By:  Pat Austin

SHREVEPORT – Hello, slippery slope.  It didn’t take long for you to appear.

I’ve always noted that once the green light was given by the 5th Circuit to remove the New Orleans monuments that the slippery slope of further changes would break open. And so it has.

Read the list of names that activist group Take ‘Em Down NOLA wants changed because they celebrate white supremacy.

One is Touro Hospital.

Touro Hospital is named for Judah Touro, who was the son of Jewish immigrants and was born in Rhode Island. Touro fought in the Battle of 1812 and later worked in shipping, trade, and real estate. He lived a simple life and donated a lot of money across the country. In New Orleans one of his charitable works was to establish what would become Touro Hospital – the largest charity hospital in Louisiana.

But that’s racist, so it must go.

Tulane University must apparently change its name as well.

Why?  Because founder Paul Tulane donated large sums of money to the Confederate States of America.

Never mind that he gave large charitable donations to charities throughout New Orleans and that he worked to raise the quality of higher education in the city.

Most of the things on this list are absurd and I’d venture to say that 99.9% of the people in New Orleans don’t have one idea who Judah Touro was or who Lane Street is named for.  In fact, maybe we should quit calling the place in the road where one drives a “lane” – perhaps that too is racist.

There is still hope that some of this madness will end.  Two upcoming bills in the Louisiana Legislature may still protect these monuments and legacy names; similar bills have been successful in nearby states.

Even more bizarre is the fact that Mayor Mitch Landrieu, who is the brainchild of this removal project, has no idea what will replace the monuments that come down nor how any new monument or art would be paid for:

This is perplexing because in every other instance when anyone wants to tear down a historic site or building, the proposed destroyer must have a plan in place for what will be replacing the historic site and why it is justifiable. A year a and a half later, the City Council has not called a meeting to discuss future artwork options.  None of the organizations—Historic District Landmarks Commission and Human Relations Commission—that rubber stamped Landrieu’s cause have called such a meeting. Nothing is planned.  No public discussions held.  No artists commissioned.  No money for new monuments mentioned.  Mitch is the man without a plan.

I’m sure Take’Em Down NOLA has some ideas but, well, there’s that slippery slope again.

 

Pat Austin blogs at And So it Goes in Shreveport.

To those who like to argue that Islam is a religion of piece and those who wish to support terror and or kill Jews simply because they are Jews, this story out of Canada reported by CBC news:

Imam calling for Jews to be killed in sermon at Montreal mosque draws police complaint

Larger Muslim community wants apology from mosque and wonders why controversial imam was invited to preach

and at the Daily Mail

Outrage as Jordanian imam ‘recites anti-Semitic religious verse calling for Jewish people to be killed’ during sermon at Montreal mosque

  • A Jewish advocacy group filed a complaint Monday in Montreal, Canada
  • Spoke out against a sermon given by Sheikh Muhammad bin Musa Al Nasr
  • Jordanian cleric is believed to have been invited as a guest to the mosque
  • Quoted a verse that says: ‘O Muslim, O servant of Allah, O Muslim, O servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him’
  • The larger Muslim community has condemned the use of the verse and urged the mosque to apologize 

But in the rush to congratulate the larger Canadian Muslim community on demonstrating their outrage and tolerance themselves on showing how tolerant the media reporting this story are missing two important points. Today let’s deal with the first one:

Where was the outrage of Muslims WHEN IT HAPPENED?

The CBC story states

The sermon took place at the Dar Al-Arqam Mosque in the city’s Saint-Michel neighbourhood on Dec. 23, 2016.

That means this imam spoke three months ago to a crowd of listeners at a Mosque in Canada. If you look at the listeners in the video, did you see people objecting? Did you see people complaining, did you see anyone raising a hand in dissent or even looking uncomfortable? Did any of them run to the Newspapers or even send them a letter saying how outraged they were over the event?

Nope.

Furthermore note what follows

The video was posted to the mosque’s YouTube channel three days later.

So since December 26th this video has been out there in plain sight (at least until this report, I wasn’t able to find it myself) and for some reason neither the folks at the Mosque nor any other Canadian Muslim who happened to watch the video during that time was all that outraged, Nor did any of the Muslims who viewed it, even if they might have agreed with it, think to say to the folks at the Mosque in question: “You know you might want to take that down as it doesn’t reflect well on us.”

Why, I submit and suggest because Canada’s Muslim community didn’t have a problem with it until it became known to non-Muslims and was plastered all over the web so every non-Muslim out there could see Islam preached as it is, by an Imam who knows his faith to an audience of believers completely unfazed by what they are hearing.

That’s when suddenly Muslims in Canada not only made it a point to condemn it to the press, but according to the Daily Mail calling themselves victims:

Another imam, Ziad Asali, firmly condemned the use of the verse.
‘I do not understand how this person was invited to come and give a sermon and spread this hatred in Montreal against any community,’ he told CBC.
‘To use the themes of the Prophet to spread hatred is actually something that is disrespectful towards the Prophet himself.’
Asali also spoke out against any mosque spreading extremist messages.
‘These people, not only do they show hatred towards non-Muslims, they even show hatred to us Muslims,’ he added

Yup, nothing shows hatred to Muslims like the quoting a Hadith of Islam by an Imam of Islam to a group of Muslims.

That the CBC didn’t find this nasty bit of weaseling, worth questioning says something, both about Muslims in Canada and the press that enables them, but there is something worse, but that comes tomorrow.

Closing thought: Canada has no first amendment and considers such speech unlawful so while I consider such laws unjust they had better damn well apply them equally to those who profess Islam as to those who profess Christianity in its many forms.

But if it was up to me as a big first amendment guy if this Imam wants to quote stuff like this and people want to hear him I say it let him because of the principles of freedom of speech and freedom of religion demand it. And By the same token people like me must be free to not only expose him these words, but be free to publicly critique and rebuke him, all those who follow him for expressing such things free to condemn his religion as false and wrong. He has the right to offend, we have the right to express our offense and offend him right back.

The easiest way to find who you are enslaved to is to discover who you are not allowed to offend by penalty of law.
******************

If you like the idea of the new media asking the questions people like the CBC won’t and would like to help us pay our writers and make our annual goal Consider subscribing and become (if you wish) a listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



And of course if you want to give a one shot hit (and help pay DaWife’s medical bills) you can hit DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

If you are not in the position to kick in your funds we’ll always accept your prayers.