Tuesday, August 29, 2006

COMMENT: Jill Singer exposes Steyn's lies

Well, it seems you don’t have to be a left wing Jew or a right wing Muslim to find the “hate speech” (his words, not mine) of Canadian-born racist Mark Steyn disturbing.

Writing in the Herald-Sun, Wakely-award-winning journalist Jill Singer expressed her dismay (if not disgust) with Steyn’s attempts to demonise anyone deemed Muslim. And that was even after Steyn’s diatribe was “modified for ABC audiences”.

Steyn used the podium of Australian right-wing think tanks to spread a simple message. Singer sumarised that message as follows:
… that Islam has nothing to offer the world but destruction … In Steyn's world, Muslims are the legitimate target of jokes and calls for obliteration.
Alleged conservatives are lapping up this message of extreme intolerance. The CIS continues to triumphantly boast of the “sell-out” session at the Conservatorium earlier this month.

Of course, no one from the CIS or the IPA has publicly distanced themselves from Steyn’s anti-Muslim diatribe. Steyn’s offensive descriptions of the cultures and religions of Muslim Aussies doesn’t seem to have perturbed these alleged conservatives.

Yet why should the now-geriatric members of Australia’s old “New Right” regard Muslim-bashing as unacceptable? As Singer notes:
Predictably enough, Steyn was given a warm welcome by the Right on his highly publicised tour of Australia, including the likes of our PM, Treasurer and Foreign Minister.

One can only assume its because they like what he has to say, but are not game to say it themselves.
Perhaps most interesting was Singer’s exposure of blatant lies told by Steyn in his quest to generate maximum hatred toward anyone deemed Muslim.
… the reefer-jacketed school drop-out is not impeded by small matters, such as factual accuracy, when labouring to slag off at Muslims whenever possible.

An example: during our interview, he repeated something he had written about the Swedish city of Malmo, to the effect it was on the path to ruination because 40 per cent of its population was now Muslim. A listener texted in to say this figure was exaggerated. With eyes flashing, Steyn stuck to his guns.

Curious about his twitchy reaction, I later contacted Sweden's official statistics department to check his alleged source, which was a furphy.

Steyn's writings on Malmo's social problems (which need no exaggeration) also state that ambulance drivers refuse to go into many areas of the city because of the danger posed by Muslims.

His source for this appears to be a two-year-old report on Fox News, except where Fox reported Malmo's Muslim population at being 25 per cent, Steyn inflated it to 40 per
cent.

And where Fox reported that ambulance drivers would not go into some areas of Malmo without a police escort, Steyn changed it to many areas.

Imagine CIS staff explaining this to the Australian CEO of the National Australia Bank. Or perhaps them using this in their next funding or sponsorship from Crazy Johns.

And to think this sort of nonsense was being promoted at a “Big Ideas Forum”.

Words © 2006 Irfan Yusuf

Delicious
Bookmark this on Delicious

Digg!

Get Flocked

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

You love to rant on about this crazy phone salesman, and this mad muslim banker, again, and again, and again.

No doubt you will jump up and down to defend these two if a mobile phone sourced from Crazy John is used to detonate an explosive on public transport, in a terrorist plot financed by a particular banker.

Anonymous said...

Irfan, what makes you right wing?

Anonymous said...

The most disturbing thing is that a room full of white people didn't lynch you for being against free speech and in favour of muslim terrorism. Free-speech and opposition to terrorism is a valid viewpoint which all non-muslims share with Mark Steyn. If Mark Steyn wants to actually verbalise the reasons why we instinctively hate muslims then that's fair enough. Not that we need Mark Steyn. We already hate muslims. Mark Steyn is just a calmer more polite, more reasonable enunciation of the basic human emotion - justified hatred for lying violent dirty smelly muslim scum.

Anonymous said...

Wow, Irf. Great to see Banjo has learned to write and type. I thought he'd still be supplying dope to darbys.

Law Student said...

Anon 12.32

Dumb prick. We are much more physically cleaner than you. Try finding dirt on some one who washes five times a day. We shave our armpits and pubes whereas you have cockroaches rooting under your arms.

Anonymous said...

You said things that the vast majority of the people in the room disagreed with. You also pissed a lot of them off.

Yet, nothing happened.

Having never been there, please tell me, honestly, what would happen if I attended a full-house meeting at Lakemba Mosque, and shouted something the whole room disagreed with and pissed them all off.

Also, why do you have multiple blogs? Isn't one enough?

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Come On Irf! Comment on the what the Prime Minister has said about Muslims integrating into western culture! You are running several days late, and it is old news now. So much for the power of instantaneous blogging changing the world in real time. Maybe you should give your next conference talk on how to blog by ignoring the topical current issues , and concentrating on obscure and irrelevant religious and sporting events.

Law Student said...

10.46 i'm a male.

Augustus said...

You're an idiot.

Liberty Resource Center said...

Here is what seems to be the truth:

Steyn apparantly said that 40% of Malmo was Muslim and that fire crews will not go into many areas there without police protection.

But he should have said 25% of Malmo was Muslim and that fire crews will not go into some areas there without police protection.

Is that correct?

I don't see any substantial difference. The real question is: is it the case that the Muslim areas of Malmo are now dangerous places?

Does anyone know the answer?

Doug

Anonymous said...

You know what? I agree. Mark Steyn is a NeoCon liar. Besides his hate speech towards Muslims, he totally misrepresents Christianity and the people who lead it. Steyn purports to be a Christian, but in reality is no more than a glorified, pompous demagogue for the NeoCon American Religious Right. What I find most objectionable, is that Steyn constantly invokes George Bush as some kind of savior for the Christian West. However, George W. Bush is not a very popular figure these days around the world or in the United States. He is even becoming a pariah within his own party. Many Republicans are beginning to admit that the war in Iraq was a mistake, and that Bush was a poor choice to be their president. George Bush was a rich drunken underacheiving frat boy who became president because of his Daddy's connections. So when even Conservatives are turning away from Bush, but he remains one of Steyn's favorites, it's difficult to take his slanted views of too seriously. Steyn may be correct that radical Islamic fundamentalism is a threat, but he often misrepresents the facts and distorts the truth. For that reason, Steyn has little credibility and should be regarded as a charlatan and a fraud.

Anonymous said...

What I find most objectionable about Mark Steyn essays, is the manner in which he justifies his anti-Muslim thought. He misrepresents peoples of the West by suggesting that the United States is the seat of Christianity and the heart of enlightened Western thinking. It is not. Nor is George Bush the annointed heir apparent of Jesus Christ. Bush and his cohorts speak not for the West but narrow, neoconservative ideological interests which are wreaking havoc not only upon the United States, but the rest of the world. Steyn's writings are disguised, right-wing, hate-filled, anti-Islamic diatribes. Steyn claims that he and the people he represents are Christians. But in reality, he and his ilk are the ideological NeoCon equivalent of a perverted form of Osama bin Laden's version of Islam, but in reverse. Just as the latter do not represent the the entire Muslim world, Steyn, Bush and the NeoCons are do not represent mainstream Western thought. They might think they do, but they do not. Therefore, many of the premises which Steyn uses to support his arguments are false. Much of Sten's writing amounts to hate-mongering by pitting Muslim against Christian. While there are good, decent, well-meaning conservatives out there, Steyn is a NeoCon to whose ideas I certainly do not adhere.