disproves that righties use hate mongering, including anti-muslim hate mongering, get real. It proves there are imbeciles everywhere, even though frankly, what this guy said was kinda fun. If the lady truly hates Belgium, she certainly can leave, not that she SHOULD leave, because we all are entitled to complain about the system (God knows you do), and seek to change it (as you should if you think it’s wrong).

    I regret any inconvience caused by this misunderstanding.

    Insincere apologies beget insincere response.

    Mr. Shirt, one of the reasons Libs don’t read past the second paragraph, is usally, by that point of reading anything from any neocon ever, the lib has seen so many racial slurs that they just shake their heads in wonder and walk away (oh, I’m kidding).

    Sure am glad I can read that Anti-Semite Juan Cole – I mean, EVERYONE knows he is, and calling someone like Cole a bigot isn’t in any way hypocritical – nosireeebob.

    /mock off

  7. I didn’t think it was possible, but Peev’s comments are even MORE unreadable thanks to his inability to understand how to code an “ital” tag.

    It’s all well and good the ego-stroking maniac knew Tunis is the capital of Tunisia (right off the top of his head, dontcha know), but his complete inability to grasp even the simplest of HTML or XML makes his incessant comment drooling akin to trying to change TV channels with a long poking stick when the remote control is just inches away.

  8. “ding” /a dime being inserted int the flinging-poo monkey machine

    “Mr. Cole says that he is often unfairly attacked for being anti-Semitic, when in reality he claims he is only critical of Israeli policy. But Michael Oren, a visiting fellow at Yale, notes that in February 2003 Mr. Cole wrote on his blog that “Apparently [President Bush] has fallen for a line from the neo-cons in his administration that they can deliver the Jewish vote to him in 2004 if only he kisses Sharon’s ass.” Mr. Oren says “clearly that’s anti-Semitism; that’s not a criticism of Israeli policy.” (Exit polls showed that 74% of the Jewish vote went to John Kerry.)

    Mr. Cole appears to be the only prominent academic in America to have embraced “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy,” a highly controversial paper by John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of Harvard. Mr. Cole told the Chicago Sun-Times yesterday that the paper argues the “virtually axiomatic” point held by the rest of the world that a “powerful pro-Israel lobby exists.” The result is that “U.S. policy toward the Middle East has been dangerously skewed.”

    But the paper has been roundly attacked for sloppy generalizations. The two authors claim that “neither strategic nor moral arguments can account for America’s support for Israel.” Even Noam Chomsky, a far-left critic of Israel, wrote that we “have to ask how convincing their thesis is. Not very, in my opinion.” But Mr. Cole praises the two professors for seeking “to end the taboo [on discussions of the “Israel lobby”], enforced by knee-jerk accusations of anti-Semitism.”

    But then I am sure peev thinks The Peanut president (with apologies to Schulz) is the best friend a jew had ever had.

  9. Hey Mitch,

    Here’s today’s anti-semite screed from Cole:

    —[Actually, no it isn’t.  In addition to violating quite a number of copyright laws, allowing people to paste entire articles into my comment section is an invitation for much bandwidth-hogging but very little actual content.  I’m not cool with either idea.  Thanks – Ed] — 

    BTW – Mr. D- I actually didn’t really type much, most of that was Berg..ironic in a not so unique sort of way, huh?

    —[Perhaps, in a world where “ironic” really means “pretty much expected, on Mitch Berg’s blog” – Ed] — 

  10. JPA, nothing you quoted abot Cole is in the least bit anti-semitic. He commented (rightly) that you righties have been courting the Israeli lobby (aka a great number of rightly interested Americans of Jewish faith) – and have been sucking up to paleoconservatives in Isreal as a mechanism to do so. If you think that’s anti-semitic, you’re daft, it’s calling the political arena what it is.

    The balance of the screed you posted is conjecture. I haven’t adopted any such thing as that paper – and frankly, comments like Cole’s have come out of the mouths of many, including some conservatives – regarding cozying up to the Israeli lobby by the right in the past decade. It used to be the conservatives were pretty anti-semitic, calling jews Christ-Killers (Jerry Falwel for example) – and explains why 74% of Jews voted for Kerry, but that’s changed, now they embrace their inner “excuse for invasion” and “big military” and Isreal is as convenient an excuse as any for doing so. In fact, Douglas Feith said PLAINLY that the invastion of Iraq had more to do with protecting Isreal from terrorism than WMD. I guess that makes Feith an anti-semite too.

  11. Ok Mitch, sorry, I’ll try not to post quite so long a comment, still it was instructive that he in fact was highly critical of … gosh, Arabs.

  12. Actually – Mitch, it was truly irony, you posted someone else’s words, in a long-winding ramble, and i got accused of being verbose (which I don’t deny) by posting in your comments.. that’s actually pretty F’in ironic, really.

  13. All I see is a 6 inch long post with your name on it, Peev. Until you learn how to use italics (as Yoss pointed out) it just becomes one gelatinous mess, whether you are cribbing from Mitch or not.

    Seek out ye shine box, troll.

  14. Hey Darsh!

    “…one of the reasons Libs don’t read past the second paragraph, is usally, by that point of reading anything from (blah, blah, blah)”

    So, why are you here? We’re the only ones who acknowledge your existence aren’t we?

    Like the child psychologists say, even negative attention is attention.

  15. You asked for examples of Cole’s anti-semitism, I posted it, with quotes. Your inabilty to comprehend is not proof that Cole is not an anti-semitic, anti-Israeli hack.

  16. peevish deserves to be ignored as long as he recognizes this:

    “you posted someone else’s words, in a long-winding ramble, and i got accused of being verbose (which I don’t deny) by posting in your comments”

    as irony. No peevish, that is actually an example of a functioning web log: proprietor posts articles, readers post comments.

    When readers post articles in the comment section they are usually discouraged from doing so (or clubbed like baby seals, depending). When readers post articles that belong to other folks in a comment section (especially ones that could be linked *hint* *hint*) they are usually scourged and beheaded.

  17. JPA, the fact that Cole pointed out the political landscape doesn’t make him anti-semitic, nor even anti-Israeli. If someone disagrees with the hardline regimes of Ariel Sharon or Ben Netenyahu, that makes them anti-Isreali? I guess disagreeing with Bill Clinton makes one anti-American too, by that looney logic. Good to know.. hey Swift, you anti-American hack :).

    If such comments proved bias, then Mitch IS biased by the same kind of logic. He has made comments more critical and sweeping than that – yet, I don’t find him to be a bigot – do you?

  18. Troy,

    agreed.

    And note Troy – no argument, I wonder how many of your blustering friends would be able to do the same. Ignore me all ya’ like, there are plenty of Liliputians out there.

  19. “Ignore me all ya’ like, there are plenty of Liliputians out there.”

    Perhaps an IP ban would be more useful… perhaps knowing how small you really are will solve your Lilliputan Hallucinations.

  20. Peev,
    Do you know what Irony is? (Baldrick gets closer than you will.)

    What’s more, anyone care to return to the point at hand… Savage and folks (like Peev) who wish us to submit.

  21. I clearly quoted an excerpt so as not to inadvertently misappropiate somebody’s work. If I overstepped my privilege as a commenter – I apologise. I will refrain from posting quotes longer than a paragraph in the future.

  22. I never said I would ignore you, peevish. It hurts my feelings that you would think me so hard hearted. 😉

  23. You can’t ignore an underwear stain like Peev. Oh, sure, you can sit it out for awhile, maybe tell yourself, “I can get through today” without doing anything about it or acknowledging it, but at some point you just look down and see that underwear stain, staring back at you, all nasty and gross like.

  24. Peev “Iraq had more to do with protecting Isreal from terrorism than WMDs.” “You righties have been courting the Israeli lobby.” If true, that would be bad in what way, seeing as Israel is the only democracy in the middle east?

  25. Badda, I’m not made out of dimes, you know.

    Still, in order to keep up with commenting convention, I shall try to be as brief as possible, and post links wherever possible. However, I’d like to note that our esteemed trolls apparently either do not know how to use links, or never get beyond the 1st paragraph of the referral, thus sometimes necessitating the “in your face” commenting technique.

  26. Look, it’s not surprising that Dan Savage isn’t fond of murderous Islamist fundies; as I understand it, the big disagreement among such types is whether gays like Savage should be thrown off tall walls to kill them, or have walls pushed over on them to kill them. Peev, I haven’t taken a survey I can point you to, but I bet that very, very few gay men wish to have either happen to them. Kind of ruins the day, and all.

    I really like Savage’s writing on issues of parenting — he did a terrific piece on raising his son on This American Life that any father should be able to relate to. (His sex advice? Not my cuppa, and I’m unfond of his politics, too, at least, most of it. So what?)

    There’s a lot that divides us in the US, and that’s fine; let’s bicker among ourselves.

    But let’s celebrate our lack of diversity on issues we can agree on — and I’m talking to you, Swiftee — and maybe respect folks getting things right, when they do, as I think Mitch is clearly doing.

  27. What joelr said. Savage can be a tool on occasion, as with the knob-coughing incident, but he’s also very funny writer even if you blanche at the subject matter. And I’d rather read his thoughts on parenting than those of, say, Flavor Flav – yesterday’s Pioneer Press website ran a story about how Mr. Flav proposed to his baby momma on stage, which was a total shocka because he’s previously chosen to marry someone called Thing 2. I’m also pretty sure Mr. Flav lacks a coherent set of objections to sharia law.

    Of all the fissures in multiculturalism, Islam vs. Gays may end up the most instructive.

  28. I’m also pretty sure Mr. Flav lacks a coherent set of objections to sharia law

    “Farrakhan’s a prophet that you know you oughtta listen to,
    what he say to you,
    what you gonna do?”
    – “Bring the Noise”.

    Yep. Might not have given Sharia much thought.

  29. vPeev “Iraq had more to do with protecting Isreal from terrorism than WMDs.”

    And since “Iraqi support for terror” was one of the justifications for the war in the first place, that is a perfectly coherent grounds for war.

  30. I love how you wingnuts go berserk over anything A-rab. Red meat for you kooks. But I think you should be addressing the real threat to our nation:

    RACHEL RAY AND HER DONUTS OF TERROR!!!!!

  31. I agree with AC re Rachel Ray & the Donuts of Terror. Breaking the butterfly on the wheel.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.