Interrogation of Muslim Cartoon Publisher

Political correctness and multiculturalism run amok up north:

"We have a heritage of free speech that we inherited from Great Britain that goes back to the year 1215 and the Magna Carta. We have a heritage of eight hundred years of British common law protection for speech, augmented by 250 years of common law in Canada.

For a government bureaucrat to call any publisher or anyone else to an interrogation to be quizzed about his political or religious expression is a violation of 800 years of common law, a Universal Declaration of Rights, a Bill of Rights and a Charter of Rights. This commission is applying Saudi values, not Canadian values.

It is also deeply procedurally one-sided and unjust. The complainant �?? in this case, a radical Muslim imam, who was trained at an officially anti-Semitic university in Saudi Arabia, and who has called for sharia law to govern Canada �?? doesn�??t have to pay a penny; Alberta taxpayers pay for the prosecution of the complaint against me. The victims of the complaints, like the Western Standard, have to pay for their own lawyers from their own pockets. Even if we win, we lose �?? the process has become the punishment. (At this point, I�??d like to thank the magazine�??s many donors who have given their own money to help us fight against the Saudi imam and his enablers in the Alberta government.)"

http://ezralevant.com/2008/01/kangaroo-court.html

Oh Canada, you’re Imam speaks for you!

That is ridiculous. I guess the positive view is that at least this happened to a guy with the will and hopefully the ability to stand up for his rights.

I sympathize with the guy, but starting the interrogation by calling the commission a farce is not going to help him one bit.

P.S: You probably should rethink the title.

[quote]lixy wrote:
I sympathize with the guy, but starting the interrogation by calling the commission a farce is not going to help him one bit.

P.S: You probably should rethink the title.[/quote]

Conceding that such a commission ought to be taken seriously is unthinkable though.

[quote]lixy wrote:
I sympathize with the guy, but starting the interrogation by calling the commission a farce is not going to help him one bit.

P.S: You probably should rethink the title.[/quote]

The commission is a farce. Whether this statement of fact helps him or not is irrelevant.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
lixy wrote:
I sympathize with the guy, but starting the interrogation by calling the commission a farce is not going to help him one bit.

P.S: You probably should rethink the title.

The commission is a farce. Whether this statement of fact helps him or not is irrelevant.[/quote]

Elsewhere on his website, and on the video of his interview, he states that he hopes to be convicted, if that’s the right word, so that he can appeal it to a proper court and use the whole situation to publicly defend free speech in Canada and Alberta. He may be arrogant and dramatic, but he’s absolutely right, and I hope he pulls it off.

[quote]lixy wrote:
P.S: You probably should rethink the title.[/quote]

What is wrong with the title? He even capitolized properly.

[quote]pat36 wrote:
lixy wrote:
P.S: You probably should rethink the title.

What is wrong with the title? He even capitolized properly.[/quote]

Mod Note
Unrelated to the above posts, we did recently edit the title in order to better fit on the forum screen.

The original title was:
“Alberta Interrogates Muslim Cartoon Publisher”

[quote]pat36 wrote:
lixy wrote:
P.S: You probably should rethink the title.

What is wrong with the title? He even capitolized properly.[/quote]

Not sure where the OP found out that the publisher is Muslim.

[quote]lixy wrote:
pat36 wrote:
lixy wrote:
P.S: You probably should rethink the title.

What is wrong with the title? He even capitalized properly.

Not sure where the OP found out that the publisher is Muslim.[/quote]

English is not your first language so you are forgiven…
In this case the word “Muslim” is used as an adjective describing the word “cartoon”, the phrase “muslim cartoon”, becomes a participle phrase describing the word “publisher”. This means the grammar of the title is correct and clear.

[quote]pat36 wrote:
lixy wrote:
pat36 wrote:
lixy wrote:
P.S: You probably should rethink the title.

What is wrong with the title? He even capitalized properly.

Not sure where the OP found out that the publisher is Muslim.

English is not your first language so you are forgiven…
In this case the word “Muslim” is used as an adjective describing the word “cartoon”, the phrase “muslim cartoon”, becomes a participle phrase describing the word “publisher”. This means the grammar of the title is correct and clear.[/quote]

How do you know the cartoon is muslim?

[quote]pat36 wrote:
lixy wrote:
pat36 wrote:
lixy wrote:
P.S: You probably should rethink the title.

What is wrong with the title? He even capitalized properly.

Not sure where the OP found out that the publisher is Muslim.

English is not your first language so you are forgiven…
In this case the word “Muslim” is used as an adjective describing the word “cartoon”, the phrase “muslim cartoon”, becomes a participle phrase describing the word “publisher”. This means the grammar of the title is correct and clear.[/quote]

Thanks, I thought it was pretty clear.

Sad to see Canada going the way of Britain and Europe, sacrificing its culture and its law on the altar of political correctness.


[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
pat36 wrote:
lixy wrote:
pat36 wrote:
lixy wrote:
P.S: You probably should rethink the title.

What is wrong with the title? He even capitalized properly.

Not sure where the OP found out that the publisher is Muslim.

English is not your first language so you are forgiven…
In this case the word “Muslim” is used as an adjective describing the word “cartoon”, the phrase “muslim cartoon”, becomes a participle phrase describing the word “publisher”. This means the grammar of the title is correct and clear.

Thanks, I thought it was pretty clear.

Sad to see Canada going the way of Britain and Europe, sacrificing its culture and its law on the altar of political correctness.[/quote]

Really?

FP�? defends Graz attack on Islam
By David Rogers

Head of Graz FP�? list calls Mohammed ‘a child molester’.

Graz FP�? politician Susanne Winter has attacked Islam as a religion at her party’s New Year’s meeting in the Styrian capital.

Winter, who is head of the FP�?'s list for the January 20 municipal, election, called Islamic prophet Mohammed "a child molester�?? because of his alleged marriage to a six-year-old girl and “a field marshal” who had written the Koran during “epileptic fits.”

She termed Islam “a totalitarian system of domination that should be thrown back to its birthplace on the other side of the Mediterranean.”

Winter added on Monday that "there is widespread abuse of children among Muslim men�?? but then declared that she didn’t want to offend anyone or insult any religion.
She also defended her Sunday statement that "a Muslim immigration tsunami�?? could occur. “In 20 or 30 years, half the population of Austria will be Muslim” if the SP�? and �?VP’s immigration policy continues in effect, she said.

In response, the Community of Islamic Believers official responsible for integration, Omar Al-Rawi, called Winter’s remarks an instance of “lack of respect” and “false.” He claimed that “Islam-bashing” had reached
a �??sickening and evil" level.

Community spokeswoman Carla Amina Baghajati added on Monday that Winter’s remarks were a threat to social peace.
�??Dialogue is very important to us. But that kind of hatred and promotion of images of enemies will make it more difficult. It threatens to poison the climate,�?? she said.
Baghajati added that FP�? statements were more and more “unappetising, provocative and disrespectful.”
The �?VP, SP�?, Greens and BZ�? have strongly criticised Winter’s remarks.

Graz public prosecutor’s office spokesman Manfred Kammerer has said that the office will examine them to determine whether she violated the law forbidding expressions of racial hatred.

Winter will have to take a position on her remarks within the next several days. If tried and convicted, she would face up to two years in prison.

FP�? leader Heinz-Christian said in response to Winter’s remarks that there was “freedom of opinion” in the FP�?.
Strache compared the new EU reform treaty to the 1938 “Anschluss” or merger of Austria and Germany as a result of German occupation.

Seems to me free speech is alive and well. The part with the public prosecutor can be safely ignored. Wasn´t in any German article I read.

[quote]pat36 wrote:
English is not your first language so you are forgiven…
In this case the word “Muslim” is used as an adjective describing the word “cartoon”, the phrase “muslim cartoon”, becomes a participle phrase describing the word “publisher”. This means the grammar of the title is correct and clear.[/quote]

Characterizing a cartoon as “Muslim” is language abuse, pure and simple. You see, a Muslim is an adherent to Islam, thus a person. You can’t talk talk about “Islamic” cartoons in this context either.

I merely suggested that the OP rethinks the title, but you had to chime in with your condescending grammar lecture. If you didn’t have those two digits appended to your handle, I would have dismissed you as yet another child left behind.

Arrogant prick!

[quote]lixy wrote:
pat36 wrote:
English is not your first language so you are forgiven…
In this case the word “Muslim” is used as an adjective describing the word “cartoon”, the phrase “muslim cartoon”, becomes a participle phrase describing the word “publisher”. This means the grammar of the title is correct and clear.

Characterizing a cartoon as “Muslim” is language abuse, pure and simple. You see, a Muslim is an adherent to Islam, thus a person. You can’t talk talk about “Islamic” cartoons in this context either.

I merely suggested that the OP rethinks the title, but you had to chime in with your condescending grammar lecture. If you didn’t have those two digits appended to your handle, I would have dismissed you as yet another child left behind.

Arrogant prick![/quote]

It doesn’t get more Muslim than the big Mo does it prixy?

[quote]lixy wrote:
pat36 wrote:
English is not your first language so you are forgiven…
In this case the word “Muslim” is used as an adjective describing the word “cartoon”, the phrase “muslim cartoon”, becomes a participle phrase describing the word “publisher”. This means the grammar of the title is correct and clear.

Characterizing a cartoon as “Muslim” is language abuse, pure and simple. You see, a Muslim is an adherent to Islam, thus a person. You can’t talk talk about “Islamic” cartoons in this context either.

I merely suggested that the OP rethinks the title, but you had to chime in with your condescending grammar lecture. If you didn’t have those two digits appended to your handle, I would have dismissed you as yet another child left behind.

Arrogant prick![/quote]

T-mag assigned me those numbers, they kind of forced it on me. Periodically I request to have them removed, perhaps, one day they will.

Don’t worry, I am not trying to steal your job as the grammar policeman. And, I don’t give a shit if you dismiss me.

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Thanks, I thought it was pretty clear. [/quote]

I, for one, didn’t think so.

Hold your horses. You seem to have a lot of misconceptions about Europe. The “farce” taking place in Alberta would never be tolerated around here. You can accuse Europeans of many things, but freedom of speech is not really negotiable. Aberrations such as the one this Canadian publisher is victim of are just unthinkable on the old continent.

Correct me if I am wrong, but as far as I know the first US print of the Jyllands cartoons was 5 months after the originals. That is, 4 months after Europe and Africa. I know you guys have been hit pretty hard, but that was a blatant case of self-censorship, and ultimately caving to terrorism. The Brits did no better but to be fair, their wound was fresh. So please, when you want to talk about Europe, get your facts straight first.

[quote]pat36 wrote:
T-mag assigned me those numbers, they kind of forced it on me. Periodically I request to have them removed, perhaps, one day they will. [/quote]

Alright. My bad for making assumptions.

There are several jobs “I am not trying to steal” too :wink:

Anyway, my comment was a suggestion in a bloody post scriptum. That was not “grammar policeman” material. Just to refresh your memory, here’s what I wrote: “P.S: You probably should rethink the title.”