Tuesday, September 19, 2017

Justin Trudeau and His Socks Make Vanity Fair's List of "Best Dressed International Men"

They're situated between Jack Schlossberg (Caroline Kennedy's kid) and a notably hosiery-less LeBron James.

JT's entry (I quote from my physical copy of the magazine since this is as far as I can seem to get in the virtual world) reads as follows:
Justin TRUDEAU
OCCUPATION: Prime minister of Canada.
RESIDENCE: Ottawa.
MOST NOTABLE ACCESORY OF THE YEAR: Mismatched blue and yellow R2D2 and C-3PO Star Wars socks, worn to a meeting with the Irish prime minister.
Surely it isn't necessary to point out that had anyone other than pretty boy Justin worn this mismatched set, it would have been pegged as either an egregious fashion faux pas, or as a strange and rather pathetic instance of arrested development.

"The Emmy Awards Were Hypocritically Progressive"--Now That's Funny!

There's just no pleasing some people (for instance, the Uber-"progressive" who came up with this stuff):
All in all, the evening was a striking display of both cosmetic and factual diversity. Although some of the night’s big winners — in particular The Handmaid’s Tale and Big Little Lies — were overseen artistically by white guys (Bruce Miller and the team of Jean-Marc VallĂ©e and David E. Kelley, respectively), they still offered woman-centric stories that unfortunately could not have been better timed. Big Little Lies’ story of women rising up against a serial abuser resonated against President Donald Trump’s history of sexist remarks, including his notorious brag during the 2016 election that stardom made it easy to sexually assault women; and The Handmaid’s Tale — well, duh. The more harrowing parts of it could probably double as short documentaries of the inside of Vice-President Mike Pence’s mind.
But these visible signs of progress and/or resistance were undercut by instances of lameness or hypocrisy. Throughout the evening, there were small and large digs at Trump and his administration. This was to be expected on a night that celebrated a politically very liberal industry during a time of Trump-fueled public displays of racism, anti-Semitism, sexism, and xenophobia, plus a documented rise in hate crimes during the presidential election year of 2016, which Trump had entered the previous summer by declaring that Mexico brought drugs, crime, and rapists into the United States
But with the conspicuous exception of Jane Fonda, Lily Tomlin, and Dolly Parton comparing Trump to their piggish boss in the 1980 hit 9 to 5, many of the jokes Sunday night lacked any discernible sharp edge...
All in all, the evening was the snoozeroo that it's always been--with or without the anti-Trump folderol.

That said, I do enjoy the sight of "progressives" shooting each other in the keester for supposed ideological failures.

Question Du Jour (Whose Answer Is Obvious)

Did a Swedish council buy apartments for a man and his three wives?

Why wouldn't it, you racist/bigot/Islamophobe, you.

Wishing All My Jewish Readers a Happy 5778!

Monday, September 18, 2017

Islam By the Books

On the NRO site, historian and pundit David Pryce-Jones elucidates two "rival approaches to Islam" that have been captured in two recent books:
Ibn Warraq is the pseudonym of someone evidently born and brought up a Muslim but who as an adult finds that rationality means more to him than Islam. The pseudonym is all that stands between him and a death sentence for his critical writings. “Why I Am Not a Muslim” is the giveaway title of one of his books, and “Why the West is Best: A Muslim Apostate’s Defense of Liberal Democracy” is the giveaway title of another. And now he comes out with yet another book, The Islam in Islamic Terrorism, and very magisterial it is too. “A propensity to violence is embedded in the core principles of Islam,” he writes, demonstrating how this propensity repeats down the centuries and across borders. Every time and everywhere the violence is a phenomenon of the faith, not a reaction to poverty or to some wickedness supposedly imposed by outsiders and unbelievers such as, for instance, Western colonialism. Terrorists, says President Trump, are “sick and demented,” while Mrs. May calls them “cowards.” Such opinions stem from Western ways of judging conduct, and are irrelevant in this context. Jihadis are committing mass-murder and self-sacrifice in the belief that Islam demands this of them. Ibn Warraq’s courage in saying so is as admirable as his learning. 
At just the same time, by coincidence, Christopher de Bellaigue happens to have come out with a virtually opposite view in his new book The Islamic Enlightenment, also a giveaway title. With one foot in journalism and one foot in universities, he singles out an elite of Ottoman Turks, Persians, and Egyptians who in the past were Westernizing modernizers in one field or another. He makes out a heroic story of reform whose whole point is that Islam is open to opportunity and has no propensity to violence. It is rather bad luck that the book has been overtaken by events so cruelly...
My comment:
If some key passages of Islamic holy writ command the faithful to wage jihad on the unbeliever (a holy war that is to remain in effect until such time as the infidel, in effect, cries, "Uncle!"), it should come as no surprise when some Muslims follow these instructions to the letter.

Pretending that that's not so--as the likes of Western apolgists for Islam such as Christopher de Bellaigue continue to do: now, that never fails to surprise me.
 

"Unaccompanied Minors" Depend on the Kindness of Strangers to Wage Jihad

Daniel Greenfield unpacks the scam and its ramifications here.

Ever Wondered Why "Koran" Became "Qu'ran"?

I know I have. Now, thanks to John Steele Gordon, all is revealed:
Koran...has been in the English language since 1725. Suddenly it began appearing as Quran, which is a transliteration of the Arabic, and even Qu’ran. What appears to English speakers as a meaningless apostrophe is actually a breath mark carried over from Arabic, which, like Hebrew, does not write out the vowels. In English we do, and so we don’t need breath marks. 
What is wrong with Koran? Exactly nothing. The idea that we should use the transliterated Arabic word instead of our own word is pure political correctness deriving from the classic linguistic fallacy of conflating the word and the thing denoted by the word. The Koran is the holy book of Islam. Koran is a word in the English language. 
This line of thinking gives Arabic speakers, not English speakers, control over many English words. Does that mean we have to use Arabic transliterations for such English words as sofaadmiral, and zero, which derive from Arabic? I’m pretty sure Arabic speakers would laugh at the opposite idea, that we English speakers get to determine how English-derived words in that language should be spelled in Arabic...

Friday, September 15, 2017

The Method In the Trudeau Liberals' Victimhood Madness

Toronto Sun columnist Farzana Hassan says the Trudeau government is determined to give "official sanction to a persecution complex which is already widespread, despite the fact that Muslims face no more discrimination than any other minority group."

She also says that it is supporting M-103, the so-called "anti-Islamophobia" motion, without reckoning on "many of the possible subtle and long-term repercussions."

Alas, that's where she's wrong. If the repercussions involve shutting people up re Islam/Islamism/the jihad, and, ultimately, just shutting people up, period, then the Liberals are all for it.

How better to permanently empower themselves and those who share their point of view, and effectively silence and diminish those who oppose them?

Update: One uppity infidel pens an open letter on behalf of another (who is being silenced and diminished for her opposing views).

Breaking News: Terrorist Bombing on the London Tube

Early reports say that "lots" have been injured due to an explosion and subsequent stampede.

"Free Speech" at Berkeley? Not So Much, Really

Ben Shapiro's speech went ahead as planned yesterday on the campus where, back in the day, the Free Speech Movement was born.

The question to be asked, though, is this: can it really be considered "free speech" when it requires a Trump-like "wall" to keep angry protesters away from the speaker and what's described as a "massive" police presence in order for his speech to procede?

Wednesday, September 13, 2017

"Ignite Change"? Ignite a CHRC-Sponsored Intifada, More Like

Ranya El-Sharkawi "is a first generation Canadian with Palestinian roots in Gaza and Jaffa"--not my ideal candidate to represent "human rights" in this country. But, unlike yours truly, there are those who believe that she's the perfect person to, you should pardon the expression, "ignite change."

Here are the deets of what happened when Ms. El-Sharkawi used the "human rights" platform she was given to push the anti-Zionist/pro-Palestinian agenda. (They're from a B'nai Brith Canada communique that just showed up in my email; my bolds):
On Aug. 22, as part of the Ignite Change 2017 conference organized by the John Humphrey Centre for Peace and Human Rights at MacEwan University, John Humphrey board member Ranya El-Sharkawi launched into a 40-minute diatribe against the Jewish State. The Ignite Change website lists the City of Edmonton, the Province of Alberta and the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) as sponsors. 
El-Sharkawi strongly endorsed the anti-Israel boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement in her speech, even though the discrimination promoted by BDS violates Section 3 of the Alberta Human Rights Act. She went on to say that "the whole concept of antisemitism is problematic," arguing that Arabs cannot possibly be antisemitic since they would be going "against [their] own ethnicity."  
Other bizarre statements by El-Sharkawi included a claim that foreign volunteers "do not have the right to dictate how Palestinians resist, whether it's violent or non-violent," in reference to ongoing Palestinian terrorism. She concluded her speech by recommending that listeners rely on the materials of Miko Peled, an extremist so toxic that even pro-Palestinian student groups have sought to distance themselves from his blatant antisemitism. 
"The complete failure by both Premier Rachel Notley and Mayor Don Iveson to speak out is shameful," said Michael Mostyn, Chief Executive Officer of B'nai Brith Canada. "Public dollars should not be wasted on propaganda that is both blatantly false and contrary to provincial law. Both the City and the Province owe the Alberta Jewish community an apology. 
"However, it is the complicity of the CHRC in this travesty that is most baffling. Last year was the worst on record for antisemitism in Canada, and the CHRC is supposed to be combating the phenomenon, not fanning the flames by funding events where the very problem of antisemitism is denied."...
Baffling?

Not so much.

After all, the CHRC is in the victimhood biz, same as the Palestinians. 

Update: Back in 2014, Canada's then-Prime Minister Stephen Harper gave at Israel's Knesset in which he exposed the antics of Ms. El-Sharkawi and her pernicious ilk. Here's what he said:
"Some civil-society leaders today call for a boycott of Israel.... Most disgracefully of all, some openly call Israel an apartheid state. Think about that. Think about the twisted logic and outright malice behind that.  
"A state, based on freedom, democracy and the rule of law, that was founded so Jews can flourish as Jews, and seek shelter from the shadow of the worst racist experiment in history," he said. 
"That is condemned, and that condemnation is masked in the language of anti-racism. It is nothing short of sickening."