Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Free to Defame?

Does the 1st amendment protect the making of untrue defamatory statements? The issue arises from the oppressive actions of a California woman who does not like her neighbours:

"Lemen owns a cottage only feet from the restaurant and led a campaign to restrict it because she said it disrupted the neighborhood. Aric Toll, 41, a chef who bought the restaurant and bar with his parents, filed a defamation lawsuit against Lemen, saying she was ruining his business.

After a trial, a judge ordered Lemen to stop videotaping Toll's customers and barred her from telling anyone that the bar makes sex videos, dabbles in child pornography, distributes illegal drugs, encourages lesbian activities, has mafia links, is a whorehouse or sells tainted food - all false statements, the court said, that Lemen had made. She appealed the order before it could be enforced.


It looks like the case could end up before SCOTUS. I don't think any prior restriction on the woman's speech is warranted. An award against her of large monetary damages should see justice done. Once defamation is forbidden, saying negative things about politicians could end up in court so often that political free speech would effectively be ended.

Though even lawsuits by politicians seeking monetary damages for defamation can be used to have a chilling effect -- which is more or less what has already happened in Singapore. As long as truth is an absolute defence, however, that should be of no great concern. Many jurisdictions, however, require that truth alone is not a sufficient defence in defamation cases. The utterance sometimes also has to be of "public benefit".

Partly because of the 1st Amendment, defamation is much harder to prove in the USA than it is in Britain or Australia, for instance. Gutnick vs. Dow Jones is a case in point for Australia.

Some comments from a lawyer about different jurisdictions here and a commentary on the current British situation here. I like the Australian laws best, oddly enough.
Radio station 'vilified' Lebanese people

But truth is no defence in the kangaroo courts ("Tribunals") that have sprung up in many countries to police political correctness:

"Leading Sydney broadcaster 2GB was guilty of vilifying Lebanese people when presenter Brian Wilshire said they were inbred and had very low IQs, according to an investigation by the media watchdog.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority found yesterday that a 2005 broadcast on the top talk station was a breach of the Commercial Radio Code of Practice. Wilshire made his remarks in a talkback segment late at night just days after the Cronulla riots.


For some facts on the Muslim inbreeding problem in Australia, see here. See also here on Muslim IQ.

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Illegal to Criticize Homosexuality in France

We read:

"A member of France's ruling party has been fined almost $4,000 for comments opposing homosexuality, under the country's hate speech law. Christian Vanneste was fined by a court in Douai, in northern France, and charged an additional $2,000 in court fees.

The case stemmed from comments Vanneste made in 2004, when the mayor of a small southwestern community performed a homosexual "marriage", later declared illegal. Vanneste said homosexuality was "inferior" to heterosexuality and said the practice would be "dangerous for humanity if it was pushed to the limit."


To me Vanneste's comments seem not only reasonable but true. But truth never has mattered to the Left. And there is obviously no right to say what you think in France. And exactly WHY should ANY group be beyond criticism?
Scandalous Party at Tarleton State University

We read:

"Photographs that partygoers posted on Internet sites showed some fraternity members and others eating fried chicken, drinking malt liquor from bottles wrapped in brown paper bags and dressed in faux gang apparel....

One picture shows a young white woman wearing a kerchief on her head and a red-and-white checkered apron and holding Aunt Jemima syrup....

The university continues to investigate to determine if students will face disciplinary action, which could range from a warning to suspension, said Wanda Mercer, vice president of student life.


Can you think of anything worse than a white man eating fried chicken or drinking liquor from a bottle? And BAN that syrup!

Seriously, if blacks tend to like fried chicken, what's wrong with mentioning it? And I have certainly drunk liquor out of a bottle at times! And I meant no ill to anybody by doing so.

Monday, January 29, 2007

Even Blacks not Allowed to Voice Dislike of Homosexuals

Even though most blacks DO scorn homosexuality:

"Isaiah Washington has entered a treatment facility. This is what sources connected to ABC and Touchstone have confirmed to me, after Life & Style magazine broke the story about an hour ago.

According to my ABC sources, one of the options the higher-ups at ABC/Disney had been considering was to release Washington from the cast of Grey's Anatomy, without giving him a farewell episode. However, I'm told by an insider that Washington agreed to do "whatever it takes" to keep his position at Grey's and to make amends with the gay and lesbian community. He also vowed to seek help for his psychological issues-hence, his entry into a treatment facility this morning.


I guess the funny hat helps!

My previous post about this was on 22nd.
Must not Diss Burger Flippers

We read:

"A leading restaurant association has called for the cancellation of a TV commercial featuring Britney Spears' estranged husband, Kevin Federline, as a failed rap star working in a fast-food eatery.

In a 30-second ad for Nationwide Insurance, Federline is shown dreaming he is a rap star but then snaps out of it to face reality -- he's working at a burger restaurant.

National Restaurant Association's Chief Executive Steven Anderson has written to Nationwide saying the ad leaves the impression that working in a restaurant is demeaning and unpleasant and asking the commercial to be dumped


The protesting restaurateurs must have limited awareness of pop culture because they seem to have missed that Federline is so pathetically lame that any comparison with him REALLY IS a terrible slur.

Sunday, January 28, 2007

China Catches the Madness

We read:

"Companies looking to reach China's consumer market with pig images during Year of the Pig celebrations next month will have to adjust after a national television network adopted a policy to be sensitive to the country's small Muslim population, according to published reports. China Central Television said it would ban all verbal and visual pork references from advertisements during Lunar New Year celebrations next month


Apparently Muslims are such delicate souls that they will self-combust just on seeing a picture of a pig! Jews too are forbidden from eating pigs but seem to have no problem with seeing pictures of them. Does that mean that Jews are stronger and wiser than Muslims? I think I had better not answer that!
That Pesky Woodpile Inhabitant Again

We read:

"A chief executive at one of the UK's largest financial services companies has apologised for using the phrase "n*gger in the woodpile".

Trevor Matthews, head of Standard Life's life and pensions business, made the comment at a staff presentation at its Edinburgh headquarters on Monday.

Matthews has posted an apology on the company's internal website and said the comment was "a terrible mistake".


To the best of my recollection, the expression comes from an old story in which a black thief hid in a woodpile -- a story from those dim faroff days when you were allowed to criticize anyone you wanted to.

Saturday, January 27, 2007

Must not Abuse the English!

It had to happen. For centuries, lots of people (particularly the Scots and the Irish) spoke ill of the English. But Australians are apparently now not supposed to do so.

Two translations may be needed below. "Pom" is the common word for the English in Australia but it is only very faintly derogatory. Many of us are to this day British-born, after all.

The other word is one common in both Australia and Britain but seems little-known in America: "whingeing" means whining, particularly the sort of whining an overtired baby or toddler does.

Compared with Americans, the English are much more likely to grumble about things rather than do something about it and in Australia they also sometimes compare various features of Australian life unfavourably with how it was back in England.

Australians are mostly a happy and laid-back lot (we have reason to be) so they complain less and they find it amusing that Poms who criticize Australia choose to live here. So the term "Whingeing Pom" is widely used and will be rapidly applied to any Pom who DOES whinge. Now read on:

"It's OK to use the word "Pom", but not in connection with lots of references to whingeing.

Radio advertisements for Tooheys New Super Cold beer featuring British men singing "Whinge whine bang-on gripe grumble" and "Slag whinge snivel cry 'Mummy"' to the tune of Land of Hope and Glory were banned yesterday by the advertising watchdog.

The Advertising Standards Board, which said last month it was acceptable to use "Pom" in the same ad campaign, has now ruled it vilifies the English to associate Poms with too much whingeing.


The ban will be greeted by most Australians with mere amusement.
Cheering at School Sports Events is Becoming Strictly Regulated

Fun not allowed. What next?

"WIAA policy states that only cheers supporting one's own team are permitted - no put-downs, no innuendos. Every BHS game has a contest manager, often an administrator, to reel in a rowdy crowd and put a damper on inappropriate cheers, signs or attire.....

"It's unfortunate that some kids who legitimately want to cheer for their team are stuck in the middle of it," said School Board President Kevin Vodak. "But the bottom line to us was that the Badger Conference approves only positive cheers for your team. Maybe the original intent was to skirt the rules, to have some fun, but the hidden meaning was well known among students and it's gotten out of hand."

Head boys basketball coach Tom Steinhorst said a little old-fashioned "De-fense, de-fense" can go a long way. "(Student fans) do what they feel is cute and funny, and cute and funny aren't what we're looking for. We're looking for fire up, loud, positive, a great atmosphere," he said. "A lot of these cheers have nothing to do with our team; they're nonsense." ....

The very people assigned to riling up the crowd at the basketball games - the cheerleaders - are having trouble making headway with a sometimes rowdy student section. "We often don't get a lot of participation from the crowd at all," said Cheer Squad advisor Teri Fichter.....

"The cheers our squads do are politically correct," she said. "The ones (the fans) come up with are a little more risky."


Good to see that the kids are resisting being dictated to. School political correctness has the saving grace of being BORING -- so that actually discredits it among kids.

Taranto has more.

Friday, January 26, 2007

Texas Mayor Singles Out N-Word for Ban

We read:

"It's one of the most reviled words in the English language, but if one Texas mayor gets his way, getting caught uttering the "N-word" will hit offenders where it hurts.

Mayor Ken Corley of Brazoria, Texas, has proposed a city ordinance that would make using the word in an offensive fashion a crime equal to disturbing the peace and punishable by a fine of up to $500. But legal experts said it's unlikely the law will stand up to the First Amendment....

Under the proposed Brazoria ordinance, users of the N-word would be fined only if a complaint were filed against them, thus protecting those who think they are using the word as a term of endearment.


A number of comments:

1). "most reviled words in the English language". Reviled in the current U.S. climate of PC hysteria would be more accurate. We DO speak English in Australia but the High Court of Australia recently ruled that the word is not offensive at all in Australia.

2). The loophole that you can avoid penalty by claiming that you used the word affectionately is fun. Can whites use that defence? And if whites are disbelieved while blacks ARE believed, is that racism? And what if a black uses the word abusively? How do you prove that? Or don't you try? And is THAT racism?

3). Why ban just one "reviled" word? What about the c-word, the f-word etc. Is not singling out just one racial word racism? And too bad there's nothing about calling a white man a "cracka", eh?

4). Anybody using the word in writing would be smart to spell it with a single "g", as "niger" is simply the Latin word for black and even Brazoria, Texas, is unlikely to ban Latin.

5). I occasionally refer to people of sub-Saharan African ancestry as "negroes" but I believe that that word is "offensive" too in America. Should that word be banned too? It IS, however, the scientific term -- though Leftists would say that there is NO scientific term for people of African ancestry. But I wonder how people of African ancestry can be given special preferences ("affirmative action") if they cannot be scientifically described?
Confederate Flag Ban being Challenged as Free Speech Violation

We read:

"Bryce Archambo says, a high school administrator suspended him a day last September, when he disobeyed a direct order to take off his shirt or turn it inside out. It had a Confederate Flag on it. His hat did too.

He, his family, and some friends are now trying to prove their point, with a protest....

District lawyer, Tom Mickes, insists school administrators never suspended Bryce, they only asked him to turn the shirt inside out, because some students, both African-Americans and whites, might be offended by the rebel flag on it.....

Two more students tell News 4 a school administrator suspended them for not turning their shirts inside out.


Note that the article above includes a comment by a black who defends display of the flag. There is news of the protest here. It happens today.
Supreme Court Agrees to Hear 'Bong Hits 4 Jesus' Free Speech Case

We read:

"The Supreme Court stepped into a dispute over free speech rights Friday involving a suspended high school student and his banner that proclaimed "Bong Hits 4 Jesus."

Justices agreed to hear the appeal by the Juneau, Alaska, school board and principal Deborah Morse of a lower court ruling that allowed the student's civil rights lawsuit to proceed. The school board hired former Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr to argue its case to the high court.

Morse suspended Frederick after he displayed the banner, with its reference to marijuana use, when the Olympic torch passed through Juneau in 2002 on its way to the Winter Games in Salt Lake City. Frederick, then a senior, was off school property when he hoisted the banner but was suspended for violating the school's policy of promoting illegal substances at a school-sanctioned event.

The school board upheld the suspension and a federal judge initially dismissed Frederick's lawsuit before the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals called the banner vague and nonsensical, but said that Frederick's civil rights had been violated.


Thursday, January 25, 2007

Racism! Whites not allowed in Black Caucus

We read:

"Freshman Rep. Stephen I. Cohen, D-Tenn., is not joining the Congressional Black Caucus after several current and former members made it clear that a white lawmaker was not welcome.

"I think they're real happy I'm not going to join," said Cohen, who succeeded Rep. Harold Ford, D-Tenn., in a majority-black Memphis district. "It's their caucus and they do things their way. You don't force your way in. You need to be invited."


Imagine the hysteria if there were a white caucus that blacks were barred from! ANY group wherein blacks were not allowed would be accused of racism so there are clearly a lot of racists in Congress -- black ones.

It rather reminds me of an old Australian political joke:

Q. What's the difference between a caucus and a cactus?
A. With a cactus, all the pricks are on the outside.
Confused thinking?

We read:

"The Oglala Sioux Tribe demanded Thursday that University of Illinois officials return the regalia worn by the school's Chief Illiniwek mascot, including the eagle feathers that were once part of the costume....

The resolution was submitted to the university's board of trustees ahead of its Thursday meeting in Chicago. It called the use of Chief Illiniwek "a degrading racial stereotype." ....

The university bought the costume, including a headdress with eagle feathers, in 1982 from Sioux Chief Frank Fools Crow, whose wife made it....

In 2005, the NCAA decided that Illiniwek and his dance are "hostile and abusive" toward American Indians, and barred Illinois from hosting postseason events.


It's degrading and abusive but they still want it back?

A blogger who has mixed sympathies about the matter says:

"I still believe it's very demeaning to use Indian mascots in sports. How would white people feel if sports teams used cartoonish images of them, like perhaps the Cowboys, Vikings, 49ers, Fighting Irish, Quakers, Celtics, Patriots."

"Vikings" sounds rather good to me and he is obviously unaware of a major Scottish football team called "Celtic". Neither they nor any of their supporters seem to feel demeaned by the name. In religiously-divided Glasgow, they are the Catholic team. Many Irish migrated to Glasgow in the 19th century (I am myself descended from one of the families concerned) and their descendants support the Celtics.
Laughing at someone who is black is racism?

Whites get practical jokes played on them plenty of times but they have not got a "card" that can earn them millions of dollars out of it. From loony Los Angeles:

"The city is paying $2.7 million to settle a lawsuit from a black firefighter who claims he suffered racial discrimination after co-workers served him spaghetti laced with dog food. The City Council approved the award Wednesday, 11-1.

In his lawsuit, firefighter Tennie Pierce, 51, said after he took a bite of the meal two years ago, he noticed other firefighters laughing. He demanded to know what was in the food after a second bite but nobody answered.

Pierce said he suffered retaliation for reporting the incident and verbal slurs, insults and derogatory remarks, including taunting by firefighters "barking like dogs (and) asking him how dog food tasted," the lawsuit said.

David Wellman, a professor at the University of California, Santa Cruz hired by Pierce's attorney, said the association of a black man and dog food "resonates with the deep historical roots of slavery and the corresponding dehumanization." "It's not just silly stuff. It's racially motivated," he said.



Larry Elder points out that the prank was clearly NOT racist.

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

"Third World" a Racist Term?

From Britain:

"Will Hutton, the author and left-leaning polemicist, is at the centre of a race row after describing a respected Asian professor of economics as a "Third World intellectual".

The head of the Work Foundation and former editor of The Observer made the comment about Lord Desai, the Labour peer, in an exchange of letters in Prospect magazine over the economic prospects of China....

Mr Hutton's comment has angered academics. Professor David Dabydeen, of Warwick University, said that it was racist. "Hutton has made a sad and dreadful attempt to ghettoise ideas that are different from his because they are voiced by a person of colour."


I guess Third World and Western countries are really the same in all respects -- or if they are not the same we must not mention it. I was very supportive of Indian academics and their work during my research career but I did notice some characteristic differences -- some desirable, some not. But I guess I am not allowed to mentions instances of that.
"Minority" Protection Likely to Defeat EU Swastika ban

We read:

"Hindus in Europe have joined forces against a German proposal to ban the display of the swastika across the European Union, a Hindu leader said. Ramesh Kallidai of the Hindu Forum of Britain said the swastika had been a symbol of peace for thousands of years before the Nazis adopted it. He said a ban on the symbol would discriminate against Hindus....

The group said banning the swastika was equivalent to banning the cross simply because the Ku Klux Klan had used burning crosses.


The Indian symbol is most usually the mirror image of the German one but they do use it both ways

My previous comment on the above matter was on 16th.
Speaking English is racist?

That seems to be the idea here:

"A bar owner who faced a discrimination complaint over a message in his window has removed a sign that read "For Service Speak English" and replaced it with one reading "Here We Speak English."

Housing Opportunities Made Equal, an area agency that handles fair-housing issues, filed a complaint with the state in July 2005 over the original sign. The Ohio Civil Rights Commission later ruled that it was discriminatory.

Ullum, 64, removed the "For Service Speak English" sign in November as part of a settlement agreement. The housing agency will not take issue with the new sign, executive director Elizabeth Brown said.


It's discriminatory to ask people to speak the national language? I guess it's discriminatory not to go out with ugly women too. I mentioned this case at its outset -- on October 9, 2005.

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

National flag a symbol of racism?

Today Australia, tomorrow the USA?

"The Australian flag has been banned from this year's Big Day Out in Sydney after organisers branded it a "gang colour" and symbol of hate.

The Daily Telegraph has learned organisers of the Aussie rock festival at Homebush will confiscate any flag or bandana bearing the national symbol at the gate.


How the elite hate the patriotism of ordinary people! They claim that the ban is because "racists" use the flag but is not their reaction to the deeds and attitudes of a tiny minority an example of that evil, overgeneralized "stereotyping" that they condemn in others? By the same logic, all blacks are to blame for the actions of the criminal minority of blacks.
Blacks Object To Robert E. Lee Honor

Once again an attempt is made to obliterate any honorable mention of Southern history:

"A Hillsborough County proclamation honoring Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee has angered some black leaders. "That's a slap in the face to every African-American, Hispanic, and every minority in the county," said Curtis Stokes, president of the Hillsborough chapter of the NAACP....

Commission Chairman Jim Norman read the "Year of Lee" proclamation Thursday as members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans and the United Daughters of the Confederacy stood in front of the commission dais.


That Lee was a man of great brilliance and personal integrity must not be mentioned, of course.

Monday, January 22, 2007

Black Star Gets off Lightly for Using Word "f*ggot"

He would be out of work now if he had been white:

"The heated controversy at ABC's top show, "Grey's Anatomy," boiled over Thursday as the network rebuked co-star Isaiah Washington for an anti-gay comment and Washington issued a lengthy apology.

"We are greatly dismayed that Mr. Washington chose to use such inappropriate language at the Golden Globes, language that he himself deemed `unfortunate' in his previous public apology," the network said in a statement....

In his apology Thursday, Washington acknowledged "repeating the word Monday night."


The Left tell us that blacks can never be guilty of racism so maybe the same applies to "homophobia". The homosexuals want him fired, however. How insensitive they are about the legacy of slavery that Mr Washington undoubtedly suffers from!
Death for Free Speech in Muslim Turkey

We read:

"A prominent Turkish-Armenian editor, convicted in 2005 of insulting Turkish identity, has been shot dead outside his newspaper's office in Istanbul.

Crowds of Hrant Dink's colleagues and supporters gathered at the scene, chanting their outrage at his murder.

Dink was given a six-month suspended sentence in October 2005 after writing about the Armenian "genocide" of 1915.


Note that the despicable BBC puts the word "genocide" in quotes. Muslims killing a million Armenians is NOT genocide??
Ya Gotta Laugh

Various media figures from the American Left recently organized a "conference" about media reform. You can see an advertisement about it here. Right in the middle of the page is a banner saying: "Save the Internet. Join the fight for internet freedom".

How Orwellian can you get? Half a century ago Orwell portrayed the Left as always calling things by their opposite and nothing has changed. Who is it that the internet needs "saving" from? None other than the Left with their constant attempts to censor anything they disagree with by calling it "hate speech".

The only freedom Leftists are interested in is the Stalin type: "Freedom to agree with me".

There's an extended commentary on the conference here. Excerpt:

"Media reform sounds like a good cause. But the gathering here of more than 2,000 activists turned out to be an effort to push the Democratic Party further to the left and get more "progressive" voices in the media, while proposing to use the power of the federal government to silence conservatives"

Sunday, January 21, 2007

"Racist" British TV Update

Jade Goody -- pictured above in a pic from a website devoted to her -- was the main source of the racist remarks against Indian actress Shilpa Shetty noted here on 19th. She has now been voted off the show by the audience. That seems appropriate justice to me.

The difference in style between the two women should be obvious and presumably explains a lot.
Britain: Anti-Christian Discrimination Dropped

We read:

"British Airways is changing its uniform policy to allow all religious symbols, including crosses, to be worn openly.

BA announced a review last year after a row erupted when Heathrow check-in worker Nadia Eweida challenged a ban on her visibly wearing a cross necklace. The airline now says it will allow religious symbols such as lapel pins and "some flexibility for individuals to wear a symbol of faith on a chain".

BA had banned crosses on chains, but allowed hijabs and turbans to be worn.


The mealy-mouthed comments by BA on the matter are rather sickening.
Bar Owner not Allowed to Set Dress Standards for Entry to his Private Property?

We read:

"The American Civil Liberties Union is suing a bar owner over his policy of barring people who wear their hair in cornrows, dreadlocks or twists.

In a federal lawsuit, the Virginia chapter of the ACLU says the Kokoamos Island Bar, Grill and Yacht Club's policy amounts to racial discrimination because it singles out hairstyles usually worn by black customers.

The group filed the suit Thursday in U.S. District Court against Kokoamos owner Barry Davis on behalf of Myron Evans and Kimberley Hines. Evans was denied entry in June and Hines was turned way in August, an ACLU statement said.


Apparently, at least one of the people that the ACLU is suing on behalf of is white... which rather undermines the racism argument.


Saturday, January 20, 2007

No Criticism of Homosexuality Allowed?

The latest attack on free speech about homosexuality is from Australia:

"Tasmania's Anti-Discrimination Tribunal has ruled that the Liberal Party should be investigated over a pamphlet it authorised during last year's state election.
The document attacked the Greens' policy allowing same-sex marriage as "socially destructive",


So "socially destructive" is hate-speech? The Liberal Party is Australia'as major conservative party. In Australia, liberals really do believe in liberty, unlike the USA.

The complaint is most unlikely to succeed as the High Court of Australia has recently ruled that Australians do have a constitutional right of free speech in political matters.
Another Call to Censor Global Warming Skeptics

From the Weather Channel we read:

"I'd like to take that suggestion a step further. If a meteorologist has an AMS Seal of Approval, which is used to confer legitimacy to TV meteorologists, then meteorologists have a responsibility to truly educate themselves on the science of global warming.....

If a meteorologist can't speak to the fundamental science of climate change, then maybe the AMS shouldn't give them a Seal of Approval.

Heidi Cullen, the fluffy-brained "expert" making those statements just believes all she is told by the "authorities", of course. She shows no sign of critical thinking or evaluation of the evidence at all. In Galileo's day she would be trying to shut up Galileo for saying that the earth revolves around the sun. If she were a Muslim she would probably be strapping on a suicide belt.

Most amusingly, the fluffybrain says how ignorant it would be to say hurricanes rotate clockwise. But she is the ignorant one. In the Southern hemisphere, they DO rotate that way! Some "expert"!

Friday, January 19, 2007

Can the "race card" be dealt when there is no mention of race?

It seems that it can in today's Britain. See here for details of a BIG controversy in Britain at the moment -- one that has even got the government of India involved.

There is an attractive Indian lady, Shilpa Shetty, taking part in a British TV "reality" show together with some pretty rough British whites. Some of the whites have treated the Indian lady contemptuously. That is of course deplorable but is it racism? Lots of people are saying it is even though no specifically racist words can be pointed to.

The fact that a fine and attractive lady might be treated equally badly by the rough types involved even if she had a white skin does not seem to be given much consideration at all. People find racism "under every bed", as it were, these days.

None of that is of course the fault of the fine Indian lady involved.
"Sissy" Now a Wicked Word

The Leftist attack-site Media Matters is targeting conservative radio personality Michael Smerconish because he uses the word "sissy" (short for "sister") to describe various policies he disagrees with. The term is of course derogatory and implies a lack of manliness so I guess you are not now allowed to question anyone's manliness.

That seems rather strange given the feminist claim that sex-roles are all obsolete anyway. Shouldn't it be a compliment to be a "sissy" among todays's androgynous Leftists? Feminists have been proclaiming androgyny as the ideal for many years now. See here.

The attack site gives various addresses that you can use to protest against Smerconish. It might be rather fun if readers here used the same addresses to support him!

Thursday, January 18, 2007

How to Shut Down Conservative Radio

There is a VERY comprehensive post here about an attempt by Leftists to shut down conservative radio station KSFO in San Francisco. Conservative radio is not welcome in the heart of nutland! The Left cannot win audiences on talk radio themselves so they want to shut down those who can.

Their tactic is to use audio clips taken out of context to scare advertisers away from doing business with the station concerned.
Whites Must Suffer Racial Abuse Without Retort

At a cricket match in South Africa recently, Pakistani (Muslim) spectators were hurling racial abuse at white members of the South African team. One of the white players, Herschelle Gibbs, uttered some racial abuse in return. He did not shout it but spoke it just loudly enough for his team-mates only to hear. For such wickedness, he has now been punished by a ban from the game for two matches. Details here.

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Are Jews beyond criticism?

Nobel-prize-winning geneticist James D. Watson does not think so:

"In an interview profile for the magazine Watson asks rhetorically, "Should you be allowed to make an anti-Semitic remark?" He answered: "Yes, because some anti-Semitism is justified. Just like some anti-Irish feeling is justified. If you can't be criticized, that's very dangerous. You lose the concept of a free society."


Watson has copped a lot of flak over that comment but it is clearly absurd to say that ANY group is beyond criticism and I cannot see that he is making any point other than that.

I will now go on to make two statements that I think are entirely defensible, one that is critical of the Irish and one that is critical of Jews. And bear in mind that I have plenty of Irish ancestry and have always been a cast-iron supporter of Israel:

The Irish have been very badly served by their religious loyalties

The overwhelming Leftism of American Jews shows that there are some ways in which they are NOT smart

You will find an extended version of the second statement above here -- in a major Jewish periodical. And I don't think anyone will argue with my statement about the Irish!

Some of the criticisms of Watson are grossly unfair. He is criticized for saying that Ashkenazi (Western) Jews have unusually high inborn IQs. Yet that is a perfectly respectable view among geneticists -- and he IS a geneticist. See here.
Disagreeing with Leftists is "Stifling Debate"?

Leftist writer James Woolcott is defending the way the Grinning Peanut has slimed Israel in his recent book -- which the ADL has of course protested against. The aptly-named woolly one says:

"To counter Carter's claim that the Israeli lobby stifles debate in this country, the Anti-Defamation League is going to stifle debate and slime the former president with guilty by association to prove how wrong he is"

Riehl World rightly comments:

"Stifle debate"? It looks to me as though they are actually initiating debate; certainly nothing Wolcott writes evidences an occasion wherein they sought to stifle it. This is a typical Liberal tactic - if you disagree with me and take a stand on principle, you're not only wrong, you're trying to shut me down

Jews have no right to defend themselves against defamation, apparently.
Is "Categorizing" Wrong?

One of the assertions that one commonly hears in discussions of race relations is that categorizing people is wrong. Apparently we should be blind to any group to which a person may belong.

This has an element of truth in it but is a vast oversimplification. The fact is that every word in our language stands for a category of some sort. When we talk about (for instance) dogs, we are using a category. Individual dogs may be small or large, black, white or brindle and savage or tame but we still need to talk about dogs if we are to discuss them. To forbid categorizing would be to forbid language.

And how could we do without the word "blue"? Yet it turns out that "blue" is a rather broad category. As any woman will tell you, there are many shades of blue -- Ming blue, Teal blue, Electric blue, Navy blue, Sky blue etc.

And the first step in any science is of course taxonomy -- which is just a fancy word for categorizing. So there is absolutely nothing wrong with categorizing.

What is true however, is that to describe any one individual adequately, we need to use many categories. To make useful descriptions, we often need to say "big old dog" rather than just "dog", for instance.

Note however, that the more complex description requires more knowledge. And the more knowledge we have about any given individual the better. Most dogs like to live in the house with their owners, for instance, but there are some dogs that are "outside" dogs and we might treat a dog wrongly if we assumed that it was an "inside" dog when it was really an "outside" dog.

But what if we are given a dog to mind that we have never met before? How do we treat it? We would seldom go wrong if we initially treated it as an "inside" dog so we would probably assume that and act accordingly. Is that wrong? Not at all. What WOULD be wrong is if we treated it as an "inside" dog once we had found that it preferred the outside.

So having in our minds and using generalizations and categories is perfectly right, proper and useful, even if it is not the end of the story. Generalizations -- such as "most dogs prefer to live close to their owners" -- are useful rather than wrong.

And the generalization: "blacks are very crime-prone so it is safest to keep away from them" is also a matter of fact and can be useful. And "white flight" shows that most Americans act on exactly that generalization. But once we have got to know an individual black person and found him peacable, it would be foolish to continue with avoidance behaviour towards him. So generalizations are proper and useful but are only a preliminary step in any reasonable interaction.

I discuss in more detail the use of generalizations and categories here, here and here.

And even Leftists understand that you need to use categories to express yourself. To take just one of zillions of possible examples, the "anti-Fascist" demonstrators against the "BNP ballerina" in London chanted: “We are Muslim, black and Jew, there are many more of us than you”. So categories like "blacks" and "Jews" are fine!

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Criticism of Islam to become illegal thoughout Europe?

The Germans have suddenly discovered a very modern use for their history:

"Germany intends to introduce a Europe-wide law banning the display of Nazi symbols and making denial of the Holocaust a crime to fulfil its "historical obligation" 62 years after the liberation of Auschwitz. Brigitte Zypries, the Justice Minister, will today outline plans to punish with up to three years in prison anyone in the European Union who publicly rejects the Nazi slaughter of six million Jews....

But there will be extra pressure from former Soviet-bloc countries for a ban on the provocative use of the communist hammer and sickle.

Ms Zypries will appeal to them at a meeting in Dresden today and tomorrow to build a European criminal code on racism and xenophobia. "We have always said it cannot be the case that it should still be acceptable in Europe to say that six million Jews were never killed," she said. "There is some controversy about that under `freedom of expression' but we believe that there are limits to freedom of expression, and the limits are there when it is offensive to other religions and ethnic groups."

Britain maintains that its laws banning incitement to hatred provide sufficient cover... A British government spokeswoman said that a specific offence of Holocaust denial "would sit uncomfortably with existing freedom of speech legislation", but did not dismiss the German plan.


The words "a European criminal code on racism and xenophobia" imply that "racism", as they define it, will become a crime in Europe. And that means no more criticism of Islam. The words "other religions" above make that very clear.
British girl banned from wearing cross at school

A total absurdity:

"A British schoolgirl has been barred from wearing a crucifix necklace in class, the Daily Mail reported Saturday. Samantha Devine, a 13-year-old Roman Catholic, was told by teachers in Gillingham, south-east England, that it breached health and safety rules, the paper added.

Her family reportedly says it will fight the decision and has accused the school of discriminating against Christians because Sikh and Muslim pupils can wear religious symbols....

The girl has pledged to keep wearing the cross when school restarts next week after the Christmas holiday. "I am proud of my religion and it is my right to wear a cross around my neck. "I can't understand why the school thinks a tiny crucifix on a thin silver necklace is a health and safety hazard," she told the Mail.


A SAFETY hazard??? Something that hundreds of millions of Catholics have been doing for centuries is suddenly discovered to be unsafe? These hypocrites will grab at any excuse to enforce their anti-Christian hatreds.
Tongue Tied 2

Some people have asked me why I call this site Tongue Tied 3. What happened to Tongue Tied 2? Tongue Tied 2 is actually alive and well. It is my mirror site for times when the main site is down. See here. It has been up ever since I started my attempts to untie tongues -- long before I moved to this site.

Monday, January 15, 2007

British Leftist Councils Misuse Indian Name

A group of Left-leaning British local authorities are using the name "Navajo" to glorify homosexuality -- which has greatly upset the REAL Navajo Indians in the US, who don't like anyone using their name -- and particularly for something contrary to Navajo law!

And the British group don't seem too apologetic about it. Considering the fuss the PC brigade in the US make about how the positive use of Indian tribal names in college sports teams *might* offend American Indians, this is priceless. I wonder who will be attending the diversity training this time?

It does show rather clearly that it is not the protection of minority feelings that motivates the Left. It is condemning the majority that they aim at -- in order to puff themselves up as wiser and better. There is no mainstream use of Indian names to condemn in Britain, so all that wonderful Leftist "sensitivity" vanishes.
More Mainstream Hate-Speech against Christianity

If hate-speech against Muslims, homosexuals etc. is not allowed, why is it OK to insult Christians?

"NBC has plummeted to the level of CBS, with a late-night skit that blatantly mocks Christianity by portraying Jesus as a homosexual voyeur, a stunt that would have been instantly condemned nationwide if it had focused on any subject other than Christianity, according to a pro-life leader.

The show, an episode of "Late Night With Conan O'Brien," was taped and aired this week, and featured a skit with a character called "the homophobic country western singer," according to Douglas R. Scott Jr., the president of Life Decisions International.....

"We've been put in the back of society's bus. The bad thing is we're willing to do it. If we responded like blacks, Jews, you name the different groups, homosexuals. If we responded like they do, only in love, this kind of thing wouldn't happen. It wouldn't be tolerated here," he said.


I personally think people should be free to say what they like about any group -- as long as there is no accompanying incitement to violence. But a double standard of sheltering some groups and not others is plainly unjust. I must be old-fashioned but I think that equality before the law still makes a lot of sense.

Sunday, January 14, 2007

Incorrect Christmas Greeting

We read:

"A criminal defense attorney has been arrested on a disorderly conduct charge involving kissing as a crime. Ralph Crozier, 55, of Southbury was arrested Thursday for kissing a female judicial marshal at Waterbury Superior Court on Dec. 22.

Crozier said state police investigators told him the marshal did not invite him to kiss her, which was why criminal charges were filed. "This is the biggest baloney I've ever seen in my life," Crozier said Thursday. "How many tens of thousands of people in Connecticut wished their co-workers and friends `Merry Christmas' the day before Christmas?"

Crozier said the video will prove he meant nothing sexual by the kiss, which he described as a peck on the cheek.


Left-inspired and Left-enforced laws are making everybody less spontaneous and more mentally regimented -- as envisioned long ago by Hegel, the Left's seminal philosopher.
Leftists still attacking private political beliefs in others

We read:

"Around 50 protesters shouting the slogan "Ballet not bigotry!" staged a noisy protest overnight outside a London theatre where a ballerina and member of a far-right British political party was performing.....

Thirty police lined the street outside the theatre as ballet-goers arrived for the afternoon show. Most patrons expressed support for Clarke, calling the protest undemocratic. "They talk about their freedom, but what about ours?," said secretary June Mitchell, 58. "She shouldn't stand down because of her political beliefs."


Leftists will use any excuse to get publicity for themselves.

Saturday, January 13, 2007

Are Lies and Misrepresentations Protected by the First Amendment?

They probably are -- but that does not mean that the propaganda concerned can be forced into the classroom. Teachers in an Andover (Massachusetts) High School seemed to think otherwise, however:

"The School Committee will review its policies on inviting speakers to the schools in the wake of last week's visit by the controversial pro-Palestinian group Wheels of Justice. While Principal Peter Anderson said there were no problem incidents during the day, when speakers spoke in classrooms, Anderson halted a nighttime presentation to the community after repeated outbursts during a question-and-answer session.....

While Wheels of Justice had been banned from speaking at the school last October, Anderson reversed this decision when teachers' union president Tom Meyers and five other social studies teachers threatened a First Amendment lawsuit. A presentation on the First Amendment by four attorneys was held Jan. 3. Speakers from Project David, a Boston-based group that says on its Web site that it "promotes Arab-Israeli understanding," were scheduled to offer another perspective to students, and then to the public, on Wednesday, after Townsman deadline.....

Last Friday evening, three speakers, Joe Carr, Hassan Fouda and Mazin Qumsiyeh, stood before 150 or more attendees in the packed Andover High School library..... Qumsiyeh said he's lived through the occupation of Israel, and claimed that approximately half of the Iraqi and Palestinian populations continue to live in similar conditions. He pointed to a slide of a green hillside where he said he'd picnicked as a child. "But look at it today," Qumsiyeh said, motioning towards a barren rubble....

Several people walked out when Qumsiyeh said there were hundreds of Palestinian villages destroyed by Israelis in the 1940s. Anderson reminded the audience they weren't there to debate. "If you don't want to listen, leave," he said....

During the question-and-answer period, many of the audience's outspoken members said they considered Wheels of Justice to be an extremist, anti-Semitic organization....


It's an interesting precedent, however. Maybe all Left-dominated schools could be forced to broadcast Rush Limbaugh's show in their classrooms. In that case I fancy that the First Amendment would immediately be interpreted to mean the opposite of the meaning placed on it above.
Arrogant University of Utah Leftists

A defender of their "hate-speech" rules admits:

The U's rules prohibiting "hate speech" may be "by the letter of the law" unconstitutional, but it's hardly in students' best interests to have anybody fight on this account."

So illegality and disrespect for acknowledged rights is fine! Great lessons the kids learn there! Apparently, what a Leftist decides is "in students' best interests" is all that counts. Stalin and Hitler would agree.

So what happens when somebody's free-speech rights are violated by the university?

it seems that students meet with administrators and discuss other courses of action and alternative ways of thinking before leaving on amicable terms without any punitive measures being taken

In other words, university administrators threaten the students concerned unless they adopt "alternative ways of thinking" and the students so far have always put up with it for the sake of avoiding punishments that would harm their careers. Very Soviet!


American Pundit has some good points about the complacent Leftist editorial above too.

Friday, January 12, 2007

Now the Mayans are Offended!

Quick! Ban that movie!

Apparently the latest Gibson film is too gory in its depictions of Mayan history:

"As if offending Jewish people was not bad enough, Mel Gibson has now raised the ire of Guatemalans. The central American nation's presidential commissioner on racism said yesterday Gibson's new film Apocalypto painted Mayan people in a derogatory light. Ricardo Cajas said the film sets back the understanding of the Mayan people by 50 years and compared it to the negative images of Native Americans in US movies from the 1950s.


The real Mayans of history were peace-loving vegetarians of course.
NY Firemen not allowed to display pictures

But the union is hitting back:

"A locker room controversy is erupting within the FDNY. Firefighters have been ordered to remove all personal decorations from the outside of their lockers, including pictures of colleagues killed on 9/11.....

"[The regulation] prohibits a firefighter from having an American flag, a 'Support Our Troops' sticker, a picture of their family, a mass card of a dead firefighter," Cassidy said.

A department-wide crackdown on locker decorations began several weeks ago after a sexually offensive slogan was found on the outside of a locker at Engine 230 in Brooklyn.

But the union claims this time the department went too far. "Two weeks ago they began scraping American flags and anything else that was affixed to a locker off those locker doors," Cassidy said....

The union said it's not satisfied with the fire department's response and what's more, Thursday it plans to give every firefighter a flag decal to put on their locker.


Thursday, January 11, 2007

Attack on Political Freedom in England

To the British Left, having views critical of immigration means that you must be hounded out of your job:

"Anti-racism campaigners are to protest at the English National Ballet after a dancer admitted being a member of the British National Party. Principal dancer Simone Clarke was revealed to be a member of the party by the Guardian newspaper last month. She has since defended her beliefs, and says the BNP is "the only party to take a stand" on issues like immigration.

Campaign group Unite Against Fascism (UAF) is calling for the 36-year-old ballerina to be sacked. It is planning to protest outside a performance of Giselle, in which Clarke takes the lead role, at the London Coliseum later this week...

The BNP currently holds more than 50 council seats in the UK. On its website, it portrays itself as the only party "prepared to defend our traditional principles against the politically correct agenda" of Tony Blair and David Cameron.



A good comment from a reader:

"The Left has officially become what they profess to hate: "Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the British National Party?""

Update 2

The English National Ballet is sending out the following reply to people who have emailed them about Simone Clarke. The "but" in the last sentence sounds ominous:

"English National Ballet does not comment on political affiliations of any of its employees nor any other aspects of their personal lives. English National Ballet is an equal opportunities employer and prides itself in the ethnic diversity of all its employees. I can confirm that Simone will continue to dance as usual throughout our Christmas Season and our Spring Tour, but casting is always subject to change."
Backlash Against Ban on Use of Indian References in Sport

The number of white Americans who harbor ill-will towards American Indians these days must be so small that you would need a microscope to find them. But that does not suit the Left at all -- who need to see racism in others so badly that they even make up instances of racism and "homophobia" from time to time. My most recent mention of such a crock was last December 29th.. And the Left have orgies of self-congratulation whenever they do manage to find something they can call "racism" or "homophobia".

And, no doubt to their great delight, their deliberately wrong-headed approach to college sporting teams who use Indian names and mascots does at last seem to have provoked anger among students in the colleges affected. The Left have CREATED some of that lovely juicy "racism"!

As I mentioned on May 19 last year, the University of Illinois has been excluded from some sporting events because of its traditional mascot -- "Chief Illiniwek", portrayed by a student dressed in buckskins who dances at home football and basketball games and other athletic events. That the chief HONORS the role of Indians in Illinois history all Leftists are apparently determined not to see.

Because of oppressive college speech codes, very few of the students affected say what they think about it all but under cover of anonymity, some students at the University of Illinois HAVE made their feelings heard. On a facebook website one student said:

"what they don't realize is that there never was a racist problem before ... but now I hate redskins and hope all those drunk casino owning bums die."

The sad thing is that Indians are getting the blame for what is mainly the work of hate-filled white Leftists.

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

German America-haters Crumble Under Blog Pressure

I mentioned on 6th. that the site of a major German magazine headlines America as a nation that could not care less about other people. After the sacrifices of blood and treasure America made in two world wars, that was a grievous misrepresention of the truth -- particularly coming from a nation that showed rather vividly in the middle of last century just how much THEY cared about others.

All the blogospheric condemnation has had an effect, however. The hate-America speech has now been removed.

The narrow definition of hate-speech is its major problem. Only certain selected, privileged groups are usually seen as protected by the definition of it. If hate-speech prohibitions were widened to condemn hate speech against America or hate-speech against Christians, the prohibitions would soon lose all support. In the meanwhile we can only do our best to press for the same rules to be applied to all.

To misquote Shakespeare slightly: ""Hath not an American eyes? Hath not an American hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases. Heal'd by the same means, warm'd and cool'd by the same winter and summer as a German is?"
Naughty Virgil Goode

Virginia Republican Congressman Virgil Goode has come under a lot of fire for a letter he wrote to constituents about immigration last December. He wants to stop illegal immigration and cut back on legal immigration -- particularly immigration from Muslim lands. You can read the letter here.

What he says seems a fairly mainstream viewpoint to me. I am pretty sure a majority of Americans would agree with it. But to the media and to the Left it is "racist", "bigoted" etc. You can read one furious editorial condemnation of Goode here.

So once again certain opinions must not be uttered. No doubt contrary to media expectations, Goode was not forced into a backdown or apology, however. His response to his critics is here. There is also a good counterblast to Goode's critics here which points out that Goode's critics could be described with most of the words they applied to Goode.

I suspect Goode's critics are so furious with him because they know that it is THEIR pro-Muslim views that are very much in the minority in America. He has given voice to ideas that threaten to upset their little applecart.

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

The "Dangerous Christians" Theme of the Left

One of the ways the chronic haters on the Left excuse their love-affair with the hate-filled Islamics is by a claim that Christians are a much greater danger to America than are Muslims. That is pretty hilarious to anybody who knows anything about the history of America. Christians were much more influential in the past so America today is a product of all that Christian "damage".

An example of the strange Leftist theory is a book called "American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America" by Chris Hedges, a Pulitzer Prize-winning correspondent for the New York Times. That he learnt his trade with the NYT is rather what one would expect in the circumstances. The NYT is after all famous for printing "all the news that's fit to slant".

There is a surprisingly balanced review of the book by a history professor here. Although apparently somewhat sympathetic to the book, the reviewer knows enough history to point out major ways in which the book goes off the rails. The reviewer notes, for instance:

"Thus, Hedges concludes, the United States today faces an internal threat analogous to that posed by the Nazis in Weimar Germany

Christians as Nazis is just too much for the reviewer, however. He goes on to make a number of points in reply, with the following excerpt being very much to the point:

"Nevertheless, Hedges concludes that the Christian right "should no longer be tolerated," because it "would destroy the tolerance that makes an open society possible." What does he think should be done? He endorses the view that "any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law," and therefore we should treat "incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal." Thus he rejects the 1st Amendment protections for freedom of speech and religion, and court rulings that permit prosecution for speech only if there is an imminent threat to particular individuals.

Hedges advocates passage of federal hate-crimes legislation prohibiting intolerance, but he doesn't really explain how it would work. Many countries do prohibit "hate speech." Holocaust denial, for example, is a crime in Germany, Austria and several other European countries. But does this mean that Hedges favors prosecuting Christian fundamentalists for declaring, for example, that abortion providers are murderers or that secular humanists are agents of Satan? He doesn't say.
The Pot Calling the Kettle Afro-American

On a far-Leftist British site we read:

"An attempt by the fascist British National Party (BNP) to hold a racist rally in Dagenham, east London, ended in its humiliation last Saturday. Despite extensive leafleting in the borough, the Nazis only managed to attract around 70 people to their rally - and they were surrounded by over 400 anti-fascist protesters chanting slogans and jeering at them....

Richard Barnbrook, the leader of the BNP's 12-strong council group in Barking & Dagenham, struggled to make himself heard to the small crowd gathered in a car park near Dagenham civic centre. His words were drowned out by the chorus of anger and derision from anti-fascists."


So who were the Brownshirts, exactly? Once again, no respect for free speech from the Left.

Monday, January 08, 2007

Political Censorship Now Widespread

The idea that saying negative things about certain selected groups of people is "hate speech", and is so very bad that it is not entitled to free speech protections, now seems to be widespread. In the USA, the First Amendment limits what governments can do to restrict so-called "hate speech" but the government is in fact a small player in the mass communications market. Note the report below for instance:

Google insisted it already had complied with court requests to identify individuals accused of using Orkut to spread child pornography and engage in hate speech against blacks, Jews and homosexuals

Not only is "hate speech" forbidden but people who engage in it can be tracked down and legally pursued in various ways. The day would seem to be not far off when saying negative things about Leftist politicians is declared "hate speech" -- with a Left-leaning mass media gleefully enforcing suppression of such speech.

Never have blogs been more needed. That Google also owns the biggest blogging service -- blogspot -- is therefore a source of some concern for the future. Since I use blogspot, I once again encourage people to bookmark my list of mirror sites.

I have just put up on PC Watch an extended argument about why "hate" speech should not be censored.
ISPs as Enemies of Free Speech

You can't rely on your Internet Service Provider. Whether what you post is right or wrong, if your ISP comes under any sort of attack over something you have written, you are toast. Take this report. A blogger had posted audio files of radio broadcasts he was critical of. The radio bosses sent his ISP a letter claiming that the posting was illegal -- a breach of copyright law. The blogger said that the files were fair use under copyright law. So was the matter tested in court? No way! After just a few days, the ISP deleted the site! End of story. No free speech for that guy, right or wrong.

Sunday, January 07, 2007

French Cowardice

As I mentioned on October 2 last year, a French philosophy teacher, Robert Redeker, wrote an article that was critical of Islam. It was published in the mainstream French newspaper Le Figaro. It led to a torrent of threats against him from Muslims, which led to him leaving his home under police protection.

But was the reaction of other people in the nation of Voltaire? A defence of Redeker's right to free speech? A recent summary of the response below:

"But the vast majority of responses, even when couched as defenses of the right to free speech, were in fact hostile to the philosophy teacher. The Communist mayor of Saint-Orens-de-Gameville, echoed by the head of Redeker's school, deplored the fact that he had included his affiliation at the end of the article. France's two largest teachers' unions, both of them socialist, stressed that "they did not share Redeker's convictions." The leading leftist human-rights organizations went much farther, denouncing his "irresponsible declarations" and "putrid ideas." A fellow high-school philosophy teacher, Pierre Tevanian, declared (on a Muslim website) that Redeker was "a racist" who should be severely punished by his school's administration. Even Gilles de Robien, the French minister of education, criticized Redeker for acting "as if he represented the French educational system"-a bizarre charge against the author of a piece clearly marked as personal opinion.

Among members of the media, Redeker was scolded for articulating his ideas so incautiously. On the radio channel Europe 1, Jean-Pierre Elkabach invited the beleaguered teacher to express his "regret." The editorial board of Le Monde, France's newspaper of record, characterized Redeker's piece as "excessive, misleading, and insulting." It went so far as to call his remarks about Muhammad "a blasphemy," implying that the founder of Islam must be treated even by non-Muslims in a non-Muslim country as an object not of investigation but of veneration.

An American Holocaust?

This time it is a conservative German politician (from Bavaria) who hates America and idealizes Muslims. He accuses America of ethnically-denominated "extermination". He compares the present day war in Afghanistan with some events of the Wild West:

"We must make it clear to the Americans, or to be more precise the current American government, that they cannot exterminate other cultural aspirations on this planet - and it is not automatically terrorism - as they did with the Apaches and Sioux."


He is claiming that what modern America is doing in Iraq and Afghanistan to resist the guys who REALLY ARE trying to "exterminate other cultural aspirations on this planet" is an extension of the rough treatment which the whole civilized world visited on primitive people up until recently. That is a twisting of the truth worthy of another politician with his base in Bavaria -- called Adolf Something-or-Other.

Saturday, January 06, 2007

Bloggers Box in Boxer

California Democrat Senator Barabara Boxer seems to be one of the Muslim-loving California Leftists and she recently gave an "award" (a pretty bit of paper as far as I can make out) to Basim Elkarra, the Sacramento head of CAIR, America's chief Muslim mouthpiece.

This blog has of course been one of many blogs that have made adverse mentions of CAIR -- most recently here on Dec. 9th., 2006. STACLU also regularly has a go at CAIR.

Boxer has however now "withdrawn" the award in response to all the criticism it received. We read:

But Boxer -- who said Wednesday that her staff made the award in her name without her knowledge -- has rescinded it because of her "concerns" about CAIR, a national group based in Washington, D.C., that has been attacked by conservative Web sites for allegedly supporting terrorism.....

Boxer said she was checking news online when an account linking her to CAIR and its alleged pro-terrorist activities "popped up. ... I said, 'Wait a minute, is any of it accurate?' " ....

Elkarra said he was aware that bloggers for two days were attacking Boxer. "The right wing went all out to attack us on this and she succumbed to it. Two days later, she withdraws the award. You do the math," he said.

The report of the matter above does not mention any blog in particular -- only Americans Against Hate, an organization that focuses on Islamic hate and hate speech. Clearly, however, Boxer felt that it was politically risky having people link her to pro-terrorist organizations.
Germans Need Hate Speech -- Again

We read:

In the introductory headline to a series on American history that the publication has had online since at least 2002, Stern magazine (one of Germany's most widely-read weeklies) writes:

"The History of the USA: No nation has ever dominated the globe like the USA. And its people could care less about the rest of humanity."

Really? Is that why the USA sacrificed the lives of hundreds of thousands of its sons and daughters to liberate Germany from National Socialism? Is that why the United States spent billions to defend and rebuild West German democracy for decades on end? Is that why the United States helped Germans to establish the very democracy that guarantees German journalists the freedom to make outrageous, dehumanizing, sweeping anti-American statements like the one above?....

Now for some bad news: This won't end anytime soon. Stern's readers can't go without a steady diet of America-baiting. Hatred is a part of their ideological existence and they expect the magazine to deliver the goods.

America seems to have replaced the Jews as the hate-object of socialistic Germans. It fits in with a recent post of mine elsewhere: Americans as the new Jews. The whole post that I have excerpted above is well worth reading.

(Technical note: The original German in "Stern" reads: "Dem Volk is der Rest der Menscheit egal", which I would translate as: "To the American people the rest of humanity is a matter of indifference". The translation I have quoted above could be seen as ambiguous)

Friday, January 05, 2007

Another case of hate-speech directed at conservatives getting only token notice

We read:

"On Monday, comedian Joy Behar likened Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to Adolf Hitler. Oops. Her co-host on "The View," Rosie O'Donnell, was visibly stunned, though secretly we're sure she's thrilled ....

FOX News reports that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a Jewish advocacy group, issued a letter stating it was "deeply disturbed" by Behar's comments, but, ultimately, implying that they weren't huge Rumsfeld fans either.

"Slaughter" a Dangerous Word

It is commonly used in sports writing to describe a decisive defeat but it's dangerous at Harvard:

"The article, which dealt with the political correctness of Native American sports mascots, concluded with the line, "I think the Crimson would've slaughtered the Indians," in reference to the possibility of a game between the Arkansas State Indians and the Harvard Crimson.

"I think the phrase `slaughter the Indians' is terrible" he said. He added that the word "slaughtered" is commonly used in sports writing, but that it can be hurtful in some contexts.


Thursday, January 04, 2007

Britain: Muslim in court on racial hatred charges

We read:

"A Muslim protester called for the bombing of Denmark and the United States during a demonstration against the publication of cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad, the Old Bailey was told yesterday....

Police video of the protest, played to the jury, showed Mr Javed, 27, leading chants of “Bomb, bomb USA. Bomb, bomb Denmark”.

David Perry, QC, for the prosecution, said that Mr Javed appeared to be one of the leaders of the protest and used a loud-hailer to address the crowd. “He addressed the crowd in terms which encouraged killing and incited racial hatred.”

Mr Perry told the court that the case was not about freedom of assembly or freedom of speech. He said that even a society that enjoyed freedom of speech had to have rules. “It is not about freedom of expression, but it is not surprising there are rules against encouraging others to kill or incite racial hatred.”

Legalized Prostitution has a RIGHT to be Government-promoted? ACLU Says so

We read:

"The ACLU is arguing before a federal appeals court that the United States is funding AIDS prevention unconstitutionally. Specifically, they argue that having a ban on funds to organizations that promote commercial sex work inhibits free speech. It should be no surprise that the ACLU is in bed with those who want to legalize prostitution.

It is true that advocating the legalization of prostitution is free speech. That doesn't mean that such speech needs to be funded by the government.


Wednesday, January 03, 2007

Freedom of the Press Means Freedom not to Tell the Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth?

To Leftist journalists it seems to. A heap of journalists will be called to give evidence in the "Scooter" Libby "leak" court case. And they don't like it. Testifying under oath with penalties for false testimony does not grab them at all:

"It will be unprecedented and, as far as I'm concerned, horrifying," Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said of the case, for which jury selection begins in two weeks.

Details here

They were happy to publish all sorts of stories in the New York Times and elsewhere but they don't want to tell their stories in a court where they can be subjected to probing questions. How odd!
Some Satire from Dartmouth College

The satirist says that the depiction of cowboys and Indians defames modern Americans:

"The symbol of the American Cowboy is an offensive and inaccurate representation of my contemporary American identity. Do I savagely round cattle and use a Smith and Wesson six-shooter? Do you see me, the modern American, herding domesticated animals and using the Pony Express instead of mail? How can people sleep at night when they shout "Howdy" as a salutation to friends? How dare they!

More here

It is of course a reaction to claims by some modern-day Indian malcontents that Wild West depictions defame them. See my previous post of Dec. 14th.
PC Losers

I mentioned on Nov. 27th. that Dartmouth college's athletic director, Josie Harper, apologized to Dartmouth's Native American Council for the pain inflicted by the thoughtless invitation she had extended to the UND "Fighting Sioux" to play Dartmouth. Powerline has the story of what happened at the actual match. Dartmouth got badly beaten. So maybe there was more than one reason Dartmouth did not want to play UND.

Tuesday, January 02, 2007

Amazing: Columbia University President Charges Leftist Student Thugs

From the NYT so it must be right. The NYT account of the riot itself is heavily biased and selective, however:

"Columbia University said yesterday that it had notified students involved in disrupting a program of speakers in early October that they were being charged with violating rules of university conduct governing demonstrations. The university did not disclose the number of students charged with violations.

Columbia's president, Lee C. Bollinger, announced the disciplinary proceedings in a letter to the university community yesterday that was also released publicly. But he said he would not provide further details because of federal rules governing student privacy....

The disrupted program, sponsored by a campus Republican group on Oct. 4, featured speakers from the Minuteman Project, which opposes illegal immigration and has mounted civilian border patrols....

Mr. Bollinger also said that several of the outsiders involved in the melee had been notified that they would no longer be allowed on campus....

Eva Fortes, a sophomore who plans to major in comparative literature and society and to minor in linguistics, expressed concern about "the bureaucracy" that student groups would face in sponsoring speakers and the light sanctions for the non-Columbia people who were involved in the scuffle. "It kind of upset me," she said, "that people not affiliated with Columbia and who came and breached university policy, they're just getting told, `Don't come back,' when they were involved in physical assaults."


A slap on the wrist coming up, no doubt. The Stalinist thugs should be charged with assault and get a criminal record. There is a fuller account of the riot here.
Australia: Appeal by Christian Pastors Successful

The incredible lower court ruling that reading out passages from the Koran is "hate speech" has been knocked on the head. Previous post on the appeal on August 29 (Scroll down). General background here

"The Court of Appeal (Supreme Court) of Victoria has ALLOWED the appeal sought by Catch The Fire Ministries, Pastor Danny Nalliah and Pastor Daniel Scot. All three justices - Nettle, Ashley and Neave - agreed that the appeal should be allowed. In particular, the argument that the Tribunal had wrongly interpreted Section 8 of the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act, the basic section that sets out the offence of religious vilification was successful.

The Court gave orders that the Tribunal orders re 'penalties' (advertisement, not saying similar things) be set aside, and that the matter be sent back to VCAT to be heard by a different judge with no new evidence. The Court also ordered that the costs relating to the previous Tribunal hearing and the next one be decided by the Member who hears it.

The Court ordered that the Islamic Council of Victoria pay half of the costs incurred by Catch the Fire Ministries and the pastors in conducting the appeal. Pastor Danny Nalliah and Pastor Daniel Scot welcomed the decision, as the statements made by the Justices show that the decision by Judge Higgins was flawed.


Monday, January 01, 2007

Stop Press: Muslims NOT offended!

After a Texan called their bluff - and they even APOLOGIZED:

"A Muslim group said it is no longer offended as Katy resident Craig Baker made good on his promise to stage Friday pig races next door to an 11-acre property the group has purchased to build a mosque....

A spokesman for the association, Yousef Allam, said members are no longer offended by Baker's decision to race pigs, a forbidden meat in the Muslim culture, despite a Dec. 1 letter an attorney for the group sent to Baker demanding that he immediately remove the pigs from his own property....

Baker, 46, said his intention is not to offend anyone with the races but to make clear that he will not be forced to move or relocate his marble-fabricating shop as he claims a member of the association previously urged him to. "I am just defending my rights and my property," Baker said. "They totally disrespected me and my family."....

Allam said if any interaction between the group and Baker was interpreted as a threat for Baker to vacate his land, it was unintentional. "If we somehow communicated that to him, then we apologize," Allam said.

An ACLU Summary for December

So far this season it has already muscled the city council in Berkley, Mich. to move a Christmas nativity off public property.

The ACLU also sued the Wilson County School System outside of Nashville, Tenn., because its Christmas program included ''Christian themes and songs'' – what the ACLU calls ''unconstitutional and illegal'' acts through which its plaintiffs have ''suffered irreparable damage.''

Alongside its crusade to suppress Christmas, the ACLU of Tennessee also found time to write Cumberland County Mayor Brock Hill to assure the removal from the courthouse sidewalk of a wooden carved statue depicting Moses holding the Ten Commandments.

Just this past week, the ACLU opposed the Winston-Salem City Council's practice of opening its meetings with a prayer referencing Jesus or Christ.