Pelle Billing, my new favourite antagonist, has written a new article for Men’s News Daily. The article is about social structures, and although I don’t buy the part about identity politics being wrong (it only became problematic for white, straight men when they had to share power with blacks, gays, and women), I do find it interesting that Dr Billing writes,

Denying the impact of structures is not only ineffective, it is fairly silly too. Whenever you meet someone from a different country you immediatly notice that they speak a different language, and have different customs and traditions. How can we explain this without acknowledging the importance of cultural and societal structures?

The next step for Billing should be to acknowledge that these customs and traditions have an impact on how we judge what is in the interest of the individual. The white men of Christian origin that make up Billing’s masculinist network on Facebook are perhaps not as culturally unbiased as their self-righteous rhetoric suggests.

The National Geographic had launched a series of videos that will examine what goes on between your legs. Fascinating stuff.

Not too long ago, I sincerely thought that Lars Vilks had a genuine interest in free speech. But since it became known that a group of Muslim radicals planned to kill this Swedish artist over a silly cartoon he made in 2007, Mr Vilks’s smug face has been in all media. It has now become obvious to me that he has no interest in free speech—he is only interested in self-promotion. That’s all right. If he wants to be the Islamophobes’ new best friend, that’s fine by me. He has every right to draw cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad or any other religious personality, but the threat to free speech is better illustrated by the many brave people who stand up against tyrannical dictators.

It is very important that free and liberal countries protect the freedom of people like Vilks, but that does not mean we have to approve of people in need of such protection. Lars Vilks bore me and I don’t like his approach to the controversy he so deliberately created.

Jihad Jane is a lot more interesting.

An YouTube video about what Apple’s iPhone 4G might look like.

“I used to think that Christianity and Marxism were the last Jewish conspiracies to con the heathen,” Richard Kostelanetz writes. Well, that conspiracy is a whole lot easier to live with than an old hag’s fantasies about Israel wanting diaspora Jews to experience anti-Semitism.

On February 22, the Knesset adopted a law under which any Israeli government entering into peace talks must claim compensation for the estimated 856,000 Jews who were forced to leave Arab countries after the establishment of the State of Israel. This is great news. Western media is very eager to remind us of the 720,000 Arabs who left Palestine prior to the 1948 assault on Israel, but few journalists bother to remind us of the many Jews who were evicted from Middle Eastern countries where they had lived for many generations.

Remember this the next time you hear sob stories about evil Zionists forcing Palestinians to leave their country.

“Two Givati Brigade infantrymen were indicted on Thursday for allegedly ordering a Palestinian boy to open bags suspected of containing bombs during Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip last year,” the Jerusalem Post reports. I wonder when we will read about Hamas’s investigation into its own behaviour during the Gaza war.

The Swedish parliament now recognizes the 1915 Armenian genocide. Good!

The European Parliament calls for the immediate release of abducted Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. Who would have thought?

The first Palestinian rockets hit Israel since February. So far no condemnation from the international community. I figure they wait until Israel returns the fire.

You might think it’s an easy enough question, but it’s not to Congressman Eric Massa.

Colleen LaRose, an American woman known as Jihad Jane, is on the cover of every Swedish tabloid today. She is one of the eight people who allegedly planned to kill Swedish cartoonist Lars Vilks for his drawings of the Prophet Muhammad.

More here.

Update: Here are a few of the many press articles on Jihad Jane and Lars Vilks:

• Los Angles Times
• New York Times
• The Times
• The Guardian
• Jerusalem Post
• Ynetnews

Eight jihadists, including one American woman, have been arrested by the police on suspicions of conspiracy to murder Swedish cartoonist Lars Vilks.

See Vilks’s controversial drawings here.

The homophobic lobby is predicting a grim future of American soldiers who talk openly about their families:

Repealing DADT [Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell] isn’t about gays serving. They already serve. Repealing DADT is about gays telling. It’s about achieving endorsement of homosexuality, and gay activist agenda items, through both military regulation and military culture.

Yes, wouldn’t it be terrifying if gay soldier stopped pretending that their boyfriends back home are girlfriends? What would this truth-telling do to the army? Truth is scary.

This is really stupid. It’s better for the army as a whole if soldiers are allowed to speak the truth without having to fear being kicked out.

Meanwhile, Palestinian activists use the American free-speech legislation to humiliate Israel. That is fine by me. Stamp on the Israeli flag all you want.

The irony is that these activists demonstrate support of Hamas, an organization that does not recognize free speech or any other civil liberty.

Unlike the friends of Hamas, I support free speech for everyone. Mocking flags should not be allowed only for the politically wicked.

A group of Jewish-American activists have had enough of Israel Apartheid Week. Read more about my opinion on Israel Apartheid Week here.

— Who are you wearing?
— Mossad.

A new poll made for the BBC World Service suggests that almost four in five people around the world believe that access to the internet is a fundamental right. Madness! Internet is no more a human right than telephones or television. It is problematic that people think things like the Internet are fundamental rights when real human rights are not yet implemented throughout the world.

In December, I wrote an article on male circumcision for MalmöModeraten, a publication for the members of the Malmö chapter of the Moderate Party. In the article, I defended the freedom of religion and argued that Jews and Muslims must be allowed to perform one of the most fundamental rituals of Judaism and Islam. If the government prohibit them from doing so, it would violate a fundamental civil right.

In my article, I gave a short explanation of the various cultural background and scriptural justification for male circumcision; for example that Abraham circumcised his older son Ishmael when the boy was thirteen years old and his younger son Isaac on the boy’s eighth day.

Yesterday I received the latest issue of MalmöModeraten; I was chocked by a response that completely distorts everything I wrote. In a reply to me, local politician Elisabeth Elgh writes, “Your arguments for circumcision of small boys is based on biblical stories about Abraham’s sons where you claim that one can find that a ban on circumcision would be a violation of the freedom of religion.” Later she asks rhetorically if there are any other body parts that parents in name of religion could pay to have removed from their children. She finishes her article by stating that freedom of religion is about being able to choose religion.

It is obvious that Ms Elgh has no interest in a serious discussion. She not only fail to understand my article, she did not even read my name right.

In my article I wrote that a ban on circumcision would be to Jews and Muslims what a ban on baptism would be to Christians. A ban on any of these rituals would hit at the core of these religious cultures. It would be impossible to be a practising Jew if circumcision of boys was criminalized. Muslims might be able to adjust if a ban was restricted for younger boys.

Ms Elgh is wrong about freedom of religion. Article nine of the European Convention on Human Rights states that the every European Union citizen is free to manifest his or her religion in worship, teaching, practice, and observance. This convention was included in Sweden’s national constitution when the country became member of the EU in 1995.

My Swedish readers can compare my original article to Ms Elgh’s reply, which is pictured above. I have not yet decided if I will write a second article for the next issue of MalmöModeraten.

Update: Here’s the exact reading of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights:

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.

2. Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Here’s the exact reading of Article 10 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which is included in the Lisbon Treaty and bounding law for all EU member states since December 2009:

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right includes freedom to change religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or in private, to manifest religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.

There are now two European human-rights declarations that protect religious minorities’ right to practice and observe their religions.

OMG, it’s a tie!