On Catch-22's

So according to some news site I'm unfamiliar with and a friend of mine named Claudia, Facebook's founder Mark Zuckerberg could be facing life imprisonment, death or life as an internationally hunted fugitive.

This of course because he and several other named parties created Facebook, Facebook then years later hosting a group for "International Draw Mohammad Day" which protested violence by Islamic extremists against (granted, tasteless) depictions of the Holy Prophet (blessed be his name) in popular media. This of course was highly insulting to anyone who takes being a Muslim seriously.

Since this group existed for a couple weeks before anyone important asked for it to be removed and Facebook immediately did so, Zuckerberg, who is not actually in charge of anything substantial, is obviously guilty of personally blaspheming The Prophet (BBHN). Long story short, the Pakistani representative to the U.N. is asking permission to bring this before the General Assembly and get Interpol to drag Zuckerberg out to be lynched tried for unholy crimes.

Honestly, I'm not sure I can infuse this with enough humor to make it funny-haha. Frankly, this is a best definition of a Catch-22 I've heard since "Catch-22 is such a long, dry book that no one can finish reading it, but since no one has finish it no one can complain about it being a legitimately bad book."

We grant freedoms of existence and expression in this country to people who would not grant us the same, but would then use our refusal to forcibly silence their extremism to meet their own objectives. We pried ourselves on allowing anyone to say anything unless it physically damages another human being, but it is that allowance itself that some take offense to, knowing we by principle can not silence their objections.

Extremists: can't live with them, can't descend to their methods of arguing.


But mostly the first thing, because they keep trying to imprison/kill people.



You know, as an aside, if you were to replace every instance of Islam in this post with "Scientology," every "Pakistan" with "Hollywood" and "extremism" with "Tom Cruise," this would all still be a perfectly valid editorial. Consider that for a moment.