The FLUBA Shadow Gnat Lileks' Father Committee notes an atypical error in reasoning in his Screedblog for July 21st:
Bombing Mecca to revenge the acts of maniacs is like nuking the Vatican to protest the pedophilia scandal in Boston. The idea appeals to those whose nuanced study of Islam makes them conclude it’s better to alienate one billion people than defeat a fraction of the same group.
First, the Vatican is not equivilent to Mecca (or Medina). Even The Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem wouldn't be that. Not to mention that there aren't Christian fanatics blowing themselves and innocent bystanders to pieces in Islamic metropolises around the world.
The idea first floated by Congressman Tancredo, isn't at all ridiculous. There already are millions (and possibly a billion) of alienated Muslims around the world, and they are profoundly emotionally disturbed. How exactly does one deal with this type of depravity (link courtesy of Betsy Newmark):
...one of the London bombers, Shehzad Tanweer, boasted of wanting to die in a revenge attack over the way Muslims are treated.
...Tanweer confessed to his cousin his ambition to become a “holy warrior”. At his father’s home village 30 miles from Faisalabad, Mohammad Saleem described yesterday how Tanweer, 22, hero-worshipped Osama bin Laden.
Mr Saleem supported his cousin’s bombing at Aldgate station which killed seven people, saying: “Whatever he has done, if he has done it, then he has done right.” He recalled how Tanweer argued with family and friends about the need for violent retaliation over US abuse of Muslim prisoners in Guantanamo Bay.
About which--after thanking the people of Illinois for giving us Senator Dick Durbin--we have to do something to put a stop to their deadly activities.
If the United States let it be known to the Muslim world that Osama bin Laden's organization was engaging in a course of action that will lead to the total destruction of that religion's holiest sites, just how popular would he be?