Gee, I don’t know… How about damn near anybody?  To the surprise of no one, except of course the TO (Red) Star, the ratings for the Ministry Of What You Should Think’s latest flop took a header when the second episode was aired.  It seems that Little Mosque on the Prairie (Laura Ingalls Wilder must be whirling dervishly in her grave) just isn’t turning out to be the endearing new smash hit that the loopy Left all told us it was.  Or maybe the nearly 50% drop in viewership was due a million Canucks suddenly realizing they were out of beer at the same time and couldn’t get back in time to watch. 🙄

Gee whiz, I wonder how that happened?  Could it maybe be that the largest audience for sitcoms in the country is made up of white Christians and the show seems to portray every non-Muslim in the cast as a bumbling closet bigot?  In comedy, you can get away with making fun of your audience but not outright insulting them (unless you’re Don Rickles), which is exactly what Little Mosque seems to do.  In the show that Michael Coren called “visual drudgery“… well, I’ll let him say it:

From beginning to end the show thumps us over our non-hijab wearing heads with a clumsy hammer. Any fears about Islam, we are told, are based on our own ignorance and bigotry.

Everyone is a caricature in Little Mosque, but some caricatures are more obnoxious than others.

The Muslim characters are nice and kind and ordinary in that quintessentially Canadian way. Some of them may be silly and old-fashioned but they’d never hurt a fly, let alone kill an infidel.

The non-Muslim caricatures, however, are repugnant. Especially if they’re cops.

So scratch that demographic out of your audience.  Okay, maybe they’re targeting the Muslim demographic, that whopping 1.9% of the population, half of whom probably won’t approve of the show in any case.  Nah, I didn’t think so, either.

Even if it wasn’t a thinly-veiled backhand at anyone not a raving moonbat, it would still fail.  Because it’s crappy.  Crappy in that quintessentially CBC way.  It’s the kind of writing and production that can only be made by a bunch of lefties secure in their deathgrip on the governmental funding teat.  Your tax dollars at work.

Quick: what’s black and white with a cherry on top? Any dieas? Aw, come on now, at least one of you out there must have some idea what I’m babbling about. Some of you must have heard the question before. If you know the answer to that one, you’re probably at least as old as me and you’re also going to find this picture to be, shall we say, vaguely familiar:

Yes, that really is just what it looks like: the OPP are back in black… and white. It seems that the OPP have decided to do away with the white cruisers that they’ve been puttering around in since the late 80s or so and get back to the good ol’ black-and-white. And no, it’s got nothing to do with going retro. 🙄 One of the main reasons for the return to the old school paint job is visibility, plain and simple:

“We welcome the return of the traditional black and white cruisers,” said Minister Kwinter. “Their enhanced visibility on Ontario’s major highways will add significantly to the safe driving message we want to reinforce with the motoring public. We support the OPP and the important work police officers are doing to keep our communities safe,” added Minister Kwinter.

The black and white cruisers will provide a distinctive presence to OPP stepped-up efforts to make Ontario highways safer and to bring traffic safety issues in line with other important public safety issues and concerns.

“Officer and public safety are the primary concerns,” said Commissioner Fantino. “The black and white patrol vehicle will be instantly recognizable as an OPP patrol car and, with the new LED high visibility roof lights and vehicle markings, will have a greater impact on the visibility of OPP vehicles patrolling our communities and our roadways,” added Commissioner Fantino.

Yeah, you can spot those things about a mile away, as near as I can remember. And yeah, most of slow down when we see a cop car. All we need now is for some loopy lefty to start hooting about “turning back the clock” that the story can be complete… 😆

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, to part two of my run for that li’l old fatwa brass ring. In case you missed yesterday’s post on this, I’m putting up a few YouTube vids that were filmed inside some British mosques by an undercover reporter with Channel 4.

So far, so good. Keep that hate mail rolling in because, you know, that’s the best way to get a guy like me to toe the line.

Well, now; lookie here, willya? The Smoking Stasi have new marching orders. Check out what the Fiberals tried to do on the Q-T. It seems that the high-falutin’ Mr “I-Know-What’s-Best-For-You” Jim Watson (Dolt McSquinty’s Ontario Fiberal Minister of Health Promotion) has nothing but your best interests at heart when it comes to banning smoking. Unless you go someplace like a casino, where the Ontario government gets a cut.

Government-owned casinos in Windsor and Niagara Falls are allowed to build outdoor shelters for smokers, even though bars and restaurants in Ontario cannot do so under a provincewide smoking ban, Health Promotion Minister Jim Watson said yesterday.

The Smoke Free Ontario Act, which became law in June, doesn’t allow bars and restaurants to provide enclosed areas to protect smoking patrons from the weather, but Mr. Watson said casinos aren’t covered by that provision because their main business is not serving food or alcohol.

Yeppers. If you slide on in to your local pub (maybe run by a guy having almost as much fun making ends meet as you are) and you feel like a smoke while you’re there, you gotta stand outside in the elements and get soaked, freeze your arse off, or whatever. That’s because, under that lovely little thing called the Smoke Free Ontario Act, that the Grits decided to beat us over the head with, bars and restaurants aren’t allowed to provide even semi-enclosed areas to protect smoking customers from the rain, snow, sleet and other things that aren’t supposed to bother mailmen.

But HEY! Guess what? If you wanna go and blow a bunch of your hard-earned dough in some slots joint where the back-scratching swine from the Big Smoke can snout up to the trough, you get to light up in a jolly little “outdoor covered structure” with walls and a roof and probably ashtrays, too.

Can you say “bullshit,” boys and girls? I knew you could. As the Freeps put it in their editorial page today:

Uh-oh.

This sounds like trouble, smells like a rat and looks like one rule for the government, another for the private sector. To be sure, it’s an injustice of the highest order for Ontario’s hospitality industry.

It’s cynical, it’s hypocritical, it’s a betrayal and it may mark the point at which Ontarians finally lose all faith in the provincial Liberals.

Well, okay. Maybe something good will come out of all this two-faced sanctimony, after all.

We were told, in the most melodramatic of tones, by the Fiberals that the smoking ban was being brought in to protect workers from the Great Plague Of Western Civilization, second hand smoke. The latest HypoGrit hyperbole is that these little smoking pits are all fine and dandy because, Watson has barfed, employees will not have to enter these shelters.

HEY, ASSHOLE: pub and eatery owners were saying the same God damned thing over a year ago when you saddled them with your little bullshit law in the first place!! They also told you that if make going out a pain in the ass for smokers, places like them were going to lose money. Could it be that you’ve finally gotten it through your thick skulls that smokers are going to go to some other place to smoke… and take their money with them? Just like bingo halls and charities said they would.

The casino plan quietly received the green light as revenues plummet because of the tough, new no-smoking law.

Well, DUH! The Grits hooted away that there would be no such drop in revenues because, with all those nasty smokers out of the way, non-smokers would start coming out in droves and smokers would still keep coming out, anyway. Well, that never happened, did it?

News flash, HypoGrits: I smoke. It’s MY CHOICE. And I don’t like going to places where I can’t. Given the choice between a) going out and having to freeze my ass off and b) staying in and having a few friends over to watch the game, have some brews, scarf back some BBQ, whatever… I’m choosing B 9 times out of 10. I used to go out a lot; not anymore. And that’s why so many pubs and restaurants are closing, even though you boneheads said they wouldn’t. You assholes annoyed a bunch of us and cost plenty of other people their jobs.

And, come election day, we aren’t going to forget that.

This is kind of interesting, given the context of what I’m in the middle of right now. The Freeps has been doing an ongoing series on racism, immigration, multiculturalism, etc for the past few days now and as part of today’s bit, they had two rather interesting pieces, here and here, that asked the question, “is multiculturalism working?” As you can imagine, one is pro and the other con.

What I find interesting isn’t that Augie Fleras, comfortable in the majority, spouts all the usual leftist, feel-good, “inclusiveness” rhetoric that one comes to expect from multicult apologists. The clear indication is that nice people like multiculturalism, with the unasked question being, of course, “if nice folks like it, what must be the kind that don’t?”

No, what I find interesting is that the one to denounce this failed experiment is Mahfooz Kanwar, a Pakistani immigrant and (supposedly, according to multicultists) one of the people having the most to gain from the policy. Yes, he used to support the idea because he “believed it gave us a sense of pluralism, diversity and a variety of cultural and social customs.” But it didn’t take long for this man, from a fractious country himself, to see the flaws in the system. An interesting example of those flaws — and what they lead to — can be found in a June, 2006 column by the Cowtown Sun’s Licia Corbella, written not long after the arrests of the TO17:

Dr. Mahfooz Kanwar recently attended Calgary’s largest mosque for a funeral.

At one point in the proceedings, a man Kanwar has known for more than three decades led the prayers.

“He was saying in Urdu (the official language of Pakistan): ‘Oh, God, protect us from the infidels, who pollute us with their vile ways,'” recalls Kanwar, a professor of sociology at Mount Royal College in Calgary.

“I stood up and grabbed him by the lapels, which was shocking even to me because I have never done anything like that in my life and I said: ‘How dare you attack my country.’ And then I addressed the crowd and said: ‘I have known this man for more than 30 years and he has been on welfare for almost all of those years.’ ”

Kanwar chuckles at the memory.

“Then I said to this semi-literate man, ‘you should thank me and those you call infidels.’

“He asked me why and I said: ‘Because the taxes I pay are putting food on your table as are the taxes of the so-called “infidels.’ ”

Most Canadians and many Muslims would applaud Dr. Kanwar’s righteous outburst. But guess which of the two men is no longer welcome at the Sarcee Tr. S.W. mosque?

Not the intolerant, hate-spewing semi-literate. No, it’s Dr. Kanwar who’s persona non grata.

That, says Kanwar, is just one of numerous instances he has experienced as a result of the culture of ignorance and intolerance that permeates so many mosques in Canada and throughout the world.

I keep asking how many times a man has to see something happen over and over before he’s allowed to say he can see it coming.

Still waiting for an answer…

Because it needs it, that’s why. Yeah, you heard that right. We get told over and over and over again about how Islam is “the religion of peace,” it’s not a threat to us, the majority of muslims just want to live and let live. And if you can’t get that through your head, then you must just not be tolerant enough. You’re just a mean, nasty, Islamophobic bigot who either, at best, is just too ignorant to know any better or, at worst, has some malevolant George-Bushesque hatred rooted deep in your worm-ridden heart.

Bullshit.

In all my years of listening to the acolytes of the multicult dogma who relentlessly bludgeon us with the claim that we can’t judge people by this or that or the other thing, there is one question that I have never, not even once, heard answered:

Just how God damned many times does a man have to see the same thing happen over and over and over and over and over and over again… before he’s allowed to say that he can see it coming?

Any takers? I didn’t think so. Muslims fly planes into buildings, we are told it has nothing to do with Islam. Muslims turn a country into a medieval hellhole, we are told it has nothing to do with Islam. Muslims blow themselves up on busses in London, it has nothing to do with Islam. Muslims (women, too) come out in support of a rape advocate, nothing to do with Islam. Muslims plot to murder Canadians and behead our Prime Minister, no Islam there.

Then why the hell do the perpetrators howl so long and loud that it IS all about Islam, and nothing else?  (Except for those nasty Jews, of course…)

And don’t give me any of that “those are just a few bad apples” bullshit. Spare me the myth of the vast, moderate muslim majority. I’ll stick with the evidence of my own eyes. Where was the “moderate muslim” outpouring of outrage when the TO17 got busted? I didn’t hear a peep. But they sure as hell came out in droves to get their knickers in a twist (and threaten violence in the name of their “peaceful religion”) over a few cartoons, didn’t they?

Britain’s independent Channel 4’s respected Dispatches programme sent a reporter undercover in several major and influential British mosques to see just what was being said behind Jack Q. Briton’s back. Some of what they found will be posted here, in three parts.

Today we start off with:

• Terrorists are innocent, because all kuffaar (that’s you and me) are liars; lying is part of their religion. They are the terrorists, not muslims, and all muslims should hate them.
• Sharia should be obeyed; not the law of the land.
• Muslim terrorists (who are all innocent) are better than non-muslims.
• Muslims should settle for nothing less than a total Islamic state.
• Apostates and homosexuals should be killed outright.
• Free speech is evil unless it incites violence against people muslims don’t like.
• Holy war is coming and you’d better be on the right side.
• Kuffaar schools corrupt your children.
• Women are inferior; beat them if they don’t do as they’re told.
• Pedophilia is fine and dandy.
• Be a bigot, but be two-faced about it so that your ass is covered.

You know, all that good, wholesome religion-of-peace that we have nothing to worry about kind of stuff. Think I’m making this shit up, do you? Well then, smartass, play the vid and see for yourself. And while you’re at it, ask yourself this:

If it can happen in England, just why can’t it happen here?

Part 2 tomorrow…