scaramouche

...born with the gift of laughter and a sense that the world was mad

About me

User: scaramouche
Irreverent, contrarian, delighted to be out of synch with the zeitgeist, I depend on my sense of humour (such as it is) to keep me sane in this wacky world.

  • Contact me
  • My profile
  • Linkme

Counter

visited *loading* times

« View the previous post.  |  Home  |  View the next post. »
Wednesday, 03 June 2009


Elmo had some little lambs: Displaying the same razor-sharp logic they deployed in their battle against Mark Steyn, two of Elmo’s sockies fling mud at another notorious “Islamophobe” (i.e. an advocate of free speech and a critic of jihad, sharia and other problematic aspects of Islam and its adherents)—Ezra Levant—in a letter to the Toronto Star:
Ezra Levant accuses Canada's human rights commissions of censorship for investigating our hate-speech complaints about his publishing of cartoons depicting Muslims and the Prophet Muhammad as suicide bombers and for hearing our complaints regarding Maclean's magazine's refusal to publish a response to one of more than 20 articles. Among other things, the articles imply that Islam condones sex with minors and animals, refer to Muslims as "sheep-shaggers" and allege that Muslims believe in drinking the blood of their enemies.
Although Levant may regard this rhetoric as "free speech," most Canadians would recognize it as racist if not hateful. Indeed, the Ontario Human Rights Commission said it has, "serious concerns about the content of a number of articles concerning Muslims that have been published by Maclean's magazine and other media outlets . . . (for) contributing to Islamophobia and promoting societal intolerance towards Muslim, Arab and South Asian Canadians."
It is not surprising that Levant is smearing our HRCs for bringing public attention to bear on his own Islamophobic track record.
Khurrum Awan, Naseem Mithoowani, Toronto
Again with the sheep? Clearly, the sockies haven’t read Steyn’s latest book, wherein it’s explained that the sheep-shaggery was the Ayatollah Khomeini’s shtick. The holy one was consumed by questions of post-coital etiquette, specifically, was it acceptable to consume the ovine object of one’s desire following sexual congress with it? Employing that “tone” that the B.C. “human rights” ‘roos found so distasteful, Steyn dared to spoof the Ayatollah’s woolly-headed edicts—something that’s not allowed in lands where sharia (and a “human rights” apparatus) calls the shots.
Memo to the relentless—and relentlessly clueless—socks: what causes “societal intolerance” toward sock-types is their gross mischaracterization of the facts; their trashing of our most valuable freedom, free speech; and their dignifying the words of that sanctimonious doofus Babs Hall, the hanging judge who took it upon herself to pass sentence on a case over which she had no jurisdiction.



Update: "Socky and Cher"? Oh, Mark, you're just too funny.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:04 | link | comments (7)


Comments:
#1  03 June 2009 - 13:03
 
Khurrum Awan is possessed by a Djinn.
Anonymous
#2  03 June 2009 - 18:28
 
Elmo's a djinn? I always thought he was, you know, an engineering professor.
User: scaramouche Contact me View user's mediablog scaramouche
#3  04 June 2009 - 02:24
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApcnpFCYd7E&NR=1

Worth watching for a good laugh. Khurrum Awan is a blubbering, amateurish mess, and the women (who at times appear not to realize they're on camera) seem very preoccupied with the appearance of their respective hair-dos. They all sound so lame and unsure of themselves when talking, and the side-ways grimaces that Naseem shoots in Steyn's direction are hilarious. 

Interesting, I think, that Muneeza Sheikh should describe herself as "Pakistani Muslim" when she is in fact a natural-born Canadian citizen.
Anonymous
#4  04 June 2009 - 03:32
 
Humour is one of the best ways to look at this nonsense.

However, there are actual people in high places, granted patronage high places who are believing this to be real, and that these are Human Rights issues.

Give me a break.

mbrandon8026
Anonymous
#5  05 June 2009 - 08:32
 
 I was going to leave a comment on the post but when I saw that everyone is Mo`---- I changed my mind. If no one knows who you are you might as well not say anything.
Anonymous
#6  05 June 2009 - 11:59
 
If you want your identity known, you have to log in.
User: scaramouche Contact me View user's mediablog scaramouche
#7  08 June 2009 - 03:27
 
The youtube video above is laughable.

I had only read about these three- didn't realise just how pathetic they really were.
Anonymous
Comments: