| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Robert Spencer | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog |  |
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
"Friday's show of support for Muslims was organized by Rabbi Hillel Katzir of the Temple Shalom of Auburn. Katzir also represents the Lewiston-Auburn Interfaith Clergy." -- from this article on the Muhammad lost dog poster
"Show of support" for what? For a display of hysteria by local Muslims about the attempt (successful as it turned out) to provoke their hysterical reaction to anything they deem other than deeply respectful of Islam, when part of the achievement of the West, sometimes abused, is that aspects of various religions are mocked all the time. And when the faith in question is Islam, and there have been repeated examples of murderous Muslim reactions to such criticism -- to, for example, the Danish cartoons -- it is not only not wrong to criticize, but useful to protect, such criticism of Islam. This is true even if it is meant to test the Muslim reaction -- let that reaction be tested. If they wish to live in the West they will have to accept the legal and political institutions of that West, and that includes free speech, as defined by us, and not by them.
As for Rabbi Katzir, who "represents the Lewiston-Auburn Interfaith Clergy," one can imagine him thinking of himself as some brave Atticus-Finch (Northern Division), standing tall "with my Muslim friends" in their "time of need." But it's nonsense. It is Muslims who need to be told, or need to be shown, that this lost-dog sign, while hardly a brilliant sally of wit, is neither prosecutable as a crime nor, in the civil law, actionable. And that the hysteria that they are showing is designed of course to force everyone to go after anyone who dares to display an attitude other than one of respect, or even reverence. It is designed, that is, to force non-Muslims in a non-Muslim land to behave as circumspectly, or deferentially, toward Islam in all of its aspects, as possible. Yet when such deference and such circumspection is not demanded of us, we do not demand it of ourselves, in regard to any non-Muslim faith.
The transparent attempt to manipulate non-Muslims is aided and abetted by the moral-preeners who choose never to quite come to grips with the collectivism and the aggressive nature of Islam. Because to begin to study and analyze Islam is to find out that it is not, pace George Bush, one more "religion" like any other. This would throw cock-a-hoop the worldview of those wedded, coute que coute, to the pieties of interfaith gatherings. Such gatherings are perfectly fine when they do not involve those whose "faith" is a Total Belief-System that mandates a "struggle" to spread that faith until it not only can be found everywhere, but until it everywhere dominates. They are not at all fine when they becomes one more instrument for those conducting Jihad by using, as Muslims have set out clearly their intent to use, the naiveté and weaknesses of the West (including mental weakness), and that strand of self-righteousness that the more rigid, and willfully ignorant, interfaith-healers display in Sweet Auburn, loveliest village of central Maine, or anywhere else in this land of ours -- during what is looking more and more like, if more people don't pull up their socks and come to their senses, what Karl Kraus would have called "the last days of Mankind."
In the Netherlands, an Iranian photographer has just had to close her exhibit (something about Islam, and homosexuality, and hypocrisy, a point apparently made by her photographs of naked Muslim men wearing face-masks of Muhammad and Ali), first at one museum, and then at another, in response to death threats which still stand. Leaving aside the question of tastefulness, leaving aside that eternal problem of defining "what is art" -- "Chto takoye iskusstvo?" said Tolstoy, and stayed too long to give his own long answer -- there is still the little matter of those threats to commit murder, that successful attempt to intimidate, in the Netherlands, by Muslims "defending" the image of Islam.
The moral-preening interfaith-healers of sweet Auburn and nearby towns, as they congratulate themselves on their display of solidarity with their "Muslim brothers," should bethink themselves.
The dog poster was clearly an attempt to flout the wishes of those Muslims who, not only in sweet Auburn but around the world, think that they have every right to stop all criticism of Islam, to shut it down, by playing the poor victim and waiting for the rabbi-katzirs to come running at one end, and by death threats, and then by murdering, the theo-van-goghs at the other end.
What the rabbi-katzirs and other interfaith-healers fail to understand, in their mediagenic indignation and outrage and "standing with our Muslim brothers" treacliness, is that they have a duty not to promote themselves as morally superior beings, but rather a duty to the legal and political institutions, including the individual freedoms, of the advanced democracies of the Western world. They have a duty, that is, not to take the side of the Muslims behaving as if a single poster applying the name of Muhammad to a dog is practically Kristallnacht, but to calmly explain that in the West such making-fun of this or that faith is permissible, is done all the time (simply turn on Bill Maher), and that by far most of the mockery is directed at the religions of the West -- but that Islam will not be considered to be immune to criticism, discussion, or mockery, and they had better get used to it.
Everyone in the Lands of the Free West should be able to mock Islam, just as they can and do mock Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, or as they mock those who mock Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism. Whether the mockery hits home, whether it scores a palpable hit, is another matter.
In the affair of the photographs, no doubt the kind of mapplethorpian thing that are not to everyone's taste, Wouter Bos, the deputy prime minister of the Netherlands, said the right thing when both museum directors, and other political figures, were saying the wrong one.
And here is what he said:
“In a democracy, we do not recognise the right not to be insulted.”
Put that in your interfaith peace-pipe and smoke it. For that, Rabbi Katzir, trumps your desire to show just what a swell fellow you are.
Posted by Hugh at January 7, 2008 4:41 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
"And here is what he said:
“In a democracy, we do not recognise the right not to be insulted.”"
- the remark by Hugh about our deputy prime minister Wouter Bos-
Those here in the Netherlands, the ones who have to endure people like Wouter Bos, the leader of the PvdA, the socialist party, prating in the news about this, about that, about everything they think they should have an opinion about, are not so much impressed by the cheap remark. Mister Bos has an abysmal history of appeasing those vulnerable muslims here in Holland, persecuted on a daily basis, of course. Last year year, at the general elections, the man tried to stop the decline of his miserable party by winning the 'Turkish Vote', which includes, naturally, denying the murder of all those Armenians. It was ninety years ago, and what is a genocide? Und so weiter, und so weiter.
So, mister Bos said something sensible for once in his life. To me, that's not really impressing, it doesn't compensate for all the harm he and his party has done to this country.
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at January 7, 2008 5:14 PM
Yecch! Methinks the rebbe doth kvetch too much. I enjoyed the prank, wishing I'd thought it up, myself. It was funny and terribly insulting. The best kind of epithet. I doubt seriously that the Offendi are the kind of folk who are making any attempts to get along with their new neighbors, anyway. At least the experience of other communities seems to point to the fact that the Somalis are downright hostile guests. Ask the folks in Shelbyville, Tennessee. Ask anyone trying to get a cab in St. Paul and elsewhere who might have a seeing eye dog or a bottle of the forbidden drink. If the Offendi were truly trying to integrate into the community I don't think they would be getting this mild flack.
(Secretly, I hope it galls 'em to have the filthy kaffirs and Jews, JOOOOOOS, I tells ya! coming to their defense, trying to shake their offendi hands with their yahudi najiness. In public! Hah! My blackened stump of coal that passes for a heart thrills.)
at January 7, 2008 5:15 PM
Wonderful article Hugh. Although I have to wonder if it would actually cause critical thinking by the rabbi. Sometimes it seems like one is banging their head against a brick wall. Naturally when trying to convince a muslim of the errors of islam it definitely is. I realize that it is far easier to convince an apologist and those are the people that we should try and convert away from this madness. But at the same time it is quite clear that the apologists are very comfortable wearing the rose colored glasses along with their blinders. What makes it even more sad is that even with the watered down commentary from the MSM, how can one not SEE the reality.
I am actually going to do something I would never normally do, defend multiculturalism. Not as it is used today, but from a historical perspective. The US has always been a multicultural nation in this respect, those who immigrate have accepted our culture, our laws, our way of life while adding a bit of their own culture. For instance, would we even bother with St. Patrick's Day were it not for people of Irish descent? Then there is the plethora of foods. We have named states, cities, counties, cars, etc. using Native American names. This nation has absorb many different nationalities and their cultural identities. But one thing never changed, the Constitution. The document by which our laws and way of life are based upon. This is true multiculturalism. Unfortunately the term has been so perverted I can't stand to hear it uttered. Our adherence to the Constitution is the only thing that will save this country from the muslims. So I hope that the Rabbi Hillel Katzir sees this article, reads it, and has a revelation of the error of what he is doing.
You are spot on Hugh.
Posted by: Kevin at January 7, 2008 5:23 PM
"[M]ister Bos said something sensible for once in his life."
-- a Dutch poster, who brings a view of Wouter Bos, and information, of which I was unaware.
It is strange for you to reproach me, as you appear to do, merely for quoting one thing that Wouter Bos -- otherwise completely unknonwn to me -- said. Am I expected to perform due diligence on everyone I quote, find out all about this or that person's works and days? If your description of him is correct, then he is not as I would have expected him to be. But then what explains such a strong and well-turend statement? Perhaps he is more solicitous of what I described as "mapplethorpain" photographs than he would be, say, of Danish cartoons. Or here's another, more pleasing, possibility. Could it be that even Wouter Bos (if he is as you describe) is beginning to get the idea of Islamic bully8ing and censorship, is beginning to worry, beginning to see the need to take a firm stand? ,
His remark was a good one. If its being quoted favorably at JW were somehow to get to him, and this did not displease him, and possibly caused him to bethink himself, wouldn't that be nice? Just a little something extra, like that treat brought to you post-prandially, at the end of your meal at the Five Flies -- no charge -- just because the waiter likes you.
Posted by: Hugh at January 7, 2008 5:42 PM
Jauhara Al-Kafirah,
I won't bother them one bit. These misguided people are aiding in the muslim cause. This defense of the muslims by non-muslims will first lead to self-censorship. From there you will have laws against "religious hate speech." And more, and more, and more until the muslims are able to have sharia first applied on them, then everyone else. So if they have to hold their breath so as not to inhale the "stench" of the infidels in order to achieve their goal, they will do so.
Posted by: Kevin at January 7, 2008 5:52 PM
"So I hope that the Rabbi Hillel Katzir sees this article, reads it, and has a revelation of the error of what he is doing."
He won't. Have the revelation of the error of what he is doing, I mean. Freedoms? The Constitution? Oh, they can take care of themselves. No need to worry there. But if I am not for the Muslims, who am I for?
Posted by: Hugh at January 7, 2008 5:54 PM
Freedoms? The Constitution? Oh, they can take care of themselves. No need to worry there.
So wonderfully naive that thought is amongst the leftists. So wonderful that the Founding Fathers saw fit to maintain the belief that the citizens should remain armed.
Posted by: Kevin at January 7, 2008 6:01 PM
Hugh,
Just as you are always careful to put "Palestinian" or "Palestinians" in quotes, you should apply the same care when it comes to "rabbis" like "Rabbi" Katzir.
Posted by: US_infidel at January 7, 2008 6:20 PM
I hope this link work. There is a comic strip called "The New Adventures of Queen Victoria". In it the had a contest for naming the "Offensive Bear". The winner was announced on January 6th, the winner name was Allah the Pooh. Wonder how the religion of Pieces will react.
http://www.gocomics.com/thenewadventuresofqueenvictoria/2008/01/06/?uc_full_date=&campid=0&
at January 7, 2008 6:43 PM
So far I had the good fortune to be spared from such rabbis, most of the people I know are fairly switched on. Most still have some fuzzy illusions about how hospitable the Muslims were when the Jews were prosecuted from the Christians, but the message is slowly seeping through that it wasn't all that flash being a dhimmi under the sharia...
at January 7, 2008 7:28 PM
Does Keith Ellison know that Jefferson called the Koran "demonic?"
Somebody needs to inform him.
Posted by: darcy at January 7, 2008 7:36 PM
I wish I knew who who the mohammed dog poster was. I'd send him/her a case of their favourite beer!
Posted by: j_not_a at January 7, 2008 8:30 PM
sheik:
Don't know if he's a "rabbi" or not, but you must not have read a Mr. Mark Cohen pining away (in the Jerusalem Post) for the good old days when Jews were second class Dhimmi's.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1198517277167&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
j_not_a:
Right on! My sentiments exactly!
Presley O'Bannon
Posted by: Lt. Presley O'Bannon at January 7, 2008 8:46 PM
I wonder what would happen if each non-Muslim member of the Lewiston-Auburn Interfaith clergy were to receive a handy list of about a dozen of the news items from jihad watch dhimmi watch 2007, featuring violent Muslim aggression toward clergy and practitioners of non-Muslim faiths? Head it up with Surah 9 and Hassan al-Banna's line "Islam is to dominate, and not be dominated".
Beginning with the latest item posted immediately before this one - 'Iraqi Catholics hit by Epiphany bombing campaign', and including such tid-bits as the murder of Rami Ayyad. Include the lengthy list of Muslim murders of peaceful unarmed Buddhist monks, schoolteachers, and ordinary citizens in Thailand, and the attacks on Hindus inside India, and in Pakistan and Bangladesh. Just to make it clear that the Jihad is not about the West, or modernity, or the Crusades, or Israel.
Perhaps append, too, Bill Warner's list of the 'Tears of Jihad' (the rough guesstimate of the total world bodycount for which Islam may be deemed responsible) as available from his Centre for the Study of Political Islam.
Islam: the Ecumenical, Equal-Opportunity Oppressor.
Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, animist, shamanist, Shinto, Confucian, Taoist, Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, Jew, Zoroastrian, Enlightenment Atheist - all Unbelievers, all to be either absorbed, greedily exploited, or...annihilated. Unless they muster the courage to fight back implacably.
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at January 7, 2008 8:59 PM
I had a great-aunt in the Auburn, Lewiston area. It is a sleepy old mill town. This is probably the most excitement they have seen in years. It's not a town that is used to international media attention.
Ayuh!
at January 7, 2008 9:02 PM
Hugh: sorry for the off-topic, but I don't get this.
"Chto takoye iskusstvo?" said Tolstoy, and stayed too long to give his own long answer
Is the long answer War and Peace (or, all his fiction)? And how did he "stay too long"?
LOL ... my curiosity is stronger than my embarrassment.
And I am assuming the Russian means "what is art", or does it not?
Posted by: Moonzoo at January 7, 2008 9:24 PM
A worthy effort on a part of some Mainer. But a better exhibit would be to include some teachings to turn the ‘hate crime’ into a better learning lesson.
How about a sheet of paper with “Descendents of Apes and Pigs” in large type stapled to power poles with a strip of bacon? Who would take offense?
at January 7, 2008 9:59 PM
"this lost-dog sign, while hardly a brilliant sally of wit" - okay Hugh, the dog posting was, in itself, not all that original or clever. What made me spew coke on my computer screen was seeing the 867-5309 phone number! Now THAT was freakin' hilarious!
(For any not familiar, Jenny (867-5309) was the name of a ubiquitous, catchy 80's song by Tommy and the Tu-tones (it's on youtube) my 10yr old heard it yesterday for the first time and has been humming it all day now and driving me nuts!). If you read some of the stories about people who had this number after this song came out they're pretty funny.
Posted by: j_not_a at January 7, 2008 10:26 PM
"Is the long answer War and Peace (or, all his fiction)? And how did he "stay too long"?"
-- from a posting above
No, he wrote "Anna Karenina" and "War and Peace" several decades before he wrote "What Is Art?" in 1897. He wrote "What Is Art" during his later, post-spiritual-crisis phase, when he preferred simple homely folk tales, children's songs, and suchlike, to the complications of the kind of art he deemed "corrupt." That later phase does not begin with "What Is Art?" but might be better dated from "Confession." Think of Chertkov, simplifcation of life, projects for the teaching of peasant children, producing "A Circle of Reading," denouncing Shakespeare, and becoming a Moral Teacher, a Teacher for those who deemed themselves Tolstoyans, and who came from afar to be in the luminous, numinous presence of The Master. More on this in R. F. Christian's biography and in Tolstoy's letters, a 2-volume edition of which Christian edited.
My comment alludes to the fact that in the 13 years of his life after he wrote "What Is Art?" he remained preoccupied with sating his thirst for spiritual truth, the truth of that variant on Christianity which might be called Tolstoyism, and which included a narrow view of "art" (whatever that is), right up to the King-Lear-like ending in 1910, at the stationmaster's house at Astapovo.
I was also having fun -- "and stayed too long to give his own long answer" -- echoes the beginning of a famous essay by Bacon: "What is truth, said jesting Pilate, and would not stay for an answer."
But that's not the only literary echo planted for the hell of it in the piece on dhimmitude-doings in sweet Auburn.
Recognition here for the person who can identify the other one.
Posted by: Hugh at January 7, 2008 10:42 PM
It would be a truly fine thing if the poster-maker came forward and explained that such a dog really does exist, that truly he was a mean dog and not good with people, and why is it that muslims suddenly own the copyright to the name "Mohammed"?
Now if you will excuse me, I need to drive away my latino neighbor who dares to call himself "Jesús". Blasphemer.
Posted by: Bacon-I Will Miss Thee at January 7, 2008 10:52 PM
Presley O'Bannon,
thanks, I did read that puff-piece by Mark Cohen with all that cliche' crock & schlock. It is depressing that such people call us 'revisionists' and make it look as if Bat Ye'or, Spencer, Fitzgerald and everyone else engaging in counter jihad are presented as 'propagandists' with some agenda. Regular JW/DW readers are more knowledgeable than them, and they haven't learned a thing, but keep chewing the cud about how good it all was living as dhimmi's in abject poverty and despised and vilified.
Looks like a lot of Jews can't get used to being free men...
I was gonna post a link but this site doesn't let me...
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at January 7, 2008 11:31 PM
Mark Cohen has been dealt with by Bat Ye'or, both in a book review she wrote of his "Cross and Crescent" (or is it "Crescent and Cross"?), and in her analysis, in "Islam and Dhimmitude," of his study and what fatally vitiates his presentation.
Mark Cohen is not as interested in the discovery of historical truths as he is in finding, and exaggerating evidence for what he wishes had been so, what he thinks simply must have been so, in the world of Islam, for if it were not so, then he cannot conceive of any "solution" to the Arab war on Israel. He works backward from the present, and he believes the evil meted out to the Jews in Western Christendom somehow mitigates what they (and Christians) endured under Islam.
But does it?
When Muslims point to "the Holocaust" and the treatment of Jews in Europe before the German murders, the mark-cohens of this world appear to think that method of defense is justifiable. What would he think, were those defending the Communists, in reply to mention of the "Doctor's Plot" and Stalin's plans to murder Soviet Jewry (stopped by his death), to note, in mitigation, that "it wasn't as bad as the Nazi death camps." Would that have been a convincing defense?
Of course not. And tu-quoque-only-worse arguments, from Muslims defending the treatment of Jews in the Lands of Islam and invoking the treatment of Jews in Europe, remains an illegitimate argument.
Posted by: Hugh at January 8, 2008 12:06 AM
Hugh wrote:
"Recognition here for the person who can identify the other one."
Posted by: Hugh at January 7, 2008 10:42 PM
That one is brutally tough. One I must seek outside assistance on, and one I fear, which wikipedia will do me no good.
I'll get back to you...hopefully.
Posted by: awake at January 8, 2008 12:28 AM
Hugh,
что ислам?
не является религией мира.
at January 8, 2008 12:29 AM
You can't get through to numb skulls like Rabbi Hillel Katzi. The man sounds like he's been drinking from the well of political correctness(cultural Marxism) for decades.
He's dead from the neck up like most of his ilk.
Look he gives away his political orientation by essentially advocating a cessation of the 1st Amendment and destroying the separation of Church and State by creating a protected religious class.
Only a authoritarian and radical - a leftist IOW would press for such measures.
BTW the rest of the city council and religious leaders all come off like a bunch of humorless lefties with a authoritarian bent.
at January 8, 2008 12:30 AM
"That one is brutally tough. One I must seek outside assistance on, and one I fear, which wikipedia will do me no good"
'Atticus Finch' transplanted to the North where mockingbirds are rare...
A more historical 'echo' would be an allusion to Skokie,Illinois where some Jewish civil libertarians argued for the right of freedom of expression for those who would put them into ovens. Not quite the same ...worse perhaps?
at January 8, 2008 1:02 AM
Wasn't Atticus Finch the father / attorney in "To Kill a Mockingbird?"
Posted by: MLMOON at January 8, 2008 1:18 AM
Wasn't Atticus Finch the father / attorney in "To Kill a Mockingbird?"
Posted by: MLMOON at January 8, 2008 1:19 AM
Once again Mr. Fitzgeralds writing style and acumen have floored me...I have a LOT of reading to do.
http://www.challenging-islam.org/contributors/hugh/jihadwatch/hughjihadwatch.htm
at January 8, 2008 1:49 AM
sheik, hugh and o'bannon - re Mark Cohen
I, too, read his foolish J Post article.
Seconding your assessment of it.
If you trawl through the talkback you will see that some readers, however, were not taken in.
I put in my two cents - including an ad for Andrew Bostom's upcoming book. What is more: the comment was added, headline and all.
I don't know how many people read talkbacks.
But...Israel is a small country. If, every time there is an article, op ed, column or blog entry, in a paper like J Post ( or whatever other online Israeli news outlet some of us follow) that cries out to be related to the paradigm in which Hugh, Spencer, Bostom and Bat Yeor have instructed us, a brief thought-provoking talkback or Letter to the Editor appears, referring to:
Islamic antisemitism and Muslim pogroms against Jews, pre-1900; real misery of dhimmitude in eretz Israel pre-1917; Slow Jihad; Fast JIhad; Lesser Jihad against Israel; the Great Jihad against everyone else; War is Deception; Hudna; taqiyya; darura; Treaty of Hudaybiyya; and so on - then sooner or later those memes will stick, like burrs in wool. They will transfer from one mind to another.
A 'tipping point' might be reached quite quickly, if we all keep at it.
Because the paradigm that Spencer et al. are delineating, has the virtue of being true and, therefore, of being predictive. Once a sufficient number of Israeli Jews (and, perhaps, the minority of non-dhimmified Christians) grasp this, and find out that actions based on that paradigm bring results (and that the actions in the past which brought results, were those that consciously or unconsciously conformed to it), then the ummah in that neighbourhood could be in for a whole series of nasty shocks.
at January 8, 2008 2:04 AM
This one was told to me by by Jewish neighbour who lives three doors along the street from me AND HE WAS NOT INSULTED BY IT WHEN HE FIRST HEARD IT!
"In mighty ecumenical conclave, the religions of the world decide to iron out their differences for the good of humanity, eliminating once and for all the petty doctrinal disputes that have blinded their followers to their common ethical teachings. In quick succession, the Sunnis announce that they have deemphasized the Haj, the Shiites issue a renunciation of jihad, the Patriarch and the Pope, in a joint statement, give up the Trinity and the virginity of Mary, the Hindus give up on idolatry, the Shintoists animism, the Zoroastrians dualism, and so on. The Dalai Lama renounces the doctrine of reincarnation a couple of days later, and the world waits, with bated breath, as the Rabbi Lau, Rav Schach, and Rishon LeTzion Ovadiah Yosef remain locked in closed session eighteen hours a day. Week after week goes by, as wild rumors fly up the alleys of Jerusalem and across the world's airwaves. Finally, the sages step out in front of the flashbulbs, sweaty and pale. In a quavering voice, one of them reads from a prepared statement, and simultaneous translators relay his words to a billion living rooms around the globe:
After deep consideration of the momentous nature of this occasion, and with abiding faith in heaven, we have undertaken an unprecedented step, and have decided, in the greater cause of peace between the children of Adam, to eliminate the second Yekum Purkan from the Shabbat Musaf service."
There is a mighty sense of humour in Judaism. Can you imagine an Imam telling a joke like that! I can't!
Posted by: OliverPCamford at January 8, 2008 2:21 AM
Oh, and the other one that he told, which has absolutely nothing to do with the subject of this thread, but is funny nonetheless:
If Microsoft was Jewish:
Instead of getting a "General Protection Fault" error, your PC would get "Verklempt".
"Year 2000" issues would be replaced by "Year 5760-5761" issues.
Hanukkah screen savers would have "Flying Dreidels".
Your PC would shut down automatically at sundown on Friday evenings.
After your computer dies, you would dispose of it within 24 hours.
Your "Start" button would be replaced with a "Let's go! I'm not getting any younger!" button.
"Abort, Retry, Ignore" would be replaced with "Stop it already--You re killing me! You vant I should try it again? I didn t hear that!"
When disconnecting external devices from the back of your PC, you would be instructed to "Remove the cable from your PC's tuchis".
Your multimedia player would be renamed to "Nu, so play my music already!"
Internet Explorer would now have a spinning "Star of David" in the upper right corner.
You would hear the tune "Hava Nagila" during startup.
Microsoft Office would include "A little byte of this, and a little byte of that."
When running "scandisk", you would be prompted with a "You vant I should fix this?" message.
When your PC is working too hard, you would occasionally hear a loud "Oy!!!"
A "monitor cleaning solution" from Manischewitz would advertise that it gets rid of the "schmutz" on your monitor.
After 20 minutes of no activity, your PC would go "schloffen."
Computer viruses would now be cured with chicken soup.
Never mind the quality, feel the width!
at January 8, 2008 2:58 AM
As my Jewish friend would say, has said when I showed him this thread:
“In a democracy, we do not recognise the right not to be insulted”
He also added: "Why are they so sensitive. God laughs, also!"
God laughs. Yep. I can agree with that.
So, I echo him, my wonderful Jewish friend (a staunch and loyal friend for many years now): "Why are they so sensitive?"
at January 8, 2008 3:07 AM
Oh where oh where .. are the "false flag" troofers who support any other interpretation of the "Dreaded Mohammed Dog of Hate" posters ..
Posted by: drk at January 8, 2008 7:25 AM
Great joke, Oliver!
Humans have the ability to laugh at themselves. Sadly, muslims don't.
Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at January 8, 2008 8:34 AM
There were once two rabbis who were disagreeing about a particular point in the Torah.
The older rabbi finally says "Let's bring this conflict up to God!'
The clouds parted, sunlight streamed down and God (sounding like James Earl Jones) pronounced, "The older rabbi is right."
The younger rabbi thought about this for awhile and then said, "Okay, now it's two against one!"
"Man is the animal who laughs." - don't know who said it, but I tend not to trust people who have no sense of humor and lack the ability to laugh about themselves.
at January 8, 2008 9:29 AM
This is true multiculturalism. Unfortunately the term has been so perverted I can't stand to hear it uttered. Our adherence to the Constitution is the only thing that will save this country from the muslims. --posted by Kevin
Me too, I hate that word, multiculturalism.
Uh Huh - the Constitution and the First Amendment. We're hanging on to 'em for dear life.
Posted by: darcy at January 8, 2008 9:43 AM
I wish I knew who who the mohammed dog poster was. I'd send him/her a case of their favourite beer!
Posted by: j_not_a at January 7, 2008 8:30 PM
If a person does get arrested, we need to show our support for him. I'm assuming it's a "him" btw.
at January 8, 2008 9:52 AM
People - YOu MUST read this Editorial from the Lewiston, Maine, paper today:!
http://www.sunjournal.com/story/246366-3/OurView/Letting_the_ignorant_few_define_us_all/
Posted by: darcy at January 8, 2008 10:13 AM
-"Am I expected to perform due diligence on everyone I quote, find out all about this or that person's works and days?"-
No, of course you're not. That's why I'm providing you here with a bit of background information about mister Bos. Without a doubt, his remark was indeed a good one. One suspects however that he felt somewhat obliged to say something like this, people all across the country criticised this Quisling museum director.
Was his comment a sign of a politician beginning to grasp the nature of Islam? Even though I wish it were, I'm afraid it wasn't. A few days after his remark there was this report of fraudulent PvdA immigrant politicians in Amsterdam. People who have introduced all kinds of ethnic clientilism, a pratice unheard of before mass immigration to this country took off.
Wouter Bos saw nothing wrong in all this, the politicians could stay, the city council's accountant, who abhorred all the corruption, was kindly asked to leave.
at January 8, 2008 10:29 AM
"But that's not the only literary echo planted for the hell of it in the piece on dhimmitude-doings in sweet Auburn.
Recognition here for the person who can identify the other one."
-- from a challenge put up at 10:42 p.m.
So far one poster (Moonzoo) has suggested "palpable hit" from Hamlet. "Palpable hit" is used so often that I consider it to have entered the language and lost its allusive quality; it does not, in my book, qualify as a going-out-of-my-way allusion.
I hinted at the answer, when in making my find-the-allusion challage I mentioned "sweet Auburn."
In the original article I refer to "sweet Auburn, loveliest village of central Maine." Why would I call it that? I've never been to Auburn, and the unwonted apostrophe to the town should surprise. But I have read Thomas Gray's "The Deserted Village," which includes the line "Sweet Auburn, loveliest village of the plain."
Yes, I know, I know. My version has an extra syllable.
Nobody's perfect.
Posted by: Hugh
at January 8, 2008 10:58 AM
Here are the first 96 lines (it's a long-winded poem) of "The Deserted Village."
Within that 96-line excerpt are two lines that perfectly describe the moral and political and economic and social degringolade in the United States today. For those who like this kind of thing, I have another question:
What are those two lines?
The Deserted Village
by Oliver Goldsmith
Sweet Auburn, loveliest village of the plain,
Where health and plenty cheered the labouring swain,
Where smiling spring its earliest visit paid,
And parting summer's lingering blooms delayed:
Dear lovely bowers of innocence and ease,
Seats of my youth, when every sport could please,
How often have I loitered o'er thy green,
Where humble happiness endeared each scene;
How often have I paused on every charm,
The sheltered cot, the cultivated farm, [10]
The never-failing brook, the busy mill,
The decent church that topped the neighbouring hill,
The hawthorn bush, with seats beneath the shade,
For talking age and whispering lovers made.
How often have I blessed the coming day,
When toil remitting lent its turn to play,
And all the village train, from labour free,
Led up their sports beneath the spreading tree,
While many a pastime circled in the shade,
The young contending as the old surveyed; [20]
And many a gambol frolicked o'er the ground,
And sleights of art and feats of strength went round.
And still as each repeated pleasure tired,
Succeeding sports the mirthful band inspired;
The dancing pair that sweetly sought renown,
By holding out to tire each other down;
The swain mistrustless of his smutted face,
While secret laughter tittered round the place;
The bashful virgin's sidelong looks of love,
The matron's glance that would these looks reprove. [30]
These were thy charms, sweet village; sports like these,
With sweet succession, taught even toil to please;
These round thy bowers their cheerful influence shed,
These were thy charmsÐbut all these charms are fled.
Sweet smiling village, loveliest of the lawn,
Thy sports are fled and all thy charms withdrawn;
Amidst thy bowers the tyrant's hand is seen,
And desolation saddens all thy green:
One only master grasps the whole domain,
And half a village stints thy smiling plain: [40]
No more thy glassy brook reflects the day,
But, choked with sedges, works its weedy way.
Along thy glades, a solitary guest,
The hollow-sounding bittern guards its nest;
Amidst thy desert walks the lapwing flies,
And tires their echoes with unvaried cries.
Sunk are thy bowers in shapeless ruin all,
And the long grass o'ertops the mouldering wall;
And trembling, shrinking from the spoiler's hand,
Far, far away, thy children leave the land. [50]
Ill fares the land, to hastening ills a prey,
Where wealth accumulates and men decay:
Princes and lords may flourish or may fade;
A breath can make them, as a breath has made;
But a bold peasantry, their country's pride,
When once destroyed, can never be supplied.
A time there was, ere England's griefs began,
When every rood of ground maintained its man;
For him light labour spread her wholesome store,
Just gave what life required, but gave no more: [60]
His best companions, innocence and health;
And his best riches, ignorance of wealth.
But times are altered; trade's unfeeling train
Usurp the land and dispossess the swain;
Along the lawn, where scattered hamlets rose,
Unwieldy wealth and cumbrous pomp repose;
And every want to opulence allied,
And every pang that folly pays to pride.
These gentle hours that plenty bade to bloom,
Those calm desires that asked but little room, [70]
Those healthful sports that graced the peaceful scene,
Lived in each look and brightened all the green;
These far departing, seek a kinder shore,
And rural mirth and manners are no more.
Sweet Auburn! parent of the blissful hour,
Thy glades forlorn confess the tyrant's power.
Here as I take my solitary rounds,
Amidst thy tangling walks and ruined grounds,
And, many a year elapsed, returned to view
Where once the cottage stood, the hawthorn grew, [80]
Remembrance wakes with all her busy train,
Swells at my breast and turns the past to pain.
In all my wanderings round this world of care,
In all my griefs (and God has given my share)
I still had hopes my latest hours to crown,
Amidst these humble bowers to lay me down;
To husband out life's taper at the close
And keep the flame from wasting by repose.
I still had hopes, for pride attends us still,
Amidst the swains to show my book-learned skill, [90]
Around my fire an evening group to draw,
And tell of all I felt and all I saw;
And, as a hare, whom hounds and horns pursue,
Pants to the place from whence at first she flew,
I still had hopes, my long vexations past,
Here to return and die at home at last.
Please post your answer here.
Posted by: Hugh
at January 8, 2008 11:07 AM
Yes, those Somalis are fine people, that is why their homeland is such a good place to live and raise your family.
AS far as this liberal douchebag rabbi(t),I'm sure he also is one with the Intifidata and the valiant resistance fighters in Lebanon. With such people as leaders, we Jews don't need any enemies. I mean can't people take a joke anymore?
at January 8, 2008 11:19 AM
A "monitor cleaning solution" from Manischewitz would advertise that it gets rid of the "schmutz" on your monitor.
Thanks Oliver. I had to clean the coffee off my keyboard.lol
Someone asked how come the muslims can't laugh at themselves. Moham"mutt" killed humor back in 622.
Posted by: Kevin at January 8, 2008 11:41 AM
More Oliver Goldsmith:
The Village Schoolmaster
Beside yon straggling fence that skirts the way
With blossom'd furze unprofitably gay,
There, in his mansion, skill'd to rule,
The village master taught his little school;
A man severe he was, and stern to view,
I knew him well, and every truant knew;
Well had the boding tremblers learn'd to trace
The days disasters in his morning face;
Full well they laugh'd with counterfeited glee,
At all his jokes, for many a joke had he:
Full well the busy whisper, circling round,
Convey'd the dismal tidings when he frown'd:
Yet he was kind; or if severe in aught,
The love he bore to learning was in fault.
The village all declar'd how much he knew;
'Twas certain he could write, and cipher too:
Lands he could measure, terms and tides presage,
And e'en the story ran that he could gauge.
In arguing too, the person own'd his skill,
For e'en though vanquish'd he could argue still;
While words of learned length and thund'ring sound
Amazed the gazing rustics rang'd around;
And still they gaz'd and still the wonder grew,
That one small head could carry all he knew.
But past is all his fame. The very spot
Where many a time he triumph'd is forgot.
Posted by: Silvester
at January 8, 2008 11:48 AM
"...who "represents the Lewiston-Auburn Interfaith Clergy"..."
Interfaith clergy is an oxymoron. Clergy is defined by one, singular faith. Interfath means simply betraying the entrusted spirituality into a dhimmitude.
Lan astaslem! I will not submit!
Posted by: Excommie at January 8, 2008 11:51 AM
I hope the moire-silk mockery in that constructed word "interfaith-healer" is picked up, and used to the same effect, by others.
Posted by: Hugh at January 8, 2008 12:14 PM
Hugh:
re: your Oliver Goldsmith poem.
First I had to find out what degringolade meant; I always find it necessary to keep my online dictionary open when reading your posts.
At first glance lines 37/38 stood out
Amidst thy bowers the tyrant's hand is seen,
And desolation saddens all thy green:
but that seemed more political than moral/economic/social.
Then lines 51/52
Ill fares the land, to hastening ills a prey,
Where wealth accumulates and men decay:
again seemed deficient in that it seems to refer mainly to the economic/social aspect of your challenge.
Similarly lines 63/64
But times are altered; trade's unfeeling train
Usurp the land and dispossess the swain;
Finally I settled on lines 73/74
These far departing, seek a kinder shore,
And rural mirth and manners are no more.
While maybe not a perfect choice, fits better with the topic of the thread.
Hope I'm not wasting your time,
Presley O'Bannon
at January 8, 2008 2:29 PM
Well, the couplet I had in mind was one that you considered, but rejected:
"Ill fares the land, to hastening ills a prey,
Where wealth accumulates, and men decay."
I think it is not only "economic/social" aspect, but also political, in that wealth would not be allowed to accumulate in ever greater amounts, in ever fewer hands, without the exercise of political power, and that couplet is also about moral collapse:
"Where wealth accumulates, and men decay."
That is what I would put on my bumper, were I in the mood for bumperstickers.
at January 8, 2008 2:53 PM
I don't know how many people read talkbacks.
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at January 8, 2008 2:04 AM
dumbledoresarmy,
Yes I frequently read the talkbacks, usually on Carolyn Glick's column's, which I read frequently.
I had wondered if that was your comment, as it seemed to contain the style and understanding of your comments here on JW/DW and was posted from Australia. I'm glad to see I was right!
You certainly do take your "defense against the dark arts" seriously.
Respectfully,
Presley O'Bannon
Posted by: Lt. Presley O'Bannon at January 8, 2008 2:58 PM
Thanks Hugh,
You're right, of course.
Hopefully there are (and I think there are) men and women who can and will stave off that decay with right thinking and right actions. I think the regular contributors to this site are just such women and men.
And may you continue, as you already do,
"Around my fire an evening group to draw,
And tell of all I felt and all I saw;"
at January 8, 2008 3:28 PM
Do you have a mameluke sword?
Posted by: Hugh at January 8, 2008 5:39 PM
No, I don't. I was only a non-commissioned officer (Corporal) briefly, and at the time it seemed like an unnecessary and slightly extravagent expense. I didn't purchase dress blues, either.
Posted by: Lt. Presley O'Bannon at January 8, 2008 6:53 PM
I just wanted to use the phrase.
Posted by: Hugh at January 8, 2008 8:10 PM
That's ok, I hoped someone would figure out the context.
I was researching something for dumbledoresarmy on another thread, and realized that I wouldn't have rated the Mameluke Sword anyway. Somehow in the haze of twenty years gone by, I juxtaposed the sword presented to O'Bannon with the one NCO's carry instead of Officers.
Oh well, what are they going to do, shave my head and send me back to boot camp?
Posted by: Lt. Presley O'Bannon at January 8, 2008 8:30 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Dhimmi Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)