Those Moderate Muslims!

“Why I HATE Malala Yousafzai”

Do you think it’s easy for me to accept flag bearers of my religion as my enemy? Do you believe that it’s easy for me to accept the fact that a 16-year-old girl fearlessly took a stand against the biggest threat facing this country while men like me were busy being apologetic on the behalf of the “freedom fighters”?
Do you honestly believe that it’s easy for me to accept that a young girl from our neck of the woods, with all the societal handicaps that one can think of, can singlehandedly orchestrate a global rude awakening? The thought rips the bigoted, discriminatory and misogynistic ideals that I’ve grown up with, into tiny little shreds.
How can I accept Malala to be a hero, when her speeches do not have any Islamic or nationalistic agenda? How can I consider her to be my future leader when nothing she says or does imbues a false sense of superiority in me as a Muslim or a Pakistani? How can I accept that a young girl was able to highlight who our actual enemies are, when grown up men in our parliaments are still hell bent on befriending them?

h/t

Reader Tips

Max Baer was an American heavyweight boxer who won the world championship in 1934 by defeating the massive Primo Carnera, only to lose the title in his very first defense against against the “Cinderella Man,” James Braddock. Most boxing historians attribute his lackadaisical performance against Braddock to the fact that Baer, an amiable, confident extrovert (not unlike Jethro Bodine, the character his son would later play on The Beverly Hillbillies, only smarter) was more interested in women and carousing than training.
In tonight’s amusement en route to the tips, filmed the year before he won the title, the happy-go-lucky Baer, sporting the highest belt line you’ll ever see outside of a Florida retirement home, performs a song-and-dance routine with a gaggle of chorus girls in The Prizefighter and the Lady.
The comments are open, as always, for your Reader Tips.

It’s Probably Nothing

NYT:

“It’s basically admitting defeat,” said Dr. Peter H. Kilmarx, the leader of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s team in Sierra Leone, adding that it was “now national policy that we should take care of these people at home.”
“For the clinicians it’s admitting failure, but we are responding to the need,” Dr. Kilmarx said. “There are hundreds of people with Ebola that we are not able to bring into a facility.”

Related.

Operation Empty Chair

ISIS on the move… in Libya

It’s a disaster. By involving American forces half-heartedly, with an eye toward no objective beyond bumping up his poll numbers before the midterm elections, Obama has set ISIS up to brag about how they’re beating the Great Satan – not just holding their own under air assault, but actually making progress, taking ground, and retaining the strategic initiative.
[…]
The report also says an Islamist group in Egypt “has been staging ISIS copycat beheadings and is thought to have declared de facto loyalty to the group.” An editorial at al-Arabiya News claims the threat of the Islamic State spreading into Libya is one reason Egypt didn’t get involved in the Nameless Non-War, specifically mentioning the parade in Derna depicted above. Another reason is that our debonair internationalist Smart Power President Obama has been treating the Egyptians poorly ever since they overthrew the Muslim Brotherhood:

More here: How Syria policy stalled under the ‘analyst in chief’

A Tale of Two Minds

I’m of two minds on Ontario’s decision to uninvite CBSA on their road-side stops.
On one hand I don’t think any illegal immigrant or illegal immigrant worker should be allowed to roam freely without fear of hindrance on the roads. The roadside checks success is evident when a net caught 21 in August according to the article.
On the gripping hand, I have a real problem with roadside stops engaging in unreasonable search and seizure.
Via, NWC.

Go, Already

Liberal cuts threaten guaranteed rights, commission argues;

The Quebec Human Rights Commission submitted a 29-page brief earlier this week to Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard and to the new committee the premier has put place to review all government programs and measures with an eye to cutting fat.
In the brief, Frémont advises the government not to undertake its austerity plan with only economic or budgetary considerations in mind. He notes that cutting or reducing the scope of some programs may affect certain vulnerable groups disproportionately and in a discriminatory way.
The Charter, he writes, is a fundamental law that takes precedence over other laws, and the state is bound by it. The program overhaul cannot adversely affect rights guaranteed under the Charter, such as the right to equality, regardless of race, skin colour, gender, pregnancy, sexual orientation, marital status, age, religion, political convictions, language, ethic background or nationality, income or disability.
[…]
Quebec is the only Canadian jurisdiction where social and economic rights are enshrined in a Charter. Quebec has also signed on to certain international agreements, such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which address the right to work and to join a union, the right to a standard of living that supports health and well-being, and the right to an education, among others.

Because A Four Dollar Shrimp Is Never A Four Dollar Shrimp

It’s not a political party. It’s a crime organization. “I’m not sure what to call this guy. Is he a staffer? Bodyguard? Some jack-of-all-trades policy advisor/goon? Why does Harry Reid have muscle with him when he walks the halls of Congress? And more importantly, per Mattera’s question, how does a humble, longtime public servant like him pay for it?”

Flashback – We had this thing called the “Sponsorship Scandal”.

Navigation