If you'd like to republish any of my articles, you are welcome to do so. Please add a link to the original post on my blog.

Friday, 14 June 2013

HuffPo Shows How for the Left "Hate" Applies only to Preferred Victims

Huffington Post hate screenshot

The Huffington Post, that wonderful Leftist outlet, has shown how hate-free it is by posting the video of a spoof made in response to negative comments for the Cheerios advertisement featuring a mixed-race couple and their daughter.

The ad "generated such a strong racist backlash on YouTube that the comments section had to be closed", laments the staunch guardian of morality and enemy of all hatred HuffPo.

Pity that, under the "Most Popular" column (screenshot above), just below the video response to reprehensible haters, there is a photo labelled "This Dog's Butt Looks Like Jesus".

Of course, offending the world's 2.18 billion Christians (a third of the global population - an astonishing figure, considering how much they are persecuted and killed for their religion in Asia and Africa, and discriminated against in the "developed", soon to revert to underdeveloped, world) for no good reason, not, say, involuntarily in the course of a well-argued discussion with the intention of making some valid points but just for the - quite appropriately - hell of it, to make fun at their beliefs without provocation or motive is OK. But maybe there is a motive: could it be, wait for it, hate?

Since the similarity, in this case, is evidently very much in the eye of the beholder, why did The Huffington Post not find or invent another likelihood?

If the photo had been "This Dog's Butt Looks Like Martin Luther King", would HuffPo, which knows everything about questions of ethics, first of all bigotry and racism, have considered it offensive to the black civil rights movement and not published it?

And what about a photo "This Dog's Butt Looks Like Muhammad"?

That is out of the question. In primis, the HuffPo staff value their lives and limbs more than moral and political integrity and avoidance of double standards and, unlike Christians, Muslims don't take insults gracefully and, what's more important for the HuffPo personnel's incolumity, peacefully, as we've had myriad opportunities to see during the last, well, 1,400 years.

In secundis, the political editor of the UK version of The Huffington Post is none other than our old Mulism friend Mehdi Hasan, who on more than one occasion was caught on video calling non-Muslims "people of no intelligence" and comparing them to animals and cattle, showing to be speciesist as well as Muslim supremacist.

He would not have taken this insult lying down, especially coming from infidels, in his esteemed opinion animals and people of no intelligence.


  1. We cannot offend muslims or mention their hatred of women,reason and civilisation-because they'd cut our heads off or blow up our friends.
    We cannot offend the gay community because many of the people in power are gay.
    However the gay and Jewish communities are at least able to laugh at themselves.
    The cancer of islam shows no such humanity or humility-they are so utterly devoid of reason,thinking they are superior.
    Cattle? Maybe we are but islam is a cancer,by definition

  2. I guess by now (many years into the ascendancy of Cultural Marxism in the West), I should be inured to the ease with which anti-Christian--and, especially, anti-Catholic--insults and canards pass from the lips of people who consider themselves models of open-mindedness and tolerance, yet I am still affronted by the double-standard that these folk so unthinkingly adopt.

    How can auto-denominated Western "liberals" so venomously attack Christianity, which has been the wellspring of human dignity in our civilization, while simultaneously deferring--often to the point of dhimmitude--to Islam, which is on every level antithetical to what liberals profess to believe? More and more, I am convinced that the answer lies, not just in limbic system-level fear of Islamist retribution, but even more in the uncertainty, fecklessness, and indifferentism that so many of the Christian denominations--including much of the Catholic Church--project. I am also convinced that the Church could take back much of the cultural ground it has lost in the past five decades, if it would only begin once more to preach its doctrines--especially its moral theology--forcefully and without reservation. The young are hungry for a moral compass; that is one of the chief reasons, in my opinion, that so many voluntary conversions to Islam are happening in Western Europe right now.

    Again, thank you for your effective defense of our civilization and the Faith.

    1. I am totally in agreement with what you say on this as well.

      I don't think that compromising on principles, whether done by a religious institution or a political party, is a winning proposition. Just look at the Republican Party in the US.

      And the conversions to Islam that you mention also demonstrate that.