D-Squared Digest officially condemns:
- Iranian laws on female clothing, and heavy-handed police behaviour in the riots their enforcement provokes
- Imprisonment and flogging of Iranian trades unionists in May last year
- The imprisonment of Mansour Osanloo
- Any doctoring of footage in the case of Mohammed al-Dura, if it at any point turns out that such doctoring took place
- Rocket attacks on civilian targets in Sderot and Ashkelon
- More or less anything Ken Livingstone has ever done
Further updates on what I'm condemning can be found here
I apologise for wasting readers' time with what looks like a pointless litany, but on this blog I occasionally write about such subjects as war crimes, the Geneva Conventions and the illegality of collective punishment of civilians, and I'd hate to think that my condemnations of everything else in the world weren't up to date. Because ... well, you know.
Thanks to Malky Muscular for originally inventing the concept and maintaining the web's definitive list of condemnerata.
I'm in the U.S and your condemnation of Ken Livingstone reminded me: whatever happened to Michael Portillo?
ReplyDeleteAh, I want to claim that I, in fact, invented the concept in a comments box at Lenin's Tomb, in which I produced a whole list of events that people may wish to condemn including the Rape of the Sabine Women and the Taking of Pelham 123.
ReplyDeleteSuccess has a thousand fathers...I too would like some credit for my 'Moderate Muslims immomoderate Muslim Apology Service' of 2002/2003 in which on requestion I would apologise on behalf of the nation's 'moderate' Muslims for anything their immoderate coreligionists had done over the past week - all in order to appease HP.
ReplyDeleteIs condemnation enough these days? Shouldn't D-Squared Digest both reject and denounce all these things?
ReplyDeleteAnd also denounce those people who do not similarly denounce them, and disassociate itself from these people?
ReplyDeleteThe question that must be asked; has D-Squared Digest condemned sufficiently to integrate into the greatest intellectual struggle of our times?
ReplyDeleteI'm going more for the "token, throat-clearing" end of things to be honest - I have no real ambition to not have the Dan Halutz Wannabe Faction call me an anti-Semite, I just want them to look a bit silly when they do it.
ReplyDeleteI condemn Dsquared for failing to condemn those things that Harry's Place has inadvertently failed to condemn. In their case, it can be forgiven as an accidental lapse, but in his we are forced to the conclusion that it is symptomatic of the fact that he is NOT A SERIOUS BLOGGER.
ReplyDeleteYour condemndations are rejected as (a) failing to employ the necessary linguistic formulae to make such condemnations effective; (b) untimely made; and (c) hollow in light of your continuing failure to make appropriate condemnations in connection with (i) the Tunguska event, (ii) the Teapot Dome scandal, (iii) the Profumo affair, etc., etc.
ReplyDeleteReminds me of a golden oldie I came across the other day (when I was revising my book).
ReplyDelete"In fact, while their decision to disown the men of violence must be considered a step forward, the fact remains that this decision was taken late, equivocally and opportunistically. This is precisely because these people have not abandoned either the profoundly negative and sterile substance of the political analysis from which they began, which hinges on the so-called ‘opposition to the system’, or the absolute void which they offer to the left ... They have dissociated themselves from the men of violence. Good: but if they still believe that republican democracy is a farce and that the parties and the unions are only servants of the bosses, and that the state is for defeating and not for changing, why have they dissociated themselves? Simply for fear of Cossiga? It is clear that this absurd vision and this doomed strategy could at any moment produce, once again, an upsurge of desperation and the philosophy of the gun."
Massimo Ghiara, "Silencing the guns is not enough", l'Unità , 20/5/77
Not being a terrorist isn't enough; not supporting the terrorists isn't enough; actually opposing the terrorists isn't enough, if we think you believe the kind of thing that people who support the terrorists believe.
Incidentally, will you condemn David Hirsch for accusing the Israeli government of anti-semitism... no, hold on, that's not right... accusing the Israeli government of accusing the Israeli government of... er...
Oh my god that Hirsh piece is fantastic. Talk about swallowing a reductio ad absurdum.
ReplyDelete