Confronting Howard

Maybe this is just another exercise in "Howard hating" but aren't the PM's comments regarding Muslim dress a perfect example of his "I have nothing against Muslims but it's important that my base thinks I do" politics.

"I don't believe that you should ban wearing headscarfs but I do think the full garb is confronting and that is how most people feel," Mr Howard told Southern Cross Broadcasting.

Got that Muslims? We won't ban your traditional dress because it would harm our liberal democratic credentials, but just know that we don't approve, and if you want us to get off your back then ditching the full garb would be the best place to start.

Seriously, how does he know "most people" find the full garb confronting? Has he done a survey? Luckily there aren't any good journalists around to ask the obvious question - "How do you know that John?"

Howard simply can't afford to come out and openly criticise proposals to ban Islamic clothing (it might hurt him in the polls) so instead he sidesteps the issue by saying "we don't have plans to ban Islamic dress". This way, Islamaphobes still have hope that one day they may get their wish, and he can also say to his critics "What? When did I say we should ban traditional Islamic clothing?"

Then there's this:

"These are things that it's very hard to lay down legislation for."

Got that? It's not so much that Howard thinks banning Islamic dress is in itself wrong, it's the difficulty you have in writing legislation to do it. He's learnt from the French example that you can't write legislation explicitly banning Islamic dress - you need to make it unspecific as far as religion is concerned, and that means Christians and Jews may be effected. It's a real conundrum.

Let the avalanche of "He's just saying what everyone's thinking" opinion pieces and letters-to-the-editor begin.

Irving in Jail

How ridiculous.

An Austrian court has found the right-wing British historian David Irving guilty of denying the Holocaust and sentenced him to three years in prison.

Isn't the Austrian nation just a little embarrassed by this. "Hey everyone! This guy suggested something preposterous in '89 - let's throw him in the slammer!" I wonder if denying the 1994 genocide in Rwanda draws a similar sentence.

Expect the "suppressed genius" card to be played ad-nauseum from now on by other holocaust deniers the world over. The reasons why this law is a bad idea are so straightforward that it seems a waste of time to even spell it out here. Instead, I'll direct you to Ed Brayton's post on this matter.