I posted a minisnark regarding the kerfluffle (intentional) about Muslims not wanting to post a public service notice that contained an image of a dog, that went like this:
That was it. And here’s the (non-hysterial) response from some Canadian twit:
Before the usual suspects flip out with predictable counter-outrage of their own about this, perhaps they might want to read this article from the Tayside and Fife Courier.
“I’ve not heard anything about that from members of the community,†Mr Sarwar said. “I was round some shops today and at the mosque and nobody has said anything about it.†Mr. Sarwar said that religious sensitivities would prevent him from displaying the postcard on a building of religious significance but there was nothing to stop them being displayed in shops.
“There is not a dog  it is just a picture,†he said.
Sorry to ruin all your fun there, BT’ers.
Oh, it does all get sooooo tiresome at times, doesn’t it?
Update: Oh yawn, how predictable. Behold Wingnuttia pissing itself silly, right on cue: Atlas Shrugs, Little Green Footballs, Moonbattery, TigerHawk, protein wisdom, Neptunus Lex, Hot Air, QandO, The Corner and Pajamas Media. *Hysterial, moronic fuckwits  each and every one of them.
I’m sorry, but did that count as pissing myself silly? Huh. Good thing this guy’s so level-headed.
I don’t believe that he’ll be able to find any posts at any of the cited sites from Wingnuttia claiming that there exists no such thing as a moderate or secular Muslim, for starters. Then, you know, it’s just nuts to think that some Muslims might get absurdly upset about images that they find offensive.
Get real, Wingnuts! Why are your reactions to everything so over-the-top?!!!Olbermanleventy!!
Sorry to land on top of your post; it wasn’t there in preview mode.
On the merits, I like Sanwar saying it’s “just a picture,” but of course he could not display it on a building of any religious significance.
isnt homophobia kinda worse than canine-ophobia?
IJS
;)
Why not nail The Mail Online for an article that quotes the involved parties, if the whole thing was fartwa(sh)? Perhaps the Tayside and Fife Courier is misreporting matters intentionally?
Egad, who to believe?
Shut up, nishi.
I see the ‘toon still suffers from on-topic-ophobia.
Canadians are freaks. They spend far too much time being offended on the behalf of crazy Muslims (when they are not passing out free crackpipes and vaseline).
Canadians?
That’s all right, Karl. Don’t mind.
nishi – v
Once AGAIN, I must repeat myself.
I have never seen any evidence of any “…phobias” here, except for one.
That would be “Jerkaphobia”, and you stand squarely in the crosshairs.
Someone seems to have missed the whole “OMG RACHEL RAY IS WEARING A SCARF!!” episode.
It’s no secret that the right-wing is trying too hard to come up with contrived examples of the nefarious sand people and their PC enablers trying to impose dhimmitude on us.
Why? Did it cover her cleavage?
[…] a glance at Memeorandum makes clear, pace the commenter AJB, below, who’s making a mountain of the story that Obama got a sweet deal on his mortgage, as […]
Sand people?
No, only Imperial Stormtroopers are this precise……..
And, no I missed that apparently, could you link to the post on this blog where OMG_RACHAEL_RAY!!!111!1!! occurred?
And when did you first begin to experience hysteresis, Dan?
As far back as I can remember, I’ve been a nut-magnet.
Rachael Ray has cleavage?
Not saying she’s not attractive, but she’s not exactly the busty type.
Rachel Ray can wear all the scarves she wants, just keep the keffiyeh off my big, drunk and busty Sandra Lee.
“It’s no secret that the right-wing is trying too hard to come up with contrived examples of the nefarious sand people and their PC enablers trying to impose dhimmitude on us.”
Yeah, we have to work really really hard to find them. They certainly don’t suddenly pop out and ban Piglet or apologize profusely for naming a stuffed animal Mohammed or anything. Where do we come up with this shit?
[…] Remember a few days ago when that Canadian twit was characterizing my response to a story about Muslims being offended by dogs on fliers put out by British police? […]
This story was believable in light of the mass riots over the Danish cartoons. The “reality based community” might not like that reality, but it doesn’t make it any less true.
I guess that makes me a “racist” or an “Islamophobic” for pointing out that the IDEOLOGY of Islam has a tendency of trending towards the surreal.
*shrugs* The world’s left are the handmaidens of the Muslims. They will gleefully fund their own destruction while patting themselves on the back for their ever-so-tolerant beliefs. They will do this, of course, as they call you all manner of hateful things.