Reason's Jacob Sullum expertly dissected the Democrats' DISCLOSE Act, a bill intended to undermine Citizens United v. FEC and silence critics of incumbent politicians (while leaving public employee unions largely unaffected). It's coming to a vote soon.
Among other things, Sullum noted that "Rep. Michael Capuano (D-Mass.) said he wants people to worry about a fine or prison sentence when they dare to speak ill of him." This prompted Glenn Reynolds to comment that:
Hacks don’t like criticism. But they should be careful. They’ll like tar and feathers even less, and that’s what you get when you make criticism illegal.
Tar and feathers have been out of favor for far too long. It's high time they came back into fashion. Given recent events in Massachusetts, maybe that would be a good place to try resurrecting the practice. Watch your ass, Capuano!
In support of South Park creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker, today is Everybody Draw Mohammed Day. I like the idea of depicting him doing mundane things like grocery shopping. But since I have essentially zero artistic ability, I'll just repost the twelve Jyllands-Posten cartoons that caused a world-wide frenzy of radical Muslim outrage in 2006.
Check Reason Hit & Run, the Stranger, or this Facebook page later today for some of the drawings. Unless you're in Pakistan, which has blocked large portions of the internet to protect you from being offended.
UPDATE: Reason has chosen three winners from among the nearly 200 submissions they received. All three are quite clever. I think I like the second-place entry, Where's Mohammed, best. But I see why the winner won — it's at once clever, amusing, and a challenge to the viewer.
I haven't read the 180+ pages of opinion, concurring opinion and dissenting-in-part of the Supreme Court's monumental decision in Citizens United v. FEC. But I've been reading the many posts about it at The Volokh Conspiracy and SCOTUSblog (links to main pages; just keep scrolling). The decision is not perfect (it upheld disclosure requirements, with only Thomas dissenting). But it strikes me as a huge gain for First Amendment rights and a very welcome repudiation of both McCain-Feingold and Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, along with the anti-free-speech mentality that drives such legislation and such court rulings.
Those anti-free-speech advocates are expressing outrage that corporations, which "aren't people," are granted Constitutional rights (as are unions, BTW). But as Ilya Somin observed, the owners and employees of corporations are people (as are the members of unions), and these individuals don't lose their rights by joining together to act in concert.
And the (mostly leftist) critics of free political speech conveniently forget that virtually all significant news media organizations are incorporated. If, as the critics claim, the government can restrict the free speech rights of (people joined together as) corporations, then government can restrict the free press rights of (people joined together as) corporations. Do they really want to go there? Of course not — because entities like CNN, NBC, CBS, and the New York Times are on their side. So they concoct some ridiculous argument of "special rights" for "the press." As if rights aren't universal.
The first amendment protects my right to speak and to print or publish (including modern equivalents like broadcasting, cable-casting, and online posting). It doesn't require me to meet some arbitrary standard of what constitutes a "journalist" in order to exercise those rights. And I don't lose those rights by joining with others to exercise them in concert.
Citizens United is a significant and welcome ruling. And it's yet another ominous indication of the President's authoritarian mindset of that he reacted by essentially calling on Congress to enact legislation to restrict our Constitutional rights (as recognized by the Supreme Court). Hey, this guy taught Constitutional Law, didn't he? And he thinks Congress can, by legislation, abrogate Constitutional rights?
Barack Obama made a mistake last fall when, while walking a neighborhood, he approached "Joe the Plumber" Wurzelbacher. This ordinary "common man" turned out to be an articulate, passionate, and courageous advocate for individual liberty, limited government, and the free market, and he became a hero to those of us who share those American values.
One of the reasons that I never remain pessimistic for very long is that this country seems to produce an endless supply of Joe the Plumbers. At an August 18 town hall meeting, Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA) made a mistake similar to Obama's when he called on Marine Corps veteran David Hedrick. Baird has found for us another Joe the Plumber.
Via NewsBusters, here is Hedrick's statement about the video below:
"I, David William Hedrick, a member of the silent majority, decided that I was not going to be silent anymore. So, I let U.S. Congressman Brian Baird have it. I was one questioner out of 38, that was called at random from an audience that started at 3,000 earlier in the evening. Not expecting to be called on, I quickly scratched what I wanted to say on a borrowed piece of paper and with a pen that I borrowed from someone else in the audience minutes before I spoke. So much for the planned talking points of the right wing conspiracy."
I cheered right along with the audience. Then I watched it again and cheered again. Bravo, David William Hedrick!
If it's the opponents of socialized medicine who are an angry mob, how come they're the ones who keep getting beaten? Via Gateway Pundit comes news of another assault by a union thug, this time in New Hampshire:
A tea party protester was accosted by one of Obama's union thugs today. He was just following orders. GraniteGrok reported, Via Free Republic:
One of the Free Staters was accosted by either an SEIU or AFSCME union thug. The story, corroborated by several sources, is that the Free Stater said something that the Union thug did not like and hauled off and spit into his video camera and then kicked him in the groin.
The camera was running so hopefully it will surface soon. I have asked that if anyone knows the Free Stater to see if he would come over and talk with us.
At Confederate Yankee, a report about a union-sponsored health care town hall in North Carolina suggests that maybe the rank and file members aren't as sold on government-run health care as their leaders would like.
But inside the President's town hall meeting, everything was friendly and wonderful. Especially that adorable little girl asking Obama why the people outside had such mean things on their signs — the little girl that was a plant!
UPDATE: Speaking of plants, it looks like the guy with the "Obama as Hitler" poster was a plant, too. Before Rep. John Dingell's town hall meeting, he paraded the poster around for the media, providing "evidence" to back up Pelosi's absurd assertion. After the meeting, he was handing out Dingell flyers.
What are the odds that the swastika at the Georgia congressman's office was planted, too, a la the noose at Columbia University and numerous similarly faked incidents? I'd say they're pretty good.
The St. Louis Tea Party held a rally at the local Service Employees International Union office Saturday protesting the beating and hospitalization of Kenneth Gladney by SEIU goons on Thursday. The Tea Party's Bill Hennessey reported (emphasis added):
Over 300 people gathered in front of SEIU Headquarters on Pershing Saturday to thank Ken Gladney for taking punishment for our freedom. On Thursday, thugs in SEIU uniforms beat and kicked Gladney. The thugs hate black men who wander off the liberal plantation to speak their minds. That hatred put Gladney into a wheelchair. Unable to speak due to pain, medication, and heat, Gladney’s attorney, David Brown, read from a hand-written statement Gladney had prepared the night before.
According to witnesses, an African-American man wearing an SEIU uniform approached Gladney Thursday about 8:30 p.m. as Gladney showed his buttons and flags to the wife of a minister. The SEIU thug said, “Why is a n***** handing out ‘Don’t tread on me’ flags,” before punching Gladney to the ground. According to video taken at the scene by numerous witnesses, other SEIU thugs joined in to kick and beat Gladney. “Don’t tread on me,” has become a rallying cry for the Tea Party Movement.
Gladney was at the rally in a wheelchair. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch has an excellent 3-minute video (top left of page) that includes an interview with Gladney, followed by another black Tea Party member giving a great verbal smackdown to a leftist.
Rush Limbaugh asked the question today, "Why isn't Kenny Gladney … the new Rodney King?" The answer, of course, is that the mainstream media and the civil rights leadership don't give a rat's ass what happens to a conservative or libertarian black man.
The contempt and loathing of the left for this man is very much on display at the YouTube video of Saturday's rally, with comments like this:
TOO FUNNY… This idiot started a fight, got banged up, and guess what… HE HAS NO HEALTH INSURANCE!!!
Right folks- the moron is working to destroy a program that would have given him medical treatment — now he has to take up a collection to pay his medical bills. He's as dumb as the rest of his ignorant friends.
The SEIU guys should've put him out of his misery.
And this:
wait until the teamsters get ahold of his ass lmao
Of course, there are bad people on both sides. According to Jeralyn Merritt (TalkLeft), a "progressive" leader's car was vandalized at the Rep. Perlmutter event Saturday. But while union thugs beating and kicking a man is apparently a source of humor for many on the left, some lout breaking car mirrors evokes outrage.
Merritt wanted to know "What rock did these people crawl out from under?" — implying that such behavior is characteristic of "these people" rather than a rare exception. And at least one of her commenters, cpinva, went stark raving bonkers (and drew no criticism or censure; this comment is rated "topical") (emphasis in original):
what we have here is a junior version(s) of the infamous bier hall putsch, to be followed by a new kristalnacht against the "others". i suppose at some point, we can expect a right-wing night of the long knives as well.
I mentioned Godwin's Law the other day regarding Pelosi's "They're carrying swastikas" remark. If Godwin's Law were actually enforceable, that comment would have ended all further discussion of the subject at TalkLeft for a very long time.
UPDATE: According to Bill Hennessey, one of the people who was arrested for beating Gladney is an SEIU director, Baptist minister, and (gasp!) community organizer:
Tea Party researchers have discovered some interesting news on one of the people arrested for beating Ken Gladney.
Elston K. McCowan is a former organizer – now the Public Service Director of SEIU Local 2000 – and board member of the Walbridge Community Education Center, and is a Baptist minister, has been a community organizer for more than 23 years, and now, he is running for Mayor of the City of St. Louis under the Green Party.
McCowan accused the Mayor of setting fire to his van . . . because that’s what big city mayors do in their spare time, I guess. He also called Slay a racist. And, on election night, McCowan thanked the family who voted for him. It was quite touching, actually.
McCowan is not a rank-and-file, card-carrying union guy. He is a director with SEIU. He IS the union. He ISSUES the cards. Andy Stern himself might as well have kicked Gladney.
I guess that means McCowan has Obama's favorite book, Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, in his library.
A high-ranking British Foreign Office diplomat and Middle East expert has been arrested for publicly cursing Israel and Jews. Charles Johnson at LGF expressed my sentiments exactly (as he often does):
I’m not sure which is more disgusting — this antisemitic rant by a British diplomat, or the fact that in Britain you can be imprisoned for seven years because you said some words.
The efforts by the left during this campaign to stifle criticism and silence political speech have become increasingly disturbing. Last week, Michael Barone wrote a column citing a few examples and bemoaning what's happening:
Once upon a time, liberals prided themselves, with considerable reason, as the staunchest defenders of free speech. …
Today's liberals seem to be taking their marching orders from other quarters. Specifically, from the college and university campuses where administrators, armed with speech codes, have for years been disciplining and subjecting to sensitivity training any students who dare to utter thoughts that liberals find offensive. …
The treatment of Samuel Joseph "Joe the Plumber" Wurzelbacher has taken these efforts to a whole new level. He's been made an example of that's bound to intimidate and silence many others. You think anyone who can shed light on the Obama-Ayers relationship or spill the beans on Obama-Rezko will step forward after seeing what happens to a man who simply asked a question?
When it’s gotten to the point that someone who happens to ask him an uncomfortable question is pursued to this extent, his personal life exposed, his address published on the Internet, his job and livelihood at risk, it’s gone too far. These people are legitimately to be feared.
Martin also quoted an anonymous email posted at The Corner that summed up how he feels:
I don't know why I'm e-mailing you, except that I just need to vent to someone on The Corner. Pass this around to the others if you like — I bet I'm not the only one.
I really don't like McCain. I'll probably vote for him just as a vote for divided government. I'm far too libertarian in my leanings to be comfortable with McCain (or Obama, for that matter).
That said, the way the pro-Obama media and bloggers, and Obama himself, have responded to Joe has got me nearly shaking with rage. They are attempting to destroy a man — a private citizen — who had the audacity to ask The One a question. Mind you, Joe was on his front lawn playing football with his son when Obama strolled up to give him his hopenchange spiel. Obama approached Joe, not the other way around. And Joe asked Obama an honest question. And Obama gave him an honest — and very, very revealing — answer. Again, mind you, the embarassment was on Obama's end, not Joe's. It wasn't a gotcha question.
And yet, for that Joe is being pilloried, every aspect of his private and professional life being sorted through and exposed. To prove … what? What does that have to do with Obama's answer? What does Joe's situation have to do with Obama's philosophical answer — that he wants to "spread the wealth"? Obama's answer goes down the memory hole while the nation concentrates its fire on obliterating Joe the Plumber.
It's sickening, it's maddening and it's downright chilling.
Sorry for the length. But I am just SEETHING.
I couldn't agree more. It's outrageous and disgusting.
But it's business as usual for the Obama campaign and the radical leftists who now control the Democratic Party. Tonight, I visited Life's Better Ideas for the first time in a week and finally saw David's link to this HillBuzz post. If you think talk of an "Obama thugocracy" is just some cranky, paranoid right-wingers trying to make something out of nothing, you're wrong. There are plenty of centrist Democrats who are angry and disturbed by what's been happening during this campaign, and they're working to expose the truth:
If you haven’t been a regular here at HillBuzz, you might not know about Gigi Gaston’s documentary “We Will Not Be Silenced” on the caucus fraud deliberately orchestrated by the Obama campaign during the primaries. Voter intimidation, registration fraud, vandalism, threats of violence, you name it, Obama’s supporters did it. … …
What’s happening here is something we have never seen before: centrist Clinton Democrats and Republicans are working together to expose the DNC and Obama campaign’s illegal activities and orchestrated, coordinated fraud. Both parties are working with federal agents to investigate ACORN, which has been funded with upwards of $800,000 in questionable donations from the Obama campaign (in what appears to be the expressed and explicit direction to engineer voter fraud in the general election). The tactics being employed now in the 15 states currently under investigation are the VERY SAME TACTICS we saw on the ground in Iowa, Texas, Colorado, Nebraska, Indiana, and other states working for Hillary Clinton in the primaries.
Regarding Samuel Joseph "Joe the Plumber" Wurzelbacher, Scott at Conservatism Today got it about right:
Seriously. This guy is the epitome of American values, hard work and self-sufficiency – and the MSM is going to do everything in its power to destroy him. Just remember, they are destroying you at the same time. Favorite line: "I have parents, I don't need another set of parents called the government." Next favorite: "We are the greatest country in the world, stop apologizing for it."
Here's another great Joe the Plumber quote (from Marina Lee):
“It’s not right for someone to decide you made too much—that you’ve done too good and now we’re going to take some of it back…That’s just completely wrong.”
Here's some Joe the Plumber video. The first one (1:31) is from his home last night after the debate (via The Barton Bulletin).
This one (3:57) is from his press conference this morning.
Where do we order the "I support Joe the Plumber" t-shirts and bumper stickers? I wish McCain (and many other Republicans) sounded this good.
A friend commented that many recent newsmakers (like Dodd, Frank, Pelosi, Obama …) have reminded her of Ayn Rand's villains, but that Joe reminded her of John Galt. That's a stretch. I suspect Joe is more of an Eddie Willers. But, damn, we need lots more Eddie Willers in the world.
BTW, did you pooh-pooh Scott's remark above about the MSM going after Joe? The effort to dig up dirt on Joe is already well under way. Charlie Martin (emphasis added):
Okay, according to Jonathan Martin (no relation as far as I know), a Politico reporter has found a tax lien against Samuel J. Wurzelbacher, who is apparently “Joe the Plumber.” For about $1200.
Now, the county webserver is being wiped out by people trying to look at that docket, so it’s a little hard to find out the whole story — like, was it paid? Was it part of a pending tax dispute? — but in the mean time, think about this for a minute. This guy had the temerity to actually argue with Obama over a point, and get attention — so now national political websites/newspapers are sending reporters to search his tax records?
I mean, at least it used to be campaign operatives doing this kind of thing.
Now, according to Allahpundit, they've dug up "paperwork irregularities" that may put Joe out of work. And Allahpundit wondered (emphasis added):
Should have known better than to ask a media darling a tough question before your affairs were in order, Joe. Exit question: The law’s the law and it is, after all, his own fault for not having the papers he needs. If, say, an illegal alien had asked McCain a tough question and some righty media source responded by bringing his status to light, would the left feel the same way?
Anyone who dares criticize Obama must be punished, and the press is eager to help. I feel sorry for Joe Wurzelbacher. The left and the mainstream media (but I repeat myself) are conducting an anal probing of this decent, hard-working man and won't rest until they destroy him.
I'm going to keep my eyes open for a Joe Wurzelbacher legal defense fund. I suspect he'll need one, and if so, I'll help.
UPDATE: Another roundup of how they're trying to destroy Joe the Plumber. (HT: Instapundit)
UPDATE: Instapundit noted that "They've done more investigations into Joe the Plumber in 24 hours than they've done on Barack Obama in two years . . . ." Read the whole thing. This has quickly gotten disgusting.
UPDATE (10/18): CafePress has "I heart Joe the Plumber" shirts. (HT: Instapundit) But I don't want to "heart" Joe. I want to support Joe. Don't miss my new post about Joe and related matters.
In his latest Weekly Standard column, Fred Barnes foresaw a bleak future for advocates of liberty and limited government (as if it isn't bleak enough, with half the nation's Republicans embracing Keynesian economic policies):
Thanks particularly to the month-long financial crisis, Republicans are in extremely poor shape with the election three weeks away. This means the worst case scenario is now a distinct possibility: a Democrat in the White House, a Democratic Senate with a filibuster-proof majority, and a Democratic House with a bolstered majority.
If this scenario unfolds, Washington would become a solidly liberal town again for the first time in decades. And the prospects of passing the liberal agenda–nearly all of it–would be bright. Enacting major parts of it would be even brighter. You can forget about bipartisanship.
The specifics are grim: big tax rate increases, liberal court appointments, protectionism, the fairness doctrine, Canada-like health care, card-check and other pro-union measures, cap-and-trade… Read the whole thing.
Stephen Green, after an admittedly large intake of wine, envisioned new threats to free speech and in particular to bloggers:
If (when?) Obama is elected, by my estimation there’s an at least even chance that the newly-reconstructed FCC will reverse course and attempt to apply the New Fairness Doctrine to blogs.
If (when?) it happens, I’ll break that law. I will break it with all due malice and in full knowledge of the possible consequences. I’ll shout “Fire Obama!” in a crowded theater. And then, for the first time ever, I’ll ask for reader donations. Because I’ll going to need them, lots of them, to pay for the lawyers.
Green went on to make a point that dovetails with something I've maintained for some time — the left views its opponents as evil enemies to be crushed by any means necessary, and they're willing and eager to use any means necessary. The libertarian/conservative side simply can't and won't fight on that level:
Libertarians/Conservatives like “Jay” and myself underestimate liberals/progressives — and what we’re guilty of is projection. But when we’re drunk and honest, we have to admit: We’re effing pikers. To restate more plainly: We don’t want power, and don’t know how to wield it. We’re pikers.
Progressives have no such qualms. Given power, they’ll take more and they’ll exercise it ruthlessly. Look at the Democrats in Congress these last two years. In not even 24 months, they’ve sunk to depths it took the Republican Congress six or more years to sink to. Their unpopularity levels are even worse than the Republicans’ in 2006. And what will happen in November? The Democrats will win seats — because they know how to wield their power to deliver the goods to please their corrupt, greedy, grabby, needy base.
I hope Barnes and Green are too pessimistic, but it's not looking good.
Green was concerned enough to blast email his many influential contacts (and me, too) with "My First-Ever Mass Mailing In Almost Eight Years of Blogging," which may lead to some kind of organization or movement, or something. Maybe not right now, but probably — if the polls turn out to be right this time.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is even more aggressive than the Democrats about trying to intimidate and silence its critics. CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in terrorist funding cases and a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the mothership of Islamofascism.
A couple of weeks ago, I posted about the distribution in Sunday papers of Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West (an excellent documentary; I contributed to the project and have recommended it many times). CAIR has filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission alleging that this DVD distribution was a Zionist plot to help elect McCain. (That link is to Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch story. I prefer not to link to the CAIR press release or the PDF of the complaint, but you can get there via Jihad Watch if you want.)
CAIR claimed that the DVD was being distributed in "swing states." Um, yeah, like New York. And California.
Spencer observed:
This is a very revealing action for CAIR to take. It reveals in particular two key aspects of CAIR's mindset:
1. It shows that CAIR is fully aware that the jihad against Israel is an integral part of the global jihad, and is not just a struggle to recover Palestinian "stolen land." Thus a film that reveals the nature and goals of that global jihad — Obsession — benefits Israel.
2. It also shows that CAIR believes that John McCain will fight against the global jihad in a way that Barack Obama will not — and that it believes therefore the distribution of an anti-jihad film, which in a sane world would be welcomed by both the Left and the Right since the global jihad wishes to destroy and remake the West utterly, must be some partisan plot.
Um, Robert? Who doesn't believe that John McCain will fight against the global jihad in a way that Barack Obama will not?
I wanted to post about this yesterday, but Blog-City was down for a long stretch. By now you've probably seen or heard about Rep. Alcee Hastings' smear of Gov. Sarah Palin. But in case you missed it, Hastings issued a warning to a National Jewish Democratic Council audience (emphasis added):
“If Sarah Palin isn’t enough of a reason for you to get over whatever your problem is with Barack Obama, then you damn well had better pay attention,” Rep. Alcee Hastings of Florida said at a panel about the shared agenda of Jewish and African-American Democrats Wednesday. … “Anybody toting guns and stripping moose don’t care too much about what they do with Jews and blacks. So, you just think this through,” Hastings added as the room erupted in laughter and applause.
Stripping moose — did he mean skinning? In any case, his point is clear: hunters and gun owners are all dangerous racist bigots who will do who-knows-what to minorities.
When they're not demonizing gun owners, Democrats are trying to silence and intimidate them. For instance, last week Obama himself suggested that his supporters get more confrontational:
In an appearance in Nevada, anti-gun presidential candidate Barack Obama told his followers:
"I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors.I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican.I want you to argue with them and get in their face," he said.
Barack Obama has gone beyond lying about his long anti-gun record.Now he is inciting his followers to lie for him and to be aggressive and confrontational with anyone who will not buy his lies.
Here’s the rundown. NRA does commercial highlighting Obama’s anti-gun record. Biased “fact-checking” site falsely claims that the NRA is being deceitful. Obama’s lawyer sends thuggish letter to networks threatening to try to get their license pulled.
Dat’s a nice broadcasting license you got dere. Sure would be a shame if anything was ta happen to it.
Xrlq thoroughly dismembered the Obama campaign's letter to radio and TV stations. And the "falsely" link in the Patterico quote above is to the NRA's response (PDF) to the WaPo claims regarding the ad. This morning, Instapundit posted a roundup of related stuff, plus the NRA ad in question. It's much like the radio ads airing here in Colorado, and none of the claims made in it were unknown to me — Obama's anti-gun history is pretty clear, extensive, and well-documented.
UPDATE: Don't miss that Gateway Pundit link in Instapundit's roundup, or Gateway's link to the St. Louis C of CC Blog. Democratic prosecutors and sheriffs in Missouri are suggesting that anyone who utters "false criticisms" of Obama may be arrested and prosecuted. Unbelievable!
I've had Harry's Place in my blog roll almost from the beginning and have linked to it several times. It's the voice of Britain's sane, anti-authoritarian left that "gets it" regarding the threat of Islamofascism and its historical and intellectual ties to European fascism.
Reading Harry's Place will convince you that they have a better class of leftists in Britain than we have here — far more articulate, reasonable, funny, and interesting than the American nutroots left. They're evidence, as I once said, "that being economically illiterate doesn't necessarily mean you're divorced from reality in all respects. :-)"
Harry’s Place, a UK blog dedicated to promoting the ideals of freedom and democracy, is being sued by Mohammed Sawalha, the President of the British Muslim Initiative, which has been linked to Hamas and the Islamic Brotherhood, both terrorist organizations. The blog reports that Mr. Sawalha, according to the BBC…
“master minded much of Hamas’ political and military strategy” and in London “is alleged to have directed funds, both for Hamas’ armed wing, and for spreading its missionary dawah”.
In their revelation of the impending lawsuit against them leveled by Mohammed Sawalha, they write:
Mr Sawalha claims that we have “chosen a malevolent interpretation of a meaningless word”. In fact, we did no more than translate a phrase which appeared in an Al Jazeera report of Mr Sawalha’s speech. When Al Jazeera changed that phrase from “Evil Jew” to “Jewish Lobby”, we reported that fact, along with the statement that it had been a typographical error.
Mr Sawalha has been the prime mover in a number of Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood associated projects. He is President of the British Muslim Initiative. He is the past President of the Muslim Association of Britain. He was the founder of IslamExpo, and is registered as the holder of the IslamExpo domain name. He is also a trustee of the Finsbury Park Mosque….
…Mr Sawalha says that the attribution of the phrase “Evil Jew” to him implies that he is “anti-semitic and hateful”. Notably, he does not take issue with our reporting of the revelation, made in a Panorama documentary in 2006, that he is a senior activist in the clerical fascist terrorist organisation, Hamas.
It looks like Harry’s Place is going up against some pretty top-notch lawyers on this one, and they’ve got guts, but as the post goes on to say:
If Mr Sawalha persists in attempting to silence us with this desperate legal suit, we will need your help.
We won’t be able to stand up to them alone.
This is why we’ve started this blogburst, to get the word out that we won’t let members of Hamas or any radical terrorist group censor us or any of our fellow bloggers.
If you're a blogger, join this blogburst in support of Harry's Place by posting this message. I'm hoping that in the future, there will be an opportunity to offer financial support as well. I'll let you know.
Two down, one to go. Another "hate speech" charge against Mark Steyn has been dropped:
The Canadian Human Rights Commission has dismissed a hate speech complaint against Maclean's magazine.
Brought by Mohamed Elmasry, national president of the Canadian Islamic Congress, the complaint was the centrepiece of a three-pronged offense against what he sees as Islamophobia in the national newsweekly, with columnists Mark Steyn and Barbara Amiel the main offenders.
An identical complaint, brought with the help of three Muslim law students who became the public faces of the complaint, was rejected in Ontario on jurisdictional grounds. The third was heard this month by a British Columbia tribunal, which is now deliberating.
Announcing the decision (the CHRC does not publicize dismissals of complaints), Maclean's said in a statement that it "is in keeping with our long-standing position that the article in question, "The Future Belongs to Islam," an excerpt from Mark Steyn's best-selling book America Alone, was a worthy piece of commentary on important geopolitical issues, entirely within the bounds of normal journalistic practice."
"Though gratified by the decision, Maclean's continues to assert that no human rights commission, whether at the federal or provincial level, has the mandate or the expertise to monitor, inquire into, or assess the editorial decisions of the nation's media. And we continue to have grave concerns about a system of complaint and adjudication that allows a media outlet to be pursued in multiple jurisdictions on the same complaint, brought by the same complainants, subjecting it to costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars, to say nothing of the inconvenience. We enthusiastically support those parliamentarians who are calling for legislative review of the commissions with regard to speech issues."
The heinous acts that Steyn and Maclean's committed? They were accused of promoting Islamophobia by quoting radical Muslims. Human rights commissions, my ass.
… There's also the very real problem that these commissions might sidestep penalizing Steyn and Maclean's out of self-preservation. They know that in going after high profile targets they've bitten off more than they can chew — any action against them would likely stir political action to do away with the commisions altogether. If they drop the complaint against Steyn, the political pressure will simply go away and they're free to continue zealously violating the rights of lesser known individuals and organizations.
Just yesterday, Ezra Levant posted about one of those "lesser known individuals" that they're already going after. In Vancouver, stand-up comic Guy Earle was heckled by two lesbians, and as comics are wont to do, he heckled back. Now the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal has agreed with one of the lesbians that Earle's jokes weren't funny, so he's going on trial for his "hate speech."
If you're shaking your head about that, be sure to read Levant's follow-up post about his TV appearance with NOW Magazine editor Susan Cole. She insisted that only lesbians can legally joke about lesbians, only blacks can joke about blacks, and so on. This absurd notion caused Levant to come up with some interesting questions:
What kind of jokes could Barack Obama tell? His mom was White; is he Black enough to tell Black jokes? How about someone who is one quarter Black? One eighth? Are they only allowed to tell gentle Black jokes, but the really tough ones are reserved for very black-skinned Blacks?
Could a straight woman pretend to be a lesbian in order to tell jokes about lesbians? How would Susan Cole propose to check her bona fides? And how about bi-sexuals?
Could a transexual — a man who "became" a woman — tell jokes about women? Even if he was still six feet tall, and looked pretty masculine?
Can anyone tell a joke that begins "a priest and a rabbi walk into a bar", or would you need two people to tell that one?
Read the whole thing. In fact, if you want to catch up on the free speech rights battles in Canada, and keep up going forward, Levant's blog is your one-stop source. Highly recommended. Along with Free Mark Steyn!, whose cool banner I really should add to my sidebar.
I completely forgot that this was Islamofascism Awareness Week, featuring speeches and other events on college campuses across the country. It's sponsored by David Horowitz's Terrorism Awareness Project. Participants included Horowitz, Robert Spencer, Ibn Warraq, Tammy Bruce, Daniel Pipes, Cyrus Nowrasteh, and Nonie Darwish.
On many campuses, the leftists took time out from supporting feminism, GLBT issues, tolerance, and peace to ally themselves with the most mysogynistic, homophobic, intolerant, and violent religio-political movement on the planet in an effort to silence discussion and criticism of that movement.
At Emory University, they succeeded. The university administration chose not to remove the protesters, implicitly stating that their freedom to "speak" (i.e., shout, harass, and disrupt) trumped scheduled speaker David Horowitz's freedom to speak (and the rights of those who came to hear him). So the lecture was terminated and police escorted Horowitz away.
At other campuses, they tried, but failed. Horowitz was allowed to talk at George Washington, mainly because the conservative Young America's Foundation was in charge of the event and controlled ticket distribution. So folks like these had to protest across the street instead of attacking the stage:
The 1389 Blog has lots of info and links about the left's censorship efforts on various campuses. Incorrect University is chock full of related entries, with lots of video clips. Including a Democratic Party strategist defending the leftists who forcibly silence opposing viewpoints as "people who are desperate to having their voice heard." Yeah, right, because leftist ideas are never given a chance to be heard on college campuses.
Muslims Against Sharia commented on Nonie Darwish's appearance at Berkeley (emphasis in original):
… As usual, Islamofascists and their Dhimmi supporters have shown their unwavering resolve to crush any type of dissent. One the members of the "Students for Justice in Palestine" claimed that the purpose of the "Islamofascism Awareness Week" is to reinvigorate anti-Muslim and anti-Arab campaign. Given the fact that the speaker, Nonie Darwish, is both Muslim by birth and Arab it truly shows the depth of brainwashing on campus.
Not only that, but Darwish is from Gaza, so she's Palestinian, too. But to the left, only radical Islamists are authentic Muslims, only those who despise the West are authentic Arabs, and only crazed Jew-hating murderers are authentic Palestinians.
In recognition of the efforts by Berkeley's leftist students and faculty to defend Islamofascism, Muslims Against Sharia gave Berkeley The Dhimmi Award.
Muslims Against Sharia looks like a pretty fine group of people. Here's an excerpt from their manifesto:
Islam, in its present form, is not compatible with principles of freedom and democracy. Twenty-first century Muslims have two options: we can continue the barbaric policies of the seventh century perpetuated by Hassan al-Banna, Abdullah Azzam, Yassir Arafat, Ruhollah Khomeini, Osama bin Laden, Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaeda, Hizballah, Hamas, Hizb-ut-Tahrir, etc., leading to a global war between Dar al-Islam (Islamic World) and Dar al-Harb (non-Islamic World), or we can reform Islam to keep our rich cultural heritage and to cleanse our religion from the reviled relics of the past. We, as Muslims who desire to live in harmony with people of other religions, agnostics, and atheists choose the latter option. We can no longer allow Islamic extremists to use our religion as a weapon. We must protect future generations of Muslims from being brainwashed by the Islamic radicals. If we do not stop the spread of Islamic fundamentalism, our children will become homicidal zombies.
In recognition of the efforts by Berkeley's leftist students and faculty to defend Islamofascism, Muslims Against Sharia gave Berkeley The Dhimmi Award.