Bydio

Ezra Levant is under investigation by the Canadian Human Rights Commission because some Muslims complained his magazine published the Mohammed cartoons in 2006.  Go here to see videos of him at his hearing at the CHRC; his arguments are strong.

I’ll buy him beer and donuts whenever he wants.

You’ll remember that the first time the cartoons were printed, there was no reaction.  However, after some shit-stirring by some imams, and then a reprint of the cartoons months later, the rioting started.  This was a fabricated outrage that cost lives, and is yet another disgrace upon Islam.

Using the legal system to harass citizens is a disgusting and effective tactic in silencing criticism of Islam, and it’s happening all over the world; in England, in Canada, in the United States, and other places where a legal system can be used.

Funny prank/statement about Islam.  Yes, I’m culturally insensitive.

hat tip: Atlas Shrugs

Tommy Tutone - 867-5309 (Jenny)

And an EXCELLENT follow-up by Robert Spencer at JihadWatch.org.

I grew up in Sharon, Massachusetts.  Nice town, not too big, not too small.  Also very Jewish, meaning a high concentration of Jews lived there, not that is was a mostly Jewish town.  As I’ve mentioned before, I always wondered why the Muslim center opened up in Sharon, of all towns.

Now, besides the fundamental Muslim policies of ICNE, we see they’re getting their freak-on Muslim stylee.

http://www.solomonia.com/blog/archive/2007/11/polygamy-in-sharon-ma/

I personally don’t care if you want to have 1 spouse or 50 spouses, as long as all parties can agree with the arrangement.  However, for now it’s illegal, and I see these actions as signs that Muslims (not all, but many) don’t want to become part of America, they want to bring Muslim values into America and force the USA to accept their values while rejecting our values.  They act this way not because we should all be treated like adults, but because Allah wills it.

Unacceptable.

AdviceGoddessBlog.com

In an open letter, one of bin Laden’s most prominent Saudi mentors, the preacher and scholar Salman al-Oadah, publicly reproached bin Laden for causing widespread mayhem and killing.

“How many innocent children, elderly people, and women have been killed in the name of Al Qaeda?” asked al-Oadah in a letter on his Web site, Islamtoday.com, and in comments on an Arabic television station.

“How many people have been forced to flee their homes, and how much blood has been shed in the name of Al Qaeda?”

This is a big deal, it has Muslims mumbling, and none of the blogs that I read (and I read many) have said anything about this.  WTF?

The open letter to bin Laden has received considerable publicity in the Arab media, including the Al Jazeera network and Islamonline.com, and has already elicited angry reactions from Al Qaeda supporters.

Indeed, the attack on bin Laden and his group by a respected religious authority is lethal, especially coming at a critical juncture for Al Qaeda and like-minded militant factions worldwide.

Fawaz A. Gerges - IHT.com

to: news@nature.com

To whom it may concern,

Your interactive Islamic world map* lacks the country of Israel.  It is
lumped together in a group labeled “Occupied Palestinian Territories.” 
Please be more precise with your maps, as it is a proven fact that
Israel does exist and is a shining beacon of science in the Middle East.

Without this prompt correction, I won’t be able to visit your site
because I couldn’t trust the content that is offered to be truthful or
reliable.  Of course I will have to tell others about this lack of
trust, and I’m sure they’ll agree with my lack of trust about your
content after viewing the evidence of your site’s misrepresentation.

Thank you for your time,

*Link to map: http://www.nature.com/news/specials/islamandscience/map/islam-map.html

The response from news@nature.com Chief News and Features Editor, Oliver Morton:

“news@nature.com”
reply-to “news@nature.com”
to byron
date Jul 17, 2007 5:51 AM
subject Nature Publishing Group [Incident: 070716-000649]

Dear correspondent

Thank you for your letter, one of many we have received on this subject.

The state of Israel is clearly marked on the map you refer to, though not named. It is not referred to as Occupied Palestinian Territory.

The number 34, identified as “Occupied Palestinian Territory”, refers to the occupied territories of the West Bank, as its associated line indicates. (The status of Gaza is not addressed, because the scale does not permit it). This territory, like all the numbered and named countries and territories on the map, is represented in green, reflecting membership in the Organization of the Islamic Conference. The map is clearly presented as a representation of the 57 countries of the OIC, of which Israel is not a member.

It is unfortunate that, due to a drafting error in the commercial template from which this graphic was developed, the border between the West Bank and Jordan is not shown on the map, and regrettable that we did not catch this error in our editorial preparation.

I apologise for this error, which I can see does to some extent raise the question of what entity on the map the number “34” refers to. We are publishing a correction and correcting the mistake in our online material. To avoid repeating the error we are revising the template too.

With this correction made, the question of what the 34 refers to becomes obvious; it can only refer to the otherwise unidentified green entity pointed to by the line from the number 34. Given that the convention of the map is that only green entities have numbers, I think the question of the point at which the indicator line ends, which has exercised some of those who have written to us, is immaterial. If it were to continue into the area representing the west Bank the effect of bisecting Israel would be unfortunate.

Some correspondents have suggested that this error is in some way connected with the fact that support for translating some articles in this issue into Arabic was provided by the Kuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Science. I can assure you that it was not, and that the Foundation had no input into the editorial content of this issue whatsoever.

Yours sincerely

Oliver Morton

—————
Oliver Morton
Chief News and Features Editor
Nature