The good news: this site has started a whole page that compiles cat news from throughout the world.
The bad news: It’s at HuffPo
And, HuffPo being what it is, they include dogs on the page. It’s the same thing they do on the “science” page, putting in irrelevant things that might catch the attention of someone passing by.
How can I stay away, though? They included this awesome Russian video of a cat and a dog battling over a cheeseburger.
But more bad news: the outcome is completely unrealistic.
Oh, and there’s a new video of everyone’s favorite tubby tabby, Maru, wedging himself into another too-small box:
And more cognitive dissonance: over at the “Religion” section, HuffPo has an article by one Professor Sahar Aziz of The Texas Wesleyan School of Law, taking Americans to task for anti-Islamic gestures like the Qur’an burning of Pastor Terry Jones, and calling for condemnation of such bigotry. As I mentioned yesterday, one can attack a religion without attacking all of its adherents. I, like many atheist writers, have already condemned Terry Jones, but I strongly defend his right to burn Qur’ans. Further, I agree with Aziz that Americans should counter attempts to suppress religion or erode the rights of those whose faiths we dislike.
But in her whole article she completely fails to condemn the murderous thugs who have not only attacked people and embassies because of some badly-made film, and previously flew planes into buildings, bombed nightclubs, and engaged in other attempts to murder innocent people in the name of the Religon of Peace. Whose fault is that? According to Azia, ours:
Many Americans fail to appreciate that this inflammatory video is not viewed by Muslims abroad in a vacuum. Indeed, it follows on the heels of a Quran-burning by a radical Christian pastor in Florida, urination on Qurans by U.S. troops, opposition to mosque building across the United States, police surveillance of Muslim students and mosque-goers across the East Coast, and offensive campaign rhetoric accusing American Muslims en masse of disloyalty — all of which contradict America’s proclaimed values of religious freedom, equal protection, and respect for diversity.
Religious freedom, of course, includes the freedom to criticize religion, no matter how vile or strident that criticism may be. Aziz continues:
Thus, Muslims abroad do not view the American-made hate film as merely an expressive act by a lone actor protected by the First Amendment. Rather it is part of a broader American assault on the Islamic faith wherein Muslims are expected to take it on the chin and smile.
Coupled with the dearth of videos, speeches, and public acts by average Americans proclaiming their respect for Islam and their acceptance of Muslims as equal compatriots, Muslims abroad are left questioning whether defense of free speech is pretext for condoning bigotry. For if all you hear and see from America is hateful speech, selective targeting and counterterrorism enforcement against Muslims, and shameless Muslim-bashing by politicians, then calls to protect freedom of speech unsurprisingly fall on deaf ears.
No, Muslims don’t have to take it on the chin and smile. They can counter anti-Islamic speech with their own speech, and match Qur’an burnings with American flag burnings. And I don’t care whether Muslims question whether defense of free speech is pretext for condoning bigotry. Free speech can indeed be a blanket for bigotry, but if we don’t protect the rights of bigots, we can’t protect the rights of anyone. Besides, Muslims don’t object when their own countries regularly portray Jews as money-grubbing killers of Christians. That is government-sponsored condoning of bigotry. No problem with that in the Middle East!
And it’s one thing to have deaf ears, another thing entirely to sever someone’s head with a knife. Aziz doesn’t seem to recognize this distinction when she piles all the blame on people like Terry Jones. In her haste to blame Muslim anger on America, she says only one brief sentence about the violence engendered by that anger:
When a Muslim terrorist attempts to harm Americans or burns an American flag, should Muslims in America publicly condemn such acts or can they assume that the guilt of one will not be imputed onto the entire religion?
Attempts to harm Americans? Attempts? No, they’re not just attempts, they’re successful attempts, and offended Muslims are not just killing Americans. Have a look (scroll down) at this list of Islamic terrorist attacks, and note the variety of nations that have been victimized.
Frankly, I don’t care about Muslims burning American flags. Let a million flags burn, and let Americans burn them too. It’s only a piece of cloth, and that’s not the same thing as a piece of flesh. When you destroy a flag, there is not a network of friends and family left to mourn the loss.
Apologists like Aziz make me ill. The first commenter on her piece is right:
Given the disrespect paid to Judaism and its symbols throughout the Islamic world day in day out, I think Muslims should do some introspection and change from within before demanding anyone else make any changes.
There aren’t too many occurrences of Christians and Jews burning down the embassies and consulates of Muslim countries.
Has Aziz forgotten about “the broader Islamic assault on the Jewish and Christian faiths wherein Jews and Christians are expected to take it on the chin and smile”? We respond with words, Muslims with swords.
Curses!! Gravity strikes again!
I’m going to have to upload a few videos of Hillary Rotten Kitten walking around with a Kleenex box on her head – her favorite game of late. She may not be the smartest feline on the planet, but I’ll give her props for not spending tooooo much time trying to eat with the box still on her head.
If that’s really your cat’s name, tip of the hat to you!
I think she’s darn smart, if she saw Maru doing it and figured she could get more quality attention from you by doing such a simple thing.
Re Maru:- Loved the “Are you taking the p***.” look when the cameraman got too close.
LMAO
“But more bad news: the outcome is completely unrealistic.”
These two are obviously friends and just playing. I’d guess the cat left the burger for the dog, perhaps because it didn’t want all those carbs anyway.
I think the cat just couldn’t stand to be so close to the icky dirty slob of a dog any longer!
I bet the cat was thinking something like, “Stinky, slobbery, nekulturny, unkempt dog is getting me dirty after I just groomed myself!”
Even better, they can make really shitty movies of their own about how <whatever /> Jesus / Terry Jones / George Washington / whoever really is.
The flags, of course, they should buy (or make) themselves before using them to slow roast their bacon-wrapped chili cheese dogs. Burning your own flags is fine — just don’t burn somebody else’s (without permission).
Cheers,
b&
I think you meant to name today’s entry “Dognitive Dissonance”.
Sometimes we have to take the dogs with the cats.
What muslims never seem to recognize is that for most democracies freedoms of religions and speech are ‘holy’ values.
Why do they “selectively target” these values when there are so many secular values that they could oppose? (O.o)
I have been waiting for moderate islamists to make their voice heard. That hasn’t happened, but today I read in the local newspaper that demonstrants have targeted and taken over two armed fundamentalist compounds in Libya. Apparently they have tired of the extremists and especially the slow process of disarming them.
I don’t condone violence, this could be or not be preemptive lesser violence, but at least the populace do something while the moderate islamists are silent partners in terrorism.
It has happened here in Australia.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/text-urges-violence-at-melbourne-rally-20120919-265kb.html
Meanwhile, to considerable astonishment, it seems that the radicals that attacked the embassy are being forced out in Behghazi by Libyans themselves. I hope this is largely accurate.
Everyone everywhere, if they feel so inclined, should piss on and burn the Quran; and media outlets everywhere, if they feel so inclined, should continually publish blasphemous cartoons depicting Mohamed so that it becomes commonplace and everyone stops bothering about it. Then we will have the restoration of true free speech, not the pissy self-restraining version we have now.
Unfortunately, the way things are going, we’d be thwarted by our own governments. There’s an excellent article online, which I can’t find again, that lays out the evolution of Islamic anti-Western protest. I think the article may have been by Taibbi. Basically, the writer puts the blame on Western governments for promoting unrepresentative radical Islamists groups as the voices of their communities. In effect, this gave those groups status as politically effective in the eyes of Islamic youth that they would not otherwise have had. The stirring up of protests is really about the fight for political supremacy between Islamist groups rather than being aimed at a Western audience.
Interestingly, there is apparently a TV show somewhere in the Middle East dedicated to mocking Islam which seems to survive primarily because it doesn’t self-censor when threatened. Details in the article I mentioned. Wish I could find it again. Let the crazies froth away for long enough without caving in to them, or reacting at all, and they usually slink away in embarrassment when they finally hear themselves.
I just realised what I like so much about the Maru vids–there is no accompanying music, just the noises Maru makes.
I was just wondering, in the last 25 years, say, how many Westerners have been killed by Muslims and vice versa?
Reblogged this on Funniest Animals.
A Pakistani minister has offered a $100,000 reward for the head of the film maker.
Maybe what we need is a wealthy westerner prepared to offer the same for the head of that Pakistani minister – unless and until he withdraws the offer,
yeah, because escalation always works.
Well, if Salman Rushdie is worth $3.3 million, I guess maybe Nakoub is worth $100K at that rate.
Nah, on second thoughts, maybe not.
“yeah, because escalation always works”
Why wouldn’t it?
Why would it escalate as opposed to making them think twice before issuing threats. It has worked for them. The media think twice before printing anything about Mohammad. How many printed the Danish cartoons. How many are self censoring each and every day in order to avoid threats. I’m for a level playing field. If you issue a threat, then a threat gets issued against you. Doesn’t the law work like that? You break the law, the law breaks you. Seems to work more or less.
So what is your solution?