Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Respect all sanctities, Saudis tell world | Main | Needling back »

Tuesday, February 14, 2006

Self imposed censorship...

Made in Canada...

***I added this pic after publishing for the blind who dare not see***

An Alberta magazine's (The Western Standard) decision to publish cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad has stoked fears of attacks on Canadian troops and embassies abroad, caused a major Muslim group to consider asking police to lay hate-crime charges and led the country's largest bookstore chain and airline to withdraw the publication. [..]

The Canadian Islamic Congress has vowed to seek hate-crimes charges against the magazine on the grounds that the cartoons incite hatred and portray Muslims in a negative fashion.

Indigo Books and Music Inc., Canada's largest bookstore chain, is refusing to put the latest issue of the Western Standard on its shelves. Air Canada, which normally carries the Western Standard in its lounges and some flights, has also decided pull the issue.

It seems to me that nothing does a better service of portraying Muslims in a negative fashion, than hordes and hordes of them burning down embassies, and calling for the heads of anyone who opposes them.  Obviously the Canadian Defense Minister is also of the opinion that Muslims are fanatical lunatics incapable of rational thought, otherwise he wouldn't be worried about our troops being victim to them.  That's a fine way to perpetuate the stereotype.  And hate-crimes charges filed by an organization that routinely vilifies Israel, subjugates women and incites hatred against infidels is beyond laughable...except it's not funny at all.

As for Indigo Books, I am reminded of my last trip into an Indigo store, to find a copy of Alan Dershowitz's The Case For Israel.  Not only was it out of stock -- and a cursory search of my area stores indicates it is still so -- but if it had been on the shelf, it would have been seriously out-numbered by an avalanche of anti-Israeli tomes and moonbat bibles.  So to have them taking a so-called "principled stand" against what they term to be hate-literature, smacks of hypocrisy and capitulation.  They go to such lengths to shelter Islam from criticism, but in the kind of world advocated by the mobs of violent arsonists in the middle east, Indigo Books would cease to exist.  And the incongruity of their actions is totally lost on them, as it is on all who believe that bowing to the pressure to censor their actions will spare them harsh judgment in the eyes of those who would reduce us to dhimmitude.

How about a deal with Dr. Elmasry of the CIC, and all the fine Muslims calling for the censorship of these hate-filled cartoons?  When the Muslim world stops publishing cartoons like these...



Then perhaps we will take a more principled stand, against the publishing of these...



Your choice.

Fellow BT'er Mark Peters calls Ezra Levant's move to publish these cartoons "Courage".  In light of what he is up against, I tend to agree.  But somebody has to have it.

North American Patriot

***Update -- Please, oh please explain how THIS is a reasonable reaction from the self-declared "Religion of Peace"...Some of you might want to recheck who's side you're on.

Posted by Wonder Woman on February 14, 2006 | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Self imposed censorship...:

» Western Standard - Levant gains little from printing prophet muhammed cartoons from Canadian Issues
By Darren Krause Freelance Columnist At the beginning of this debate over the controversial Prophet Mohammed cartoons, I was all for the freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Heck, I would even go as far as to say I... [Read More]

Tracked on 2006-02-14 9:53:19 AM

» Western Standard - Levant gains little from printing prophet muhammed cartoons from Canadian Issues
By Darren Krause Freelance Columnist At the beginning of this debate over the controversial Prophet Mohammed cartoons, I was all for the freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Heck, I would even go as far as to say I... [Read More]

Tracked on 2006-02-14 8:34:20 PM


I was bemused at the breakfast table on Valentine's Day morning to come across this column, "The Dirt on the Squirt", in the Globe's free magazine insert, TORO.

The opening sentence reads: "Yes, females ejaculate. And yes, all women can do it. Believe me. I took the workshop". I leave the rest to the reader's imagination.

One wonders if it is "responsible" journalism to provide such strong evidence to encourage the view of many Muslims that our society and culture are decadent, and thus unworthy of respect.


Posted by: Mark Collins | 2006-02-14 8:37:49 AM

McNally Robinson, Chapters / Indigo and Air Canada are all private companies, who like the Western Standard, are making a decision. They are free to stock what they chose. If you don't like it - shop at another store that is the wonderful thing about a capitalist, democratic society.

We have choice and options.

Posted by: Shaky | 2006-02-14 8:44:06 AM

I think the free speech argument is frankly a little weak.
The Danish cartoonists were able to freely exercise their right. What's followed is people using the Danish cartoonists voice to pursue their own agendas. You can defend a person's right to free speech without needlessly fanning the flames.

The cartoons you so boldly reprinted have been in the public domain for suach a long time. You could have simply linked us to where they could be seen without this exercise.

Posted by: MolarMauler | 2006-02-14 8:45:50 AM

Mom, they started it. He did it too.

What a lame justification for publishing offensive material -- because they do it too.

Posted by: ted | 2006-02-14 8:51:23 AM

Aren't you glad that the Liberals allowed Indigo to buy out Coles and Chapters so that there is no effective competition in the book selling business?

I bet the fact that the owners are high profile Rosedale Liberals have nothing at all to do with allowing a monopoly.

Posted by: Warwick | 2006-02-14 8:54:27 AM

Well, at least we know who's side Chapters and Air Canada are on. They didn't have to pull them. They could have gone about their business as usual. But no, they wanted to make a statement.

Posted by: Mallard42 | 2006-02-14 8:54:41 AM


What options? Indigo/Chapters/Coles are a monopoly and the state keeps out foreign competition. Now that the Indigo chain has its monopoly it uses preditory pricing to eliminate rivals and control what is offered for sale.

It would be fine if we had a choice. We don't.

Posted by: Warwick | 2006-02-14 8:58:17 AM

I buy all my books now, through the Conservative Book Club...
So thank you Shaky, I will exercise my choice.

Posted by: Wonder Woman | 2006-02-14 9:02:04 AM

We can understand the price of freedom by comments. Prostitution to a religion advocating murder, violence seems more valuable than freedom to many people even to many companies.

The god of Islamofacists is not the real God. That is why they need to defend him by crime. God created everything and does not need anyone to defend Him. He is also a God of love and justice.

Posted by: Rémi houle | 2006-02-14 9:06:11 AM

Thanks for publishing these.

The idea that any Western newspaper is refraining from publication out of "respect" is ludicrous. They are refraining out of fear.

Given the Moslem reaction, the cartoons are now THE STORY. It's hard to see how one can have an intelligent discussion about the situation unless we know what lies at the source of the (feigned) outrage.

More importantly, one ought to remember that the Danish paper originally published the cartoons as a protest against self-censorship. The entire furore seems to have proved its point.

Posted by: matt harrington | 2006-02-14 9:06:24 AM

I think it's classless to reprint them.

Posted by: beancounter | 2006-02-14 9:06:44 AM

You have no choice in bookstores? Monopoloy? Puh-leeze. Every major city in Canada has independent bookstores. And if you don't like those you can get any book you want via the internet. You can also give Chapters/Indigo an ISBN number and they will order any book you want. Please don't talk about your book buying experience in Canada like you are oppressed - it is offensive in the context of other countries like China where there really is a monopoly on content. I also like how Warwick is basically taking up the exact argument often used by lefty moonbats to argue against Walmart (too big, price out competition, etc.).

Freedom of expression goes both ways. If you want everyone to have to freedom to say/publish anything they want, you must also acknowledge the freedom of everyone to NOT publish/sell anything that they don't want to - for whatever reasons.

From all the rhetoric flying around here, you would think that folks choosing not to publish the cartoons were traitors. Talk about a Stalinist attitude - "you must publish what we tell you to"

Posted by: ted | 2006-02-14 9:07:42 AM

Jezz, the old fellow looks a lot like my Uncle
Harold, before he shaved his beard - meanwhile
my alma mater are having a problem with their
multicultural students who are issuing threats
-Saint Mary's University is a 200 year old Roman
Catholic University/College in Halifax NS. It was
founded by Irish/Scots Catholics,most from Ulster. It was never intended to be a multi-cultural university. Students who threaten the
administration using the typical Islamic stance
of threats leading to fear should be expelled,

Posted by: Jack Macleod | 2006-02-14 9:12:17 AM

It's nice to see that you've used the ever-present "You're all a bunch of anti-zionists" to bolster your position...

Did you somehow miss the press release from the Canadian Jewish Congress?

In President Ed Morgan's words...

"“We are saddened by a situation that has gotten entirely out of hand. The decision by all those who chose to publish the cartoons is inexcusably provocative, insensitive and disrespectful of Muslim believers. At the same time, we strongly denounce the verbally and physically violent reaction to their publication by so many of those same believers.

“We commend Canada’s Muslim community for the civility with which it has protested and those media who have decided not to republish the cartoons. We regret that there are some in the media and elsewhere who have taken the misguided step of using these cartoons as a means to defend freedom of expression. "

Posted by: George in BC | 2006-02-14 9:16:50 AM

I get your point, Shaky, but, with regard to Air Canada, we don't have much option in Canada. It's essentially a monopoly as set up by the Canadian government.

And,also as a result of the Canadian government, and its extreme taxation of citizens and corporations, very few Canadians do not have the investment capital to establish large businesses, such as Indigo/Chapters. Did you know that less than 1% of Canadians have an investment capacity? That's why we rely on foreign investment to run our hotels, industries, services, set up large businesses etc; we are employees, that's all. The investment capacity of a capitalist economy ought to be about 20% of its population; not less than 1%.

Most certainly, stores etc have the option of carrying whatever magazine they want. I don't think that's the issue in this case. I think the issue is the openness of the subject matter to debate. That's the essence of free speech.

Do we have this openness in the West? That's what these cartoons are about. They have nothing to do with 'sensitivity' to feelings - which is a smarmy smokescreen of censorship. After all, one can claim sensitivity to anything, claiming that such issues are linked to the identity beliefs within a religion or group, including issues such as the definition of truth, the actions of science, the role of women, the nature of marriage, and shut down debate instantly. Once one, in the leftist West, moves into defining a belief as part of one's 'identity', it somehow becomes 'essential', much like a biological aspect, and has moved out of debate and choice. It has become 'genetically innate'. Hmmm. A belief is 'genetically innate'? But, that's what we do when we declare that a belief is an 'essential characteristic of one's identity'.

The questions raised in those cartoons were - How does one justify ACTIONS of terrorism (bombings, suicide bombings), carried out in the name of Mohammed, with a BELIEF in the religion of Islam? These are important issues and should be open to debate. Surely we aren't going to define a Muslim's 'essential identity' as vicious terrorism. Therefore, the gap between their beliefs and their actions has to be discussed. By them and by us, the recipients of their actions of bombing.

To remove something from debate is to move it into the domain of dogma, a final truth beyond question. To state that these issues are outside of discussion, because their discussion 'hurts feelings'..is an action of moving them into dogma...i.e., one bombs a commuter train in the name of Mohammed..because one does. Period.

Take a look at the other cartoons, found on Islamic web sites. They are also political cartoons; they refer to actions, presumably carried out for a political agenda. Their content is certainly provocative. Should Israelis and Jews insist that they be withdrawn because they 'hurt our feelings'? Should Israelis and Jews burn down embassies because of them? And the important question - are they open to debate?

One cartoon shows Ariel Sharon as a Nazi, beating up and cutting up Palestinian children. Now, should this be open to debate or has it moved into dogma, on the part of the Islamic view, and is beyond discussion? Is this a cartoon about Sharon? About ALL Israelis? All Jews? The other cartoon - about which I'm not sure, is also of Sharon, and is for a western audience (English)..

My point is that I'm against the censorship of any such images/word - but I'm only in favor of their expression IF, IF, IF, their content is open to debate. Otherwise, it is dogma and is meant to brainwash rather than explore and develop truth.

And, I'm strongly opposed to the prevention of debate, by defining an image as 'sacred', i.e., by moving it from the realm of debate, moving it into the 'essence of a group's identity', and stating that 'we are insensitive' if we discuss it.

To remove those cartoons from debate is actually extremely discriminatory to the Muslims. We are saying that 'we acknowledge that you bomb people in the name of your religion'; that bombing people is an essential attribute of your religion' and..since it is, we won't discuss it so that we won't hurt your feelings about this essential characteristic of your religion'.

But - is this an essential attribute of the Muslim identity? Bombing people? Shouldn't we instead set this 'essential image' up for debate and..ask them to debate, discuss, deny it..so that we don't view them in this manner (as essentially a people who bomb other people)..and they also, know that this is not their true identity.

Do we just accept their actions of bombing people as an 'essential characteristic of their identity'..and beyond the realm of discussion?

Posted by: ET | 2006-02-14 9:18:59 AM

Thx, Ezra, for letting Canadians see what the big flap is all about. Talk about a tempest in a tea pot!

Makes one wonder why muslims are so afraid of the truth about islam?

Posted by: Dark Skies | 2006-02-14 9:21:15 AM


If Ezra ran Indigo instead of the Liberals best friends in Rosedale (who also now own a monopoly in movie theatres in most markets now, too) would the Liberals have allowed them to buy both Coles and Chapters? This happened while on their watch.

I wouldn't care if the government didn't stop foreign firms from setting up shop in Canada - but they did and do. Just like foreign banks are hamstrung, they limit competition. How does it benefit the consumer (or the staff) to limit entry to the market? It isn't free enterprise if the government regulates competitors out of the market.

Government manipulation of the market helps well conected (read: Liberal) firms at the expense of Canadians. This is also true of the CRTC.

I want the market opened up to all competition. Anti-monopoly rules are not anti-free market. Even conservative economists acknowledge monopolies to be "market failures."

Posted by: Warwick | 2006-02-14 9:23:54 AM

Thanks for publishing the cartoons...it's time the multiculties realized that when Muslims migrate to the west they dont just bring with them new dances and recipes.

Posted by: scarlet | 2006-02-14 9:26:00 AM

thanks ezra for confirming the fact that bigots exist even in Canada.

Posted by: Ezra the Bigot | 2006-02-14 9:27:06 AM

Bravo to Ted. The only reason I can see for Western Standard to publish the cartoons is to gain attention and publicity for the magazine.

Posted by: Nancy | 2006-02-14 9:28:26 AM

Those with any shred of human dignity:

15-minutes of fame jackass:

Posted by: Ezra the Bigot | 2006-02-14 9:30:54 AM

Izra we are behind you, people here in Canada have the right to freedom of speach and freedom of press without a group of people telling us what we can or can't do or print.
Us christians have been critized as well but we don't riot and we don't kill inocent people, we respect people of all faiths which muslims do not. We applaud you for your courage.

Posted by: M.DeVille | 2006-02-14 9:31:13 AM


I look forward to your letters to the editor requesting that the newly installed Conservative government breakup the conservative Canwest newspaper monopoly.

I agree with Ted. It is pretty sad when you claim that you have no book buying options in Canada. We have so many options here it is ridiculous.

Posted by: kelly | 2006-02-14 9:32:54 AM

While it may be true that these cartoons are considered offensive by some muslims, that in itself does not constitute sufficient reason for the willing compliance and self censorship being exercised by virtually all of the main stream media in Canada. Just for the record, Sharia law does NOT apply in Canada, at least not yet.The caricatures of the prophet mohammed are not sacred to me in the least. As for the offence taken, I too am offended that Islam requires a woman to wear either a burqha or at the very least a hijab to show that she is subject to a man. In addition under Islamic custom a male heir is entitled to twice as much as a female heir when an estate is wound up and a female's testimony in a court of Islamic law counts for only half as much as a male's testimony. I find these discriminatiry practices deeply offensive to women and am still waiting for an apology from mainstream Islam. Does anyone seriously think there's a snowballs chance that that will happen!

Posted by: Jimmyeh-Al-Akri-Aljazeera | 2006-02-14 9:35:18 AM

Those who find the cartoons offensive can explain what is bigoted and offensive about them?

I see fair criticism of the type that is used by editorial cartoonists a thousand times a day.

Is there not in fact a terrorism problem by the followers of Islam?

Are people not being killed by terrorists and "insurgencies" all over the world?

With the exception of some tribal/marxist wars in Africa, most of the world's conflicts have Muslims on one of the sides. This is indisputable. So how is it wrong to point this out? Are Muslims alone above all criticism?


Posted by: Warwick | 2006-02-14 9:36:25 AM

Freedom of Speech is what is at stake here, these Muslims and Islamists will be offended by anything, and to carry on like they have over a cartoon, demonstrates their mentality.

Nice too see a magazine that doesn't fear to print a cartoon that would offend some people.

Muslims won't be happy until the entire world has converted to Islam.

Posted by: Pablo | 2006-02-14 9:37:13 AM

I imagine this event has increased the number of hits per day on this site. That give you a little lump in your pants, Ezra?

Posted by: Don | 2006-02-14 9:37:24 AM

I listened to the interview on As It Happens last night (Feb 13, '06.) Well said Mr Levant!!! Your comments were right on the mark. Thank you for exposing the emperor's new clothes (or lack there of.)

How anyone can question that censorship of the cartoons is about fear of reprisal rather than social conscience is beyond me and the examples you refered to in the interview truly demonstrate this fact.

Posted by: Bruce in Nova Scotia | 2006-02-14 9:38:44 AM

The next time Ezra Levant wants to increase the circulation of his little rag, I suggest he just strip down to the buff, give us a wide open shot of his goodies and publish that. Most people I know wouldn't be able to stop themselves from buying a copy of his little rag (out of various impulses, but none of them prurient, for obvious reasons)...and he wouldn't be doing this on the backs of anyone else's hurt feelings.

Posted by: Ti-Guy | 2006-02-14 9:40:22 AM

Thank you for having the courage to tell it like it is. Political cartoons are out there for whatever is most newsworthy of the day. Be it religion, different nations, or areas of the country it is meant as satire, and if you can up and fight and kill over this you have a serious problem. Canada still has freedom of speech, check the Bill of Rights.

Posted by: NMacD | 2006-02-14 9:44:47 AM

This is not a philosophical debate without consequences. With freedom comes responsibility; there could be real consequences for Canadians working overseas, especially our troops in Kandahar. How on earth can you justify inflaming an already dangerous situation?

Perhaps if you were to visit some of the people at CFB Edmonton, or you were talk to the wives and husbands of the people serving in Kandahar you would get a sense of the real danger they are in. They go to sleep with the sounds of explosions; the fighting is within hearing distance of the Canadians compound. The very least we can do is support them, not incite the very people who can hurt them!

Your actions are contributing to an already dangerous situation. I don't think that you feel strongly about your principles on this issue. I think you are motivated by a hope of fame, along with a distaste for some Islamic people. Only you know the truth of what motivated you, and you will have to live with the consequences of your actions.

I dearly hope that the worst that happens is that people write a lot of angry letters to you. I hope that you don't have to live with the knowledge that someone was hurt, in part, because of your actions. I just pray that there are no consequences for people who had no say in this.

Please do what you can to cool things down and to make peace.

-Sharon Griffin, Ottawa, Ontario

Posted by: Sharon Griffin | 2006-02-14 9:46:59 AM

Thank you Ezra! Most people, i believe feel that offending people on purpose is wrong but that is not the point here. The point is that the western world is being held hostage by the fear of VIOLENT retaliation by muslims. Thier reaction far outweighs the original offence. where were all these anti cartoon people when the Jesus was being portrayed negatively over the years?

Posted by: nondhimmi | 2006-02-14 9:49:50 AM


Heard of Bell Globemedia? How about Quebecor Corp.? Heard of that small little enterprise, TorStar? All very large media companies.

Canwest a monopoly? You've got to be joking.

CanWest is owned by the Aspers who have been high-profile Liberals for, well, ever. Israel Asper a very high profile Liberal supporter. Martin gave Winnipeg (the Asper's home town) $100,000,000 taxpayer dollars for a Human Rights Museum that Israel had been advocating for a decade just before the 2004 election where the Canwest papers and Global News endorsed Martin. David Asper has been Liberal up until the last election when he endorsed his own reporter for the CPC (Peter Kent) who lost anyway.

I don't want Chapters/Indigo broken up, I want the government to allow competitors to enter the market. I want the CRTC broken up and scrapped. I want all competitors to be allowed in.

Independents do not have the scale to compete en mass. They don't have the cash to offer the selection of major chains. Canada's market is too small not to allow foreign competitors into the market.

The bottom line is that my first choice is open markets. But if we're gonna have lame CanCon regulations, at least don't allow the Canadian firms to combine into a monopoly. The Reisman/Scwartz monopolists are just irksome because they target protected industries.

Posted by: Warwick | 2006-02-14 9:50:25 AM

Sent to many newspapers, Calgary,Edmonton,Toronto Star,Toronto Sun,Ottawa Sun,Winnipeg Sun,etc.

Dear Editor, Feb. 14/06

As I watched a man carrying a placard which read,"Mohamed was a great prophet and he founded a great Religion."during the demonstration in Montreal, I heard a Muslim saying, "It is insulting, it is insulting."

Can anybody figure that one out??

Thomas Laprade
480 Rupert St.
Thunder Bay, Ont.
Ph. 807 3457258

Posted by: Thomas Laprade | 2006-02-14 9:54:24 AM

How do you Know that the cartoons are a dipiction of the characture of the prophet has anyone got a picture or a photograph of him, for all we know it could be Muhammed Saddam or somebody, there are a lot of Islamists called Muhammed ______. It just proves the immature mentality of of the extremists to try to propagate FEAR on the west.
This whole thing is stupid and has been blown out of proportion. This has nothing to do with religion but everything to do with our FREEDOM to speak.
Good on you Western Standard for standing up for our rights, the cowardice of the western press is!

Posted by: Discusted | 2006-02-14 10:00:06 AM


You direct responsibility on the wrong person. If there are people who cannot behave themselves in a civilized fashion and direct their savage violence towards others, that is their responsibility alone. Ezra is not a threat to our troops.

Try telling a rape victim it was her fault for not wearing a burka. It may well come to that.

Our freedoms and way of life are worth fighting for. Ezra - and our troops - know this very well and are up to the task. My friends served in PPLCI and did tours of Bosnia. Our troops didn't shy from that, they won't shy from this either.

Our military hate it when we treat them like victims. We didn't train school girls, we trained warriors. They can take care of themselves. Note also that the savages that are trying to take freedom away from Afghanis did not wait for Ezra to publish a bunch of cartoons before targeting Canadian soldiers. They've been doing it since we got there.

Posted by: Warwick | 2006-02-14 10:00:44 AM

Hi Ezra,

I saw you this morning on CBC (Communist Bull...-ing Centre) "news" channel and I can only congratulate to you! You're the best!!!
You should have run for PM.

As one who came to Canada from a commie country 21 years ago I truly enjoy and appreciate freedom. I should say; I enjoy it whenever I feel it. Most lately, due to some allegedly liberal, but in real life socialist morons' activity I rather feel like in my old bolshi country.
Thus, posting these infamous cartoons about Mohamed and calling the Canadian Muslims' big chief an idiot on TV was a refreshing moment for me.

Normally I would agree that some of the cartoons were in bad taste for it contained a passage from the Koran (on the turban), which this way characterizes entire Islam. If it was only about Mohamed, the first great terror-leader of the Muslims, it would not accuse all his followers today, only him.
But even this way that I find one of the cartoons a little bit offensive I think it is the duty of every free country's press to stand up for their friends, the Danish people. The Muslim world cannot possibly divest and create an economic blockade against all free countries in the world and they will have to learn to take criticism without violence.
We must stand united against this satanic threat.

By the way, I enjoyed the reaction of the Muslim world: In order to disprove the cartoon that portrayed them as terrorists they marched out on the streets and terrorized some people. Now we are all convinced, thank you guys!


Posted by: Miklos Brauner | 2006-02-14 10:03:00 AM

Good observation Warwick . The whole bunch of them are part of the Godless Liberal oligarchy which was threatening to take a stranglehold on the country; why they were even trying to infiltrate Buzz and his auto workers with their nastiness. Lots of connection there. Their object was and is constant religious warfare , keep the pot bubbling , don`t let anyone define the problem and expose it as being insignificant. It plays especially well with the great unwashed downtown.
I wonder if Canada could have withstood another round of these Liberal parasites . Harpers` win was more than huge, it was historically significant and these idiots know it. Their MSM lapdogs are running around in a tizzy , trying to convince each other that they are still relevant. Big changes on the way.

Posted by: dave h | 2006-02-14 10:04:10 AM

Ti Guy , Don and other lovers of violent islam,

Piss off ... You don't appreciate what the meaning of freedom is.

Please go and live in a Muslim country and take your families with you.

Good for you Ezra. You do have huge support.

This is not about 'we have to print it too' for gratuitous reasons, this is to say that we can print whatever the hell we want and this is an opportunity for the WS to demostrate that it is an open and uncensored mag. I often wonder about most Canadian publications when you read some of the tripe they hand off to the public.

Cheers to that. All others cower and play the apology game with an ingrate Muslim population.

Muslims should kissing the feet of the western countries that have allowed them come into the twenty first century without having to pay their dues. Here, they can be free to do what they like without fear and they are also free to liberate their wives and daughters. But do they?

Seems to me that all they do is sit in large male groups and look for something to get angry about.

And regarding the comment about female ejaculation in a Toronto mag. (that might lead the Muslims to believe we are a base culture and therefore what? have license to kill us for it?)

I think that is in poor taste, but there is no accounting for taste. The point it that the pervs who like to dwell on spurting bodily fluids ... that's for them, you don't have to read it.

Our women are free to ejaculate if they want to. Many middle east women wish they could have sex.

Freedom is messy, but, I'll take it over orderly enslavement.

Posted by: Duke | 2006-02-14 10:10:26 AM

I'm proud of the Western Standard. The absolute need to "Draw the Line" and take a stand against Muslim/Islamofacist intimidation and bloody brutality is increasingly apparent. Yes, indeed, "they came for the cartoonists first..."

Posted by: Biddy M | 2006-02-14 10:15:00 AM

If I had any doubts about the necessity of publshing these cartoons, the over the top reaction on this thread has removed it. A magazine prints some fairly innocuous cartoons about a religous figure, a regular occurence around the world, and the publisher is accused of bigotry, attention seeking and greed. And then there's the rather disturbing speculation about the lump in his pants.
Keep up the good work, Ezra, it's apparently necessary despite the fact we live in Canada in the year 2006.

Posted by: nazz rune | 2006-02-14 10:15:11 AM

Kol ha Kovod. Good for you. First it will be freemdom of the press, then manybe they don't like the way we dress.
Also as one from Nova Scotia good for Peter March (prof at SMU) for standing up to the guest students from Syria, Jordan, Palastine etc, who want him out of their school.
Stand up for FREEDOM in Canada, give into this and what will they demand next?

Posted by: karen harrison | 2006-02-14 10:19:28 AM

this have nothing to do with the liberty of expression
"western standard" has been paied to publish the picture to make some friction between muslim and catholic...
And the worst.. some western canadian(dumb canadian) aprove it...
and seriously this newspapaer is realy lucky to be not in Quebec...

Posted by: Don Papas | 2006-02-14 10:31:14 AM

Hi Ezra,
I saw you this morning on CBC (Communist Bull...-ing Centre) "news" channel and I can only congratulate to you! You're the best!!!
You should have run for PM.

Hey, Ezra did run for office once in Edmonton. Of course, he was pretending to be Rahim Jaffer at the time.

Posted by: bob | 2006-02-14 10:32:10 AM

Indigo/Coles/Chapters are all owned by the same people ? Guess rather than blowing up an embassy somewhere, I'll not shop at those stores. By the way, Conservativebookclub.com has a lot of good reading.

Posted by: MarkAlta | 2006-02-14 10:35:35 AM

Besides the Indigo dominion (btw, I liked Chapters better when it was Chapters) there is always Amazon.ca, Unless I need something right now and they have it handy.

Having said that, I think you guys missed another good one:


It seems like the German "Tagesspiegel" printed a cartoon showing the Iranian national soccer team squaring off against four Bundeswehr soldiers, with the Iranians sporting explosives strapped to themselves.

The reactions were similar to the ones in Belgium, but before you go off a rail here: This was an INTERNAL cartoon in which the cartoonist tried to show how stupid it was to use the Bundeswehr during the upcoming world cup.

Netherless, the cartoonist received a couple of death threats and the German embassy in Therean was firebombed.

Posted by: Snowrunner | 2006-02-14 10:44:47 AM

The "All Systems Go" post below proves what this is all about: Selling subscriptions. There is no principle here, just self-promotion.

Although when I see posts like this one from you, I wonder just how many others see this, as you do, as a radical Islam vs radical Judaism holy war. Religious bigotry is ugly, in both directions.

Posted by: Mark Logan | 2006-02-14 10:49:26 AM


"Those who find the cartoons offensive can explain what is bigoted and offensive about them?"

Unless I (or you) were Muslim, my opinion (and yours) of the cartoons themselves is irrevelant... However, the mere appearance of Mohammad is what is offensive and is what is taboo in a great number of Muslim/Islamic sects including the major Sunni and Shia movements. I'd suggest informing yourself.... can you spell Google?

"Is there not in fact a terrorism problem by the followers of Islam?" Of course... but what does that have to do with these cartoons? NOTHING. The terrorists will blow themselves up regardless of whether we publish cartoons or not. So to use them as some sort of excuse is frankly ludicrous.

"Are people not being killed by terrorists and "insurgencies" all over the world?" What does that have to do with this discussion... see above.

"With the exception of some tribal/marxist wars in Africa, most of the world's conflicts have Muslims on one of the sides. This is indisputable. "


Right... so... ignoring the Millions of people in dozens of wars who die in Sub-saharan Africa from tribal and religious warfare (they're easy to ignore after all.. being poor... starving.. and black)... did you forget about Columbia? Did you forget about Peru? Did you forget about Nepal? Did you forget about Burma? Did you forget about Korea? Did you forget about Laos?

Ignorance is so bloody frustrating...

Posted by: George in BC | 2006-02-14 10:52:54 AM

It is absolutely disgusting, after all the outrage and outcry for understanding and compassion, that you publish the Islamic cartoons in the name of freedom of speech and anti-media censorship. It is not freedom of speech to publicly humiliate and disrespect individuals and their beliefs. There is some point in which you need to say this just isn't right and you have crossed the line. I for one will never pick up and read one of your magazines as obviously you are to careless and crass to see beyond your own self interests.

-non-denominational and outraged.

Posted by: Kelly | 2006-02-14 10:57:36 AM

Sharon: Get a grip girl. The fanatical muslims in Afghanistan are not interested in the least in the cartoon affair. They were killing and maiming and causing chaos long before anybody ever printed any cartoons and they will be at it long after this is ancient history. Afghans are thankful that there are Canadian soldiers who are willing to put themselves in harms way to try to establish a decent democracy in the muslim world, which would be a rare jewel indeed! Our men and women in uniform are not targeted because of cartoons. Thay are targeted because thay are "infidels" who must be "cleansed" from the Islamic lands. These muslim murderers don't care a wit for your opinion on the cartoons or your selfless giving to improve their miserable place in the world. They hate you! Get it? Why? Because you are an infidel and a woman infidel at that. They want an Islamic rule over the whole earth! Sharia law. Wouldn't that be a joy?! The cartoons may have been offensive, they may have been provocative, they may have fanned the flames but the fire is aready burning out of control in the muslim ME so I don't think our self censorship and willing compliance with Sharia law will make a wit of difference. In our nation we believe in free speech and freedom of the press and also freedom to practice a religion even if it's not Islam. Go and see how many Christian churches or Jewish synagogues exist in Islamic countries and then you will see how tolerant they are. Islam's agenda is world domination. Go read their websites yourself if you don't want to believe me.

Posted by: Jimmyeh-al-Akri-Aljazeera | 2006-02-14 10:58:14 AM

1 2 3 Next »

The comments to this entry are closed.