The Consequences of Capitulation

Eugene Volokh forecasts the grim future of those who, like Comedy Central, capitulate to bullying blowhards without a fight (my bolds):

The consequence of this position is that the thugs win and people have more incentive to be thugs. There are lots of people out there who would very much like to get certain kind of material removed, whether religious or political. The more they see others winning, the more they will be likely to do the same. Behavior that gets rewarded gets repeated.

How true. And if you don't believe Prof. Volokh, just ask Richard Warman.

Dudley (Do-Right) Does Kandahar

In Canada these days, the wimpish constabulary is content to sit back and allow angry mobs to, say, imperil Zionists and shut down campus lectures by "bigoted" American blondes. Ah, but import them to a war scene, and they suddenly become brave and all-powerful, as per this from the Ceeb:

Canadian combat troops are slated to leave Afghanistan next summer, but RCMP Commissioner William Elliott said Saturday he expects his personnel will have to stay behind to undertake the "huge challenge" of training police officers.

About 50 RCMP and other civilian Canadian police are posted to Afghanistan as part of a mission to train the Afghan National Police. The ANP, as its known, has had a reputation for roadside shakedowns and graft that Canadian officials hope mentoring, training and supervision will eradicate...

Let me get this straight. They're afraid to deal with rowdies here in Canada, but they're going to train corrupt primitifs in an area where roadside bombs set by jihadis are an ongoing hazard?

M'kay. And maybe once they're finished in Afghanistan, they can come home and "mentor" some Somalis.

Tea and a Lack of Sympathy

This is what passes for humour/incisive commentary in the New York Times--the "clever" gas-baggery of Thomas L. Friedman (my bolds):

I’ve been trying to understand the Tea Party Movement. Sounds like a lot of angry people who want to get the government out of their lives and cut both taxes and the deficit. Nothing wrong with that — although one does wonder where they were in the Bush years. Never mind. I’m sure like all such protest movements the Tea Partiers will get their 10 to 20 percent of the vote. But should the Tea Partiers actually aspire to break out of that range, attract lots of young people and become something more than just entertainment for Fox News, I have a suggestion:

Become the Green Tea Party.

I’d be happy to design the T-shirt logo and write the manifesto. The logo is easy. It would show young Americans throwing barrels of oil imported from Venezuela and Saudi Arabia into Boston Harbor.

The manifesto is easy, too: “We, the Green Tea Party, believe that the most effective way to advance America’s national security and economic vitality would be to impose a $10 “Patriot Fee” on every barrel of imported oil, with all proceeds going to pay down our national debt.”...

Where were they during the Bush years? Er, does Tom not "get" the Tea Party shtick at all? It's a revolt against Barack H. Obama's Big Government agenda and his kiting the national debt into the stratosphere. Where were they pre-BHO? Living their lives. Minding their own beeswax. Not paying a whole lot of attention to Washington hijinks because--and I believe this is key--Bush did not have a Big Government agenda and was not kiting the national debt into the stratosphere.

It ain't exactly rocket science, Flat Tom.

Bollocks on Rye With a Side of Cole Slaw and Pickles

The Ceej is in a major snit over Steyn:

In his April 12, 2010 Maclean’s column, “True, North, Strong, Not Free,” journalist Mark Steyn claimed that Canadian Jewish Congress had taken a variety of positions directly against the interests of Canada’s Jewish community. Mr. Steyn, however, rooted his assertions in quotations that Canadian Jewish Congress never uttered. Maclean’s apologizes for this misattribution in its current issue. Please click here to read Congress’s letter to the editor of Maclean’s as well as Maclean’s apology. Mr. Steyn has neither apologized nor even acknowledged his error and continues to post the fallacious column, without any clarification, on his private website.

Apparently what happened is that Steyn misattrubuted an article written by a Mississauga News scribbler  posted on the Ceej site as being the words of Bernie Farber. An honest mistake, since the scribbler wrote, in essence, that that old saw about sticks and stones breaking bones but names never hurting you was a load of crapola; in a similar vein, Mr. Farber, one of our land's most vocal and vehement proponents of state censorship, had been heard to observe that "hate speech" almost always invariably leads to genocide and that Canadian Jewry's sense of "well-being" hinges on Section 13 remaining on the books. Mr. Farber took enormous--dare one say excessive?--umbrage at having such comments placed in his mouth, despite the fact that the following are some of the things he has been heard to utter:

• "If the destructive language of the last century teaches us anything it is that destructive language, left unchecked, can lead to destructive action."
• "The Internet must be tamed."
• "The blogosphere is sadly replete with bullies, jerks, racists, homophobes and bigots. But here my friends is the kicker, these same racist, bigots and misogynists all “love” Israel and as a result there are those in our community who will tolerate them even accept them. Accepting those who engage in motsi ra can never be OK….ever!"

And let's not forget this golden oldie, from a Ceej publication:

Anti-hate laws under our criminal code and human rights legislation continue to offer much needed protection for minorities in Canada. Yes, by all means let's fix the parts of the law that are broken, but let us not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Now, I ask you: does that sound like someone who would ever concur with the sentiments expressed in the Mississauga News article posted on the Ceej site, i.e. that sticks and stones can break one's bones but only Section 13 and the CHRC can protect the vulnerable from dangerous "haters" (like the ones that the Ceej's beloved "Nazi" hunter, Richard Warman, has turned up in his tireless Web-probings)?

How awful it must be for Mr. Farber to have had such alien concepts misattributed to him!

Not Too Much To Ask, Eh?

Mahmoud Abbas calls on Obama to "impose" a solution on the Middle East conflist (sic)

Cheesed Off

How craven is Comedy Central? So craven that it capitulated sans grumble to a some loser named Cheeser. The NY Post has the ridiculous details:

It was no joking matter to the NYPD.

Even before Comedy Central's "South Park" aired its episode that purported to feature the Prophet Mohammed in a bear suit, security was tightened at the cable network's Midtown headquarters and satellite offices around Manhattan.

Tipped off by blogs that the episode would air, cops beefed up security to ward off any attacks on Comedy Central by aggrieved Islamic fanatics who believe any depictions of the prophet are punishable by death.

On Wednesday, Comedy Central aired a heavily censored version of the episode that showed it was actually Santa Claus -- not Mohammed -- in the bear suit.

So far, the only public threat came from a group of American converts to Islam who run the Web site Revolution Muslim.

"May Allah kill [creators] Matt Stone and Trey Parker and burn them in Hell for all eternity. They insult our prophets Mohammed, Jesus, and Moses," wrote Zachary "Abu Talhah al-Amrike" Cheeser.

Ooo, how "edgy"--making fun of Santa. (Rumour has it Mrs. Claus was a mere moppet of six when she and the old goat got hitched. Also, his name is an anagram for "Satan".)

Update: The Cheeseheads issue a "clarification" (and, no, this is not a parody):

Please spread this around in sha’a Allah.


Clarifying the South Park Response and Calling on Others to Join in the Defense of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him)– RevolutionMuslim.com

In the name of Allah the Beneficent the Merciful, all praise is due to Allah the Lord of all that exists, and may blessings and peace be upon the Messenger of Allah Muhammad, and I bear witness that there is no deity worthy of worship except for Allah, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger,

As for what follows,

In light of the volume of attention being given to our response to the recent South Park episode we feel compelled to issue a statement clarifying the issue to both Muslims and non-Muslims alike. We would like to point out that we are not against a rational dialogue with either group and would like to take this opportunity to ask all to read and respond with an objective mind. We live in an age of media concision, and a consequential reality which tends to afford very little opportunity for in depth discussion.

Our intention with this explanation is only, Allah willing, to create the possibility that a deeper and more productive dialogue may be initiated. We seek to create an opportunity for correction of wrongs and the alteration of behavior that many may suggest is insignificant, but nevertheless is a behavior which we hold to be not only sacrilegious, but which we feel typifies a cancer which bites at the root of global injustice. The cancer we are referring to is that of American imperialism and its coincident culture of pagan hedonistic barbarism, a culture which drives to dehumanize the intrinsic morality of the rest of the world. As it stands today the vast majority of the world has witnessed the cloud of American debauchery, and those whom it has not hovered over have at the very least been affected by its dust.

This past week South Park aired an episode which insulted three of our beloved prophets: Musa (Moses), ‘Isa (Jesus), and Muhammad, peace be upon them all. Not only did they do this, but within the episode the makers of South Park made it very clear that they knew how the Muslims would feel and potentially respond to their show. In an effort to cover their actual intention to incite, the creators of South Park carefully contrived a plotline that they believed could only stump those Muslim extremists that may arise to defend the honor of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). They wished to degrade and mock a man who is held in highest regard by Muslims and many Non-Muslims alike, and indeed many have categorized Muhammad (peace be upon him) as the most influential human being that ever walked on Earth.

By placing the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in a bear suit, the creators of South Park sought to insult the sacred, and show their blatant and general disregard for religion. By insulting our beloved Prophet (peace be upon him) without the outright depicting of his image, the creators of South Park thought that they had found some loophole in the Muslim faith for them to mock...

Yes, what on Earth were you thinking, South Park creators? Surely you must have know that (to paraphrase a famously solemn Ayatollah) "there are no loopholes in Islam."

Royal Flush

BCF's update on the Guy Earle case prompted me to take a look at what's coming up, kangaroo court-wise, for the the B.C. marsupials. Perusing the list of upcoming hearings, my eyes fell upon one with a mysterious complainant, identified only by the initial "G". Typically in in these complaints, the person on the receiving end is a small business owner trying to keep his head above water. In this instance, however, there's a most regal personage being asked to account for her, um, "bigotry"--"Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia as represented by the Ministry of Housing and Social Development, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia as represented by Ministry of the Attorney General, Robinson."

Well, if you're looking to get someone to cough up major coin, Her Majesty the Queen is an excellent prospect. They say she's loaded. ;-)

Rush to Judgement

In line with his confreres on the left who can't stand opposition to their agenda and are quick to label it as "scary" and/or "seditious," Toronto Star scribbler Mitch Potter queries: Is paranoid U.S. losing (its) grip on reality?'

I think I'll let "seditionist" Rush Limbaugh field that one:

Like the millions of citizens who’ve peacefully risen up and attended thousands of rallies in protest, I seek nothing more than the preservation of the social contract that undergirds our society. I do not hate the government, as the left does when it is not running it. I love this country. And because I do, I insist that the temporary inhabitants of high political office comply with the Constitution, honor our God-given unalienable rights, and respect our hard-earned private property. For this I am called seditious, among other things, by some of the very people who’ve condemned this society?

I reject the notion that America is in a well-deserved decline, that she and her citizens are unexceptional. I do not believe America is the problem in the world. I believe America is the solution to the world’s problems. I reject a foreign policy that treats our allies like our enemies and our enemies like our allies. I condemn the president traveling the world apologizing for America’s great contributions to mankind. And I condemn his soft-peddling the dangers we face from terrorism. For this I am inciting violence?

The left reminds me of that old Peanuts line: They love mankind. It's (ordinary) people they can't stand. Especially ones who balk at their warrior-God, Sillyman the Magnificent.

A Major Victory for Pamela, Robert, 'Apostates' and Free Speech

That series of ads on Miami buses offereing help for Muslims looking to leave the faith (an act of "apostasy" which merits a death sentence under the terms of sharia) will be allowed to run after all. Kudos to indefatigable anti-jihadis Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer for not caving in the face of opposition (like, say, Comedy Central did).

A Disturbing--and 'Inexplicable'--Transformation

David Brooks uses the lamest of excuses (essentially, a reworking of the phrase sh*t happens) in trying to account for how such a seeming "moderate" as Barack Jekyll could have morphed into humungous government Barack Hyde.

Iggy's Ellipses

That dot dot dot (...) can sure do wonders when you're trying to flog a book. Just ask "Honest" Iggy, currently in major freak out mode due to an ex-MP and mega-hyped allegations about cocaine and "busty hookers." Endeavoring to shift a few more copies of his snoozerama True Patriot Love, Iggy and his publisher resorted to a little ellipis legerdemain. From the Ceeb:

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff was accused Friday of twisting media reviews to promote paperback sales of his latest book, True Patriot Love.

The book traces the influence of several generations of Ignatieff's mother's family, the Grants.

The jacket of the book includes a number of excerpts from newspaper critiques that leave the impression it won rave reviews when first published last spring.

Take this snippet from the National Post: "Plenty of scope for a rich story ... Some wonderful anecdotes, particularly about George P. Grant ... Well written."

In fact, the Post review in its entirety was far from laudatory.
"True Patriot Love offers little that is new on the Grants save some wonderful anecdotes, particularly about George P. Grant," wrote reviewer Robert L. Fraser.

"As an exploration of patriotism, it offers up clichés about modern Canada but little more.True Patriot Love is a well-written disappointment."

Oops! Well, it's definitely not as sexy as that "busty hookers" trope, but it has prompted at least one Tory to call Iggy's suitability for the highest office into question:

"This is the type of dishonesty that not even a first-year university student could get away with," Alberta Tory MP Chris Warkentin told the House of Commons.

"I am wondering if the leader of the Opposition really believes that this is honesty or if this is maybe a case of deceitfulness."

I think there are plenty of other reasons to question Iggy's fitness for office. This is maybe--or merely--a case of Iggy trying to sell more crappy books.