Thankfully, that is certainly not the case here and as expected, the very same leftists who would praise the bravery of anyone trashing Christians, are now screaming “Islamophobia!”:

—–

Gothamist:

While Leary is probably trying to shock his fans out of their pre-holiday stupor—fueled by a never ending stream of wallpaper Christmas tunes—we had a very tough time sitting through this particularly xenophobic one-note joke.

Islamophobia Watch:

A jaw-droppingly Islamophobic video has been posted by Irish-American comedian Denis Leary on WhoSay. Some years ago Leary took a firm stand against Mel Gibson’s antisemitism. But apparently crude anti-Muslim stereotyping is fine with Leary.

Please note that neither one said anything objecting to Leary’s shots at Christianity.

Who’s the “phobe” now?

Screaming “Islamophobia,” “xenophobia,”  “homophobia,” “bullying,” or anything of the like, is just the cowards’ way of telling the satirist to shut up.

Repressive tolerance.

These awful people hide their desire to silence free speech with the not-so-velvet hammer of political correctness.

If Leary was on record only ever trashing Muslims, then these crybabies might have a point. But that’s just not the case, and what you have is a reenactment of what we see every time gays are in any way satirized: humorless, sanctimonious, censorious prigs demanding those groups more equal than others receive inoculation from satire.

Good for Denis Leary and please thank Weasel Zippers for for digging this up.

Reese wanted George to hear a song they often play on their show that Drew and I had written in 2009 called “A Hero’s Creed” – a tribute to all the 9/11 first responders and our military members fighting the war on terror.  There was a line in the original version that said “Eight years have passed…no attacks on our land…we owe it to those who heed the call.” Sadly, since the new administration moved into our nation’s capital, we can no longer say that.

We needed to update the song, so we did.  Somehow, however, through a slight miscommunication regarding our updating of the song, Gadi was under the impression we were working on a brand new 9/11 tribute song and would have it ready in time for his 9/11 Tribute show on 8 Sep.  We knew we had to write a new song for Gadi’s show.

—–

It did not take long for us to come up with the concept for the song:  a young girl who lost her father – one of the 343 firefighters who died when the towers collapsed – who is now a young woman looking back with sadness on all that she lost that day and a determination to follow in her Dad’s footsteps and serve her country in uniform…knowing one day she would meet him again.

In just one week (a record for us), Drew and I took that concept, crafted the lyrics together in real time (Google Docs is great for collaborating online), and developed a basic melody.  I sent my raw vocals to him and had no idea what the track would sound like when he got finished with it, but knew he would more than do it justice.  I heard it for the first time a few hours before Gadi’s show Thursday evening.  I smiled as tears rolled down my cheeks.

As we pause to remember those we lost that day – the innocent civilians and the first responders – and those who have died since then fighting the war on terror, let us also lift up the youngest victims in prayer – the children left behind.

Godspeed brothers and sisters…we will never forget.

The BBC:

Influential American broadcaster Katie Couric has suggested a way to change attitudes to Muslims in the US.

Pointing to the success in the 1980s and 90s of TV sitcom The Cosby Show in improving relations between African-Americans and whites, she argues that a Muslim version of the show may counter some Americans’ negative perceptions of the community.

But just across the border, in Canada, this “Muslim Cosby Show” already exists. Little Mosque on the Prairie, made in Toronto, is recording its sixth and final series. 

However…

Judging by the Left’s “eliminationist” rhetoric when it comes to we “sons of bitches” and their obvious need to fulfill violent fantasies through video games, what this country might need is something more along the lines of ”Little Tea Party On the Prairie.”

From the Associated Press:

NEW YORK — A frequent contributor to a jihadist website has threatened David Letterman, urging Muslim followers to “cut the tongue” of the late-night host because of a joke the comic made on his CBS show.

The Site Monitoring Service, a private intelligence organization that watches online activity, said Wednesday that the threat was posted a day earlier on the shumukh al-Islam forum, a popular Internet destination for radical Muslims.

Jihadist didn’t like his joke…

The contributor, who identified himself as Umar al-Basrawi, was reacting to what he said Letterman did after the U.S. military announced on June 5 that a drone strike in Pakistan had killed al-Qaida leader Ilyas Kashmiri.

Al-Basrawi wrote that Letterman had made reference to both Osama bin Laden and Kashmiri and said that Letterman had “put his hand on his neck and demonstrated the way of slaughter.”

“Is there not among you a Sayyid Nosair al-Mairi … to cut the tongue of this lowly Jew and shut it forever?” Al-Basrawi wrote, referring to El Sayyid Nosair, who was convicted of the 1990 killing of Jewish Defense League founder Meir Kahane. Letterman is not Jewish.

Al-Basrawi, which is likely to be an alias, has made some 1,200 postings to the Muslim website, said Adam Raisman, an analyst for the Site Monitoring Service. The private firm, part of the Site Intelligence Group, provides information to government and commercial clients on what jihadists are saying on the Internet and traditional media. Raisman said the online forum is often used by al-Qaida.

Muslim extremist groups in the past few months have increased calls for people to take violent action against certain targets in the West, he said.

“The concern is that there is someone who will read it, agree with it and say, ‘I want to be the Sayyid Nosair of 2011 and kill David Letterman,’” Raisman said.

The FBI is also looking into the threat, said Jim Margolin, spokesman for the bureau’s New York office. “We take every potential threat seriously,” he said.

Neither CBS nor a Letterman spokesman, Tom Keaney, would comment on the threat. CBS would not make available a transcript of Letterman’s monologue on the killing of Kashmiri.

Letterman has been the target of criminal threats in the past. A former CBS News producer was jailed for trying to extort $2 million from Letterman in 2009 by threatening to expose the host’s sexual dalliances with members of his staff. A former painter at Letterman’s ranch in Montana was jailed following a 2005 plot to kidnap the TV funnyman’s nanny and son.

A radical Muslim group last year warned the creators of “South Park” that they could face violent retribution for depicting the prophet Muhammad in a bear suit on the Comedy Central cartoon. Author Salman Rushdie spent years in hiding after Iranian leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini urged he be killed for blasphemy after writing the book “The Satanic Verses.”

Filmmaker Theo van Gogh was killed on an Amsterdam street in 2004 by a Dutch Muslim angered by his film “Submission,” a fictional study of abused Muslim women.

His name is Yonathan Melaku, and he was originally picked up while lurking inside Arlington National Cemetery.

(he was probably just planting flowers)

Anyway, for peaceful reasons i’m sure- he was carrying spent shell casings, some ammonium nitrate and a notebook containing stuff about Osama bin Laden and the Taliban.

But I imagine that was just fan fiction.

[My notebooks contain reams of sketches i've made of Clive Owen. I'd show them to you, but they're personal.]

Anyway, now Feds are charging him with a bunch of stuff. But I’ve read this story around the web, and so far the only spot where his religion was noted, was on some blogs – and FNC.

Because, as you know, he’s a militant Christian.

Just kidding: he’s Muslim.

And I confess, we’re a bunch of Islamophobes for bringing it up.

And yet we have another example, of willful blindness – born out of political correctness and the fear of being labeled a bigot.

This kind of terror-based incident has happened before, also involving our military.

At Ford Hood, tragically.

But the story – that radical Muslims within the military desire to harm us – seems too unsavory to mention by other networks.

Or, even our administration.

Meanwhile, The Justice Department says two men have been arrested in a plot to attack a military recruiting station in Seattle – with machine guns and grenades.

Their names: Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif, and Walli Mujaheed.

Damn Mormons!

And if you disagree with me, you hate Islam, gays, and little bunnies.

Tonight:

Jim Norton!

John Devore!

Noelle Hancock!

When a new episode of South Park airs, it is generally available for streaming shortly thereafter from South Park Studios. In the case of “201,” we got this message:

Following this message, there was a long list of people upset that the network, who has courageously stood by South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone over the years, decided to cower in the corner and bleep important sections of episode “201.” In fact, Muhammed was shown in a bear suit, an obvious play on the fear of showing Muhammed on TV. Even that was censored out (important note: Comedy Central has allowed South Park to show Muhammed in the past). As the dust settled, many people (including myself) felt that the truth would be told and free speech will prevail, on some level, when the episode comes out on the season 14 DVD.

Upon the release, I heard that the episode was still edited, which was a shameful move on Comedy Central’s part. Not surprised about that, I figured Matt and Trey would get to say a few things on the commentary track that would allow more of their voice to be heard. Unfortunately, this is not the case and the bulk of their commentary is also bleeped out with that same annoying tone that is spread throughout episode “201” (supposedly a speech about fear and intimidation that doesn’t mention Muhammed). The beginning of the episode on DVD says the following words.

In the 14 years we’ve been doing South Park we have never done a show that we couldn’t stand behind. We delivered our version of the show to Comedy Central and they made a determination to alter the episode. It wasn’t some meta-joke on our part. Comedy Central added the bleeps. In fact, Kyle’s customary final speech was about intimidation and fear. It didn’t mention Muhammad at all but it got bleeped too.

After reading that statement, I can just hear the obscenity-laced commentary from Matt and Trey, likely using more colorful terms than “coward” in reference to Comedy Central. The reason South Park has reached the status it has acquired is because of the show’s ability to mock anyone or any idea; the end result often being a smart, useful reflection on the topics lampooned. Matt and Trey have long appreciated Comedy Central’s willingness to stand behind their work. Today, however, it appears that Comedy Central has willingly given into the hyper-politically-correct elements in our society.

Over the last year, there has been more mumblings from Matt and Trey that they are getting tired of doing South Park. Their ability to stay on top of current events means they literally put a show together in under a week. This is no easy task and certainly not worth the sleepless work nights if your show is going to get butchered from the terrified suits above. With the ongoing culture war, a voice like South Park is essential and should be supported. Silencing such a voice and giving into intimidation only shows a severe weakness in our culture that will be exploited by those who want to crush it.

Originally posted as Parcbench.

—–

Amazing footage, full of righteous passion and truth. The seven minutes only get better as they unspool, especially when actress Veena Malik completely turns the argument around on both the sanctimonious newsman and the downright frightening Muslim cleric.

In a word, it’s inspirational.

Looks like Pakistan has something in common with America. Like here, their women appear to be the best and bravest badass truth tellers — the biggest threat and enemies to an oppressive media, entertainment and political establishment ready to destroy and punish those who dare stray off of a certain ideological plantation.

Take a moment and say a prayer for the safety of Veena Malik. She could use it. For starters, it’s unlikely anyone in Vichy Hollywood will be starting any kind of ribbon campaign on her behalf any time soon. Also, there’s a key difference between America and Pakistan. Here this kind of free-thinking only results in more negative press and name calling.

The crowd, well-organized with professional signs that read ” ‘Today I am a Muslim Too,” targeted their ire at Peter King, the chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security.

The protest was forgettable in its predictability; but the media coverage was even worse in its report-by-numbers portrait of the “event.”

First, it was mandatory to toss the term Islamophobic at anyone in favor of the hearings. Also, you must employ the word “witchhunt” when possible.

And because he announced the hearings, King is now being compared to Senator Joe McCarthy, the bellicose anti-communist censured by the Senate in the ’50’s.

Sure, Joe’s manic zeal was toxic, but it didn’t kill tens of millions of people. I mean, if you think McCarthyism was worse than Communism, you’re a loon. But you’re also a loon if you think Peter King’s concern over Islamic radicalism is somehow worse than Islamic radicalism itself.

The fact is, they’re labeling King the “new McCarthy” to keep him from doing his job.

Which is to make us safe.

As for the signs “Today I am a Muslim Too,” I’m not sure that’s as risky as saying the reverse.

Last Friday, a funeral was held for the Pakistan’s Christian cabinet minister, Shahbaz Bhatti. He was assassinated by radicals for his opposition to the country’s blasphemy laws. On the same day, National Review notes, accusations of blasphemy led to many more murders. And let’s not forget Muhammad Imran, shot dead at a cafe for making an “insulting” remark about Islam.

So, about that “witchhunt.”

Right word, wrong place.

And if you disagree with me, you’re a racist, homophobic Islamophobe.

Tonight!

Matt McCall

Joe Devito

Imogen Lloyd Webber

In fact, ABC’s Castle web page today opens with the following pop-up window inviting visitors to take an extensive survey regarding the episode and the show in general (which I dutifully filled out):

We would like to invite you to participate in a short survey about the episode of CASTLE that aired on 2/28/11. This episode featured Castle and Beckett rejoining Fallon’s task force, the detectives suspecting a former U.S. soldier of planning a terrorist attack, and Castle and Beckett partnering with a Syrian official to track down the bomb.

Having seen the episode, I can assure you that the story cannot be fairly characterized as bigoted or anti-Christian.

The episode, “Countdown,” is the conclusion of a two-parter in which the show’s protagonists (NYC police detective Kate Beckett and her unpaid-consultant partner, mystery writer Richard Castle) attempt to prevent a mass murder through detonation of a nuclear “dirty bomb” in Manhattan. (Note: spoilers hereafter.)

In part 1, viewers were led to believe that the conspirators were Muslims from foreign countries. In “Countdown,” however, it soon becomes clear that the main villain is non-Muslim (though not characterized as a Christian), and the Muslims in the story are being used as scapegoats by him and his associates in a rather silly and fanciful scheme to revive Americans’ interest in our recent Middle East wars by exploding a dirty bomb in Manhattan and planting evidence so that it will be blamed on Muslim terrorists.

However, unlike in other stories of this kind which I have seen in the past couple of years, a credible character—Castle himself—expresses sympathy with the man’s aims while of course decrying his intent to commit mass murder and mayhem to achieve them. It is in fact rather surprising to see Castle do so, and I think that this element in itself redeems the episode entirely.

In addition, the narrative also points out that a character initially seen as unattractive and hardhearted is driven to act that way out of unresolved grief over the death of his wife in tower two of the World Trade Center, her having “ridden the tower down” to her death at the hands of Muslim terrorists. This reminder can hardly be seen as pro-Muslim or anti-Christian.

In no way, in my view, can this episode be fairly characterized as anti-Christian, pro-Muslim, or bigoted. As noted above, I find the story’s terrorism scheme to be fanciful, but I believe it to have been motivated by a desire to create a relatively surprising resolution to the mystery (and, alas, failing to make it either convincing or surprising, in my estimation), not any sense of prejudice or desire to make a political point. To the extent that the story is less than laudable, the reasons are aesthetic, not political or religious.

Moreover, the first sequence of the episode, in which Castle and Beckett are locked in a subzero refrigerated container with no way of escaping or informing anyone of their predicament, is an extraordinarily powerful scene and quite poignant, something regular or even casual viewers of the serious should not miss. The two characters face a slow, painful death together while individually confronting what appears to be a rather desperate love for each other which neither can find the courage to express. The scene suggests so much about the human condition, how one’s love for another can create an intense fear that makes that emotion all but unendurable and impossible to admit.

A similarly powerful and understated dramatic moment occurs when Castle tells his mother and his daughter to leave town but cannot admit why and insists that they tell no one else, lest it lead to a citywide panic. Later, Castle realizes that another character faces such emotional wrenching and vexing moral dilemmas every day.

Moments such as these are rather unusual in contemporary drama and are to be praised. Yes, “Countdown” has aesthetic flaws, but in my view they’re mistakes, not manifestations of prejudice.

This article originally published at The American Culture.

“Eradicating Islamophobia won’t be easy.”

The foundation of this entire skit is based on our “Daily Show” superiors’ elitist and bigoted opinion that America and Americans have some sort of prejudice towards Muslims, which is why the six minutes really don’t work. The comedy is mean-spirited towards its own audience, reeks of condescension, and simply isn’t true. And of course, Muslims aren’t made fun of, not even the divisive and controversial Ground Zero Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, who’s made to look like a warm, good-humored grandfatherly-type in order to further memory-hole, well, scary stuff like this – stuff that’s truly ripe for satire once we find a satirist brave enough. 

But who does get mocked as bigoted and intolerant? Well, because we all know that each and every Muslim is a regular Phil Donahue when it comes to human rights, Stewart & Co. assemble a group of everyday Americans, a carefully cherry-picked group to represent all of us as bigots (or they’re actors assembled for the exact same purpose).

Things get even more patronizing once the test audience is seated and we’re then bombarded with a litany of lazy PC jokes that revolve around the absurd premise that Muslims — who have lived peacefully in this country for freakin’ ever — somehow have to give up their traditions before Americans will accept them. Damn the facts. Damn that history proves that a lie. And then it’s back to the Borat-ing of the test audience. 

What’s Jon Stewart all about now, anyway? Is he so enamored with his smug and superior self that he’s managed to delude himself into thinking it’s cool to Speak! Truth! To! The! Working! Class!

We’re told the test audience represents “everyday Americans.”  Well, the best comedy is supposed to be based on truth so you can bet that’s what these people were all thinking when they produced this. Which means, of course, that Stewart and the “Daily Show” aren’t just laughing at us, they’re smearing us.

Who’s the real bigot here?