Bad Juju! You no logged in or no introduced to the frogman. Log-in or register. Or suffer mucho hoo-doos.
Agence France Press does not know the basics of ballistic

18th

01/2008


The following motion picture video may offend your sensibility by stirring 3:31 minutes of racial hatred.

Want a refund? Yeah, try me.


In the light of the recent racket around British laws and courts' breakthrough in reenacting Orwell's worst Orwellian nightmares, at least when it comes to specious smoke screens for tyranny such as "hate speech", "defamation of (a certain) religion", and an outrageous disposition to hear cases brought forth by various Islamic libel tourists and other "stirring of racial hatred", I was hoping I could leverage the accompanying videotaped evidence to successfully sue Rowan Atkinson, the full Monty (Pythons), their writers and producers and live happily ever after, sunbathing on mattresses full of Her Majesty's banknotes with Her Majesty's face on them, in a faraway tropical island surrounded by swarms of exotic beauties with little clothes on. And margaritas à profusion.

I was prepared to argue that this would have been quite a small compensation for the prejudice of being pictured, on the sole account of being French, as a blathering hysterical homosexual with a béret basque and a small penis — and on British television and US silver screens to top it all.

You see, I never wore a béret basque, even for kicks(1). In fact, you'd sooner see me hanging out with the Hezbollah's Boy Band than put on this ridiculous piece of clothing that instantaneously makes one look like one's been milking a very sick cow that couldn't hold it any longer.

If those of you who still know what a cow looks like can forgive the picture.

Alas, considering a no less recent resolution by the International Dictator's Club and Political Branch of the Global Islamic Conquest (sometimes shortened by the stealthier and less alarming nickname of "United Nations") it would seem that my libel tourism trip only stands a chance, really, if the aforementioned hate speech applies to one religion, and one religion only.

Apparently, in addition to being only one God (and Mo being his prophet), there is only one religious offense, and that is the preposterous propagandist invention of "islamophobia".

There go my dreams of living off the British Court-ordered generosity of some among the most famous British entertainers.

Then again, Britain always lives up to its reputation of being a land of opportunity for us libel tourists, this time courtesy of a woman, no less, Miss Home Secretary Jaqui Smith(2):
Ministers have adopted a new language for declarations on Islamic terrorism.

In future, fanatics will be referred to as pursuing "anti-Islamic activity".

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said that extremists were behaving contrary to their faith, rather than acting in the name of Islam.

Security officials believe that directly linking terrorism to Islam is inflammatory, and risks alienating mainstream Muslim opinion.

The alleged terror attack on Glasgow Airport last summer: The Government is renaming Islamic terrorism as 'anti Islamic activities'

In her first major speech on radicalisation, Miss Smith repeatedly used the phrase "anti-Islamic".

In one passage she said: "As so many Muslims in the UK and across the world have pointed out, there is nothing Islamic about the wish to terrorise, nothing Islamic about plotting murder, pain and grief.

"Indeed, if anything, these actions are anti-Islamic'.
Of course, some of us happen to disagree with that latest bout of cultural suicide and taxpayer funded march towards Dhimmitude(3), with the notable exception of the thousands of us already killed at the cries of "Allah is the greatest", and therefore finding themselves in a completely neutral position on the issue (or any other, for that matter) what with being completely dead and all.

Right on you say, but wait, how does that make Britain a land of opportunity for the libel tourist? (wonders, hypothetically, the less enterprising minds in the audience.)

Easy. Follow my train of thought, if you can:

a. Mark Steyn was "summoned to appear before two Canadian Human Rights Commissions on vague allegations of (…) being "flagantry Islamophobic"(4), for speaking out (writing, actually) against Islamic terrorism, basically.

b. Under the new British Government Official Terminology Relating to Islamic Terrorism, Islamic terrorism is neither Islamic or terrorism, but "anti-islamic activity".

From which we can deduce that:

a. Speaking out against the anti-islamic activities formerly known as Islamic terrorism confirms Mark Steyn as a dedicated islamophile.

b. Ergo, attacking Mark Steyn for taking a courageous stand against anti-islamic activists (formerly known as Islamic terrorists) exposes these two Canadian Human Rights Commissions, as well as the non-profit (you wish) Canadian Islamic Congress which initiated the complaint, as vicious and dangerous islamophobic entities and organization.

Conclusion: approach Mark Steyn and offer legal counsel, fill a complaint in British courts, sue Canada and fill mattresses with Canadian Dollars(5).

I understand some of them even have Her Majesty's face on.
  1. And I won't even go anywhere near the other perfidious English slander.
  2. Her real name is just Jacqui Smith though, not Home Secretary Jacqui Smith.

    And not "that silly bitch" either, as some of you might, quite legitimately I guess, think.
  3. Meaning that until their sh* hits our fans and our backs end against the wall, Miss Smith ain't seen nothing yet when it comes to "anti-Islamic activities".
  4. Which is rather cool actually. I would submit that for the contemporary polemicist and pamphleteer, it's even cooler than being banned in China. At least until, or if, China becomes an open threat on the world stage. Yeah, more open than it already is.
  5. I know you find the whole thing a bit confusing, but that's why I'm on my way to becoming a successful and wealthy libel tourist, and you're still sweating and slaving in that cubicle.


Creative Commons

You Recent entries Recent comments

Today October 02, 2014

You're either not logged in, or not registered as a member.

Or you're just a Smelly Socialist.

So which one is it?