The War Room

WHEN EXTREMISTS RAIL AGAINST THE EXTREME

We all have views that we are passionate about. Views which we hold so dear that we could never be swayed from our position without some sort of rational discussion. There then is another sect of people who can never be swayed and believe that anyone who disagrees with them is extreme. They usually are extremists themselves but cannot see it.

Today's column by Toronto Star columnist Antonia Zerbisias entitiled "Hate Behind Right Wing BlogBurst" is a perfect example of the irony of one who is extreme accusing others of being hateful extremists.

In the article, a self-righteous Zerbisias accuses the "right-wing blogosphere" of promoting hatred against Islam because there have been reprints of the recent Danish cartoons that insult the Prophet Muhammad. At the beginning of her article she even makes a bizarre allusion to the re-prints of these cartoons as being the same as the violence that resulted from them.

"While Muslim religious extremists are rioting in the streets of Beirut, Gaza City and Kabul, Scandinavian embassies are being torched and Jordanians are deprived of their Danish feta over cartoons that were never actually published in any legitimate newspaper, the right-wing blogosphere has been staging its own "blogburst": the act of reproducing the offending depictions of the Prophet Muhammad."

She then goes on to give the expected insults and rebukes to women such as Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin but saves her most venemous rage for Kathy Shaidle who writes the web-site Relapsed Catholic. Here, her attack seems to verge on something that goes well beyond critique and seemingly into the realm of the personal and anti-Catholic.

"Case in point: Toronto-based blogger Kathy Shaidle (a.k.a. Relapsed Catholic) whose religious politics would have easily qualified her as chief judge and bonfire builder during the Spanish Inquisition. "

and

"Why she doesn't call her blog the Daily Auto Da Fe — for the public burning of heretics in Spain — is beyond me. "

Now whether or not one agrees or disagrees with the religion or politics of Shaidle, Malkin or Coulter is not the point. The point is the extreme way that Zerbisias tries to defame them in a public forum when these women, in the Toronto newspaper market, do not have the advantage of defending themselves. The point is how she slurs and generalizes about the right wing blogosphere in general. The point is also that Zerbisias herself is no moderate becon of love and tolerance.

There is much that is said against Islam that I find unfortunate on some blogs. Some do generalize and promote hate and should be critiqued. When that criticism comes from a moderate voice such as Michael Coren then the critique is valid. When the accusation comes from someone such as Zerbisias in the Toronto Star, it is billous and hyprocritical.

Zerbisias herself and by association the Toronto Star have engaged in some of the most hysterical hate-based conspiracies of 9-11 for years now.

In an article entitled "Pursue the Truth About Sept. 11" and published in the Toronto Star
on Sunday, 17 November, 2002, Zerbisias promotes some of the most extreme conspiracy theories about September 11 . Some of these theories can be found on websites that would be considered anti-semitic for how they implicate Jews and Israel in the attacks. Then she wrote,

"...contrary to what was circulated at the time, box-cutters, which the hijackers were alleged to have used to take over the planes, had been forbidden on planes since 1994. Airport screeners were to call supervisors if such items were found. But they didn't on Sept. 11, even though, as we now know, there had been "chatter" about hijacking for weeks. Why not?
The questions are endless. "

"All of which to say, there are many people, and more by the minute, persuaded that, if the Bushies didn't cause 9/11, they did nothing to stop it. "

In this part, Zerbisias seems to want to give creedence to the 'theories' but not quite commit in a public forum to them herself.

"The dearth of public accountability explains why it took only a couple of hours after Democratic Senator Paul Wellstone's plane crashed last month for the conspiracy theorists to crank up the "was-he-murdered?" e-mails. His death sure seemed odd, especially since he was such a staunch anti-Bushite. Could it have been a coincidence that his wife was also killed, so she couldn't step in for him? Or that the markets jumped after the news, in a turnaround dubbed the "Wellstone Rally?"

Of course it was a coincidence. But still, there are mysteries about what's been happening - and most of the big media are not wasting any energy on them. "

Does she really believe this is coincidence? The way she writes I really can't tell. Then she refers to a site called whatreallyhappened which is a doozy. She calls it "...carefully considered, well crafted and very compelling."

Even the most cursory glance at this website shows it engages in the most extreme form of left-wing propaganda. With large essays dedicated to demonstrating not only that President George Bush orchestrated and allowed September 11, but other long essays illustrating timelines hoping to enlighten people to the fact that President Bush's rise to power is equivocal to Adolph Hitler's and America is now in a phase similar to the rise of the Third Reich.

If I was Zerbisias I would be ashamed to associate myself with these arguments that trivialize the Holocaust...unless of course she really believes them. Many of these 'theories' are mainstays on other sites that are very anti-semitic. As I do not read her column on a regular basis I have no idea if she or the Toronto Star have backpeddled since this article was first published.

Before my wedding last summer we had a shower. One of the bridesmaides showed up with her new boyfriend, a young Palestinian Man and his best friend who was also Palestinian. One sported a Che tatoo on his arm, and each looked as though they spent much time in the gym. Eventually my worst fears came to fruition when they started saying how they had spent time in the middle east and 'bragged' about having shot at Jews there. I have no idea if this was true although they looked as though they could have had military experience of some sort. They then went on to engage in some of the worst conspiracy theories about Jews, 9-11 and the Vatican saving some of their worst vitriol for Catholics.

Now were these two men representative of all or even many Palestinians. Of course not. To think so would be racist. They are extremists and bigots. But when I read Zerbisias giving creedence to some of the same types of hateful conspiracy theories they spoke of and referring to websites about them I shake my head. Her paper, the Toronto Star has also engaged in some of the biggest hate based anti-Catholic rhetoric I have read since university.

When she then has the audacity to accuse others of 'hate' I have to be amazed at the hypocrisy.

And that's what this essay is really about. Not Palestinians; not Muslims; not Jews; not Catholics. It is about extremists and hypocrisy. And how sometimes, that which extremists accuse their foes of is exactly what they are guilty of themselves.

posted by Nicol DuMoulin @ 6:05 AM