Bad Juju! You no logged in or no introduced to the frogman. Log-in or register. Or suffer mucho hoo-doos.
Published and printed from http://www.thedissidentfrogman.com. All rights reserved. Commercial and/or derivative use without our agreement is restricted.
Next entry | Previous entry
Font size · Taille du texte Normal . Large
You're reading the print-optimized version of the dissident frogman's weblog. It's fine by me, but keep in mind that you're missing some of the content and most of the functionalities. So in case you arrived here via an external link and want the best value for your clicks, the full frogman for this page is over there.
Vous lisez la version optimisée pour l'impression du blog du dissident frogman. Pas de problème, mais soyez conscient que vous loupez un peu de contenu et beaucoup de fonctionalités. Dans le cas où vous êtes arrivés ici via un lien externe et en vouliez plus pour vos clicks, le "full frogman" pour cette page est là.

19th

06/2008

2 months, 2 weeks, 4 days, 50 minutes ago...

Challenged
the dissident frogman • Thursday, June 19, 2008 · 0944 zulu time | In France · Goose stepping and other European achievements

Well, there's a tad more to it than just that:

"are the French literally mentally challenged? Bardot “incited racial hatred” by commenting upon sheep sacrifice? Really?"

Allow me to sum up this here rant once again: while it is definitely wrong for la Bardot to be put on trial for expressing her opinion publicly, there's a bit more to her and this affair than simply "commenting upon sheep sacrifice".

In no specific order, despite the ordered listing below:

  1. She's not just a former uberbabe turned nice little old lady who cares for the poor little sheep, but basically France's PeTA all by herself. No, I'm not kidding.
  2. Beyond her multiple expressions of disgust for many nasty Muhammadan habits, she is also an old xenophobic hag, in bed (politically and literally as a matter of fact) with France's Le Pen National Front.

Again, she shouldn't be prosecuted for having an opinion—because that's what this whole affair boils down to, in effect—but the law of the land in France is for certain opinions to be deemed unacceptable, and the people expressing them to be prosecuted1. That is true for Holocaust revisionists, and that is also true—thank in no small part to the legitimacy and political weight offered on a platter to radical Islam by the Left and one Sarkozy, Nicolas, via the French Muslim Council he singlehandedly forced through2—for critics of Islam like the xenophobic hag Bardot or more sensible—or shall I say, more considered—dissenters like French writer Michel Houellebecq.

Is it wrong? Yes. Is it arbitrary? Considering the vast amounts of politically correct anti-Semitism ("anti-Zionism"), anti-Americanism, apology of each and every mass murdering Communist and Third World dictator as well as plain anti-white racism flowing with complete impunity over the air and in print in France on a daily basis, yeah, you can bet your ass—whatever its color—that it is indeed arbitrary.

Am I deeply opposed to such arbitrary laws and practices, and despite the fact that I hold nothing but contempt for the xenophobic hag, do I think that this kind of pseudo justice is one of the most repulsive aspect of French society?

Oh, you must be new around here. Welcome to my blog.