The Baffling Bafflement of Befuddled Buffoons

Before we watch some real news clips, let’s look at this Fox News spoof from 2007:

Needless to say, no one would dare broadcast a sketch like this today, not on any major television outlet. But it doesn’t matter — there’s no need to lampoon media denial about Islam anymore, because the industry is busy satirizing itself 24/7.

As a case in point, check out the following excerpts from news reports about the San Bernardino jihad massacre that have appeared on TV in the last few days. Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for compiling and uploading these clips:

Media reluctance to engage the real motives behind this and other jihad massacres may be influenced by Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s recent announcement about her intention to prosecute “violent” speech about Islam — that is, they never know when something they say that mentions Islam might invite the scrutiny of the Department of Justice and its battalions of overpaid lawyers.

The peculiar tongue-tied bafflement on display in these clips is brought about by the application of the precepts of sharia to those who speak in public. As Vlad points out in the second half of his compilation, Ms. Lynch and the mainstream media are implementing UN Resolution 16/18, which requires UN member states to criminalize criticism of “religions” — that is, effectively impose sharia codes on Islamic blasphemy.

For anyone who may be new to this general topic, here’s a brief overview of how laws against blasphemy work under Islam:

Insulting Islam is considered a form of slander (ghiba), which is, according to sharia, a serious crime.

An important source on the details of sharia may be found in ’Umdat al-salik wa ’uddat al-nasik, or The reliance of the traveller and tools of the worshipper. It is commonly referred to as Reliance of the Traveller when cited in English.

The Revised Edition (published 1991, revised 1994) is “The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ’Umdat al-Salik by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (d. 769/1368) in Arabic with Facing English Text, Commentary, and Appendices”, edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller. This is an authoritative source on Sunni Islamic law, because it is certified as such by Al-Azhar University in Cairo. There is no higher authority on Sunni Islamic doctrine than Al-Azhar; it is the closest equivalent to the Vatican that can be found in Islam.

The following material is from Reliance of the Traveller, Book R. “Holding one’s Tongue”, §2.0,“Slander (Ghiba)”.

First, from r2.1:

Slander and talebearing are two of the ugliest and most frequently met with qualities among men, few people being safe from them. I have begun with them because of the widespread need to warn people of them.


Slander (ghiba) means to mention anything concerning a person that he would dislike…


As for talebearing… it consists of quoting someone’s words to another in a way that worsens relations between them.

This is not the Western understanding of slander. According to this definition, to slander someone is to say something about him that he would not like — that is, something that offends him. When a Muslim is offended by something you say, according to sharia he has been slandered.

Under “Evidence of Prohibition”, r2.4, we find:

The above define slander and talebearing. As for the ruling on them, it is that they are unlawful by consensus…of Muslims.

This means that the legal ruling is absolute — these crimes are considered serious crimes by all Muslims, everywhere, by consensus of the scholars.

Quoting the prophet Mohammed for the point of law, r2.6:

The Prophet… said: (1) “The talebearer will not enter paradise.”

So if you are a Muslim and you engage in talebearing or slander, you will go to Hell, which is an indication of how serious the crime is.

Next comes:

(2)   “Do you know what slander is?” … “It is to mention of your brother that which he would dislike.”
(3)   “The Muslim is the brother of the Muslim. He does not betray him, lie to him, or hang back from coming to his aid. All of the Muslim is inviolable to his fellow Muslim…”

So if I say something about Islam that is true, but Muslims would prefer that nobody know, I am still guilty of slander under Islam. This is a vastly different from any definition of “slander” that Westerners are used to. This is why telling the truth about Islam may be considered offensive to Muslims and therefore unlawful.

News anchors and government spokescreatures don’t actually have to know the nature of this rule or understand Islamic law in order to enforce it on themselves. All they need is a nebulous awareness that their lives may become very, very miserable, or even come to an end, if they say certain things about Islam. They don’t know exactly what those things are, so they say as little about Islam as possible — beyond asserting that it is a religion of peace, of course.

The vague aura of menace that surrounds all things Islamic is enough to cow most infidels into silence.

This is how sharia is enforced among non-Muslims. Once the preliminary softening-up has been done, it pretty much enforces itself.

Welcome to the Caliphate!

24 thoughts on “The Baffling Bafflement of Befuddled Buffoons

  1. If incitement to violence is going to be prosecuted, then why isn’t the government prosecuting every imam for urging belief in the Arabian Charles Manson of the 7th century?

    There is such a tsunami of backlash building in the USA that these idiots and traitors will soon be swept away.

    • Here’s some backlash against Muslims for you:

      Oops. Sorry: that’s frontlash, or whiplash, or…(gasp!) the London police are calling it by the T word.

      The assailant who stabbed a man in London’s Leytonstone tube station today shouted “This is for Syria” before attacking him, according to witnesses. Two others were slightly wounded in the incident. Unlike the mass shooting in San Bernardino, authorities aren’t wasting any time treating the attack as a terrorist extremism incident.

      Nope, no T here. And notice that dude on the tube? He was a lone extremist.

      Those other attacks in groups, e.g.,the 19 bridegrooms in the four planes on 9/11; those bonny school boys on 7/7 out for a bit of fun, or the loving couple pair who left their child with her grandmother before driving off in an SUV with thousands of rounds of ammo for a Christmas party…motive? They were merely delivering fun Christmas crackers for the celebration…

      The ability of the MSM to twist themselves into pretzels is fascinating…but this is just
      ARWDHATV = Another Reason We Don’t Have A TV…I have a friend who keeps the family freezer in a room off the kitchen. When the “news” is on and steam starts coming out of her ears, her husband sends her out to bash the freezer with a rubber mallet. Soon rubber mallets won’t be enough: regular TV news watchers with an IQ anywhere near room temperature will be sitting in rubber rooms having quiet time.

  2. Pardon me, but which of the first two videos is the comedy skit and which is the serious news report?

    • I think we have passed the point where it matter anymore, Mr. O’Malley. But if you want some real parody, tune in tomorrow night when our feckless leader speaks about terrorism our desperate need for gun control.

      • And no doubt he will inform you about the cause of the San Bernardino massacre—Global Warming, rising oceans (they’re not) and the need to install solar panels on all vehicles, and phase out coal, oil, nuclear power plants, natural gas, and anything else he can think of to steer the nation away from the real cause—islam.

        And no, not radical islam, just islam. The cancer of planet earth.

        • Peter35.

          Are you insinuating that the San Bernardino massacre wasn’t a DIRECT result of global warming? That it was somehow connected with the Religion of Peace (Trademark registered)? You are clearly off your rocker!

          Next thing you’ll be claiming that it wasn’t the CIA and/or the Mossad (who control the CIA anyway) who orchestrated 9/11.

          You’d be well advised to listen to the profound insights of David Icke. He was once famous for doing something on television, you know. And anybody who does anything on television is, ipso facto, a person of deep wisdom and superior intelligence.

          • Global warming is indeed the cause. Just like back in ol’ Tombstone, when they wore scratchy woolen underwear, scratchy linen shirts, a woolen vest, then a tweed-type jacket and an ankle-length leather duster, plus woolen socks, calf-high leather boots and a wide-brimmed felt hat – in 110°F. No wonder they were all cranky with REAL itchy trigger fingers.
            Berdoo isn’t Tombstone, but it’s kinda mild, so Mr. & Mrs. Farook just got a li’l hot under the headscarf/burka/turban/burnus/whatever it’s called and had to let off some rounds, erm, steam.

  3. Mohammed was a serial sexual offender: a child rapist, serial rapist, a mass murderer, a child murderer, a racist, and a highway robber. Each of these attested to by the Kuran and Hadith. The people he attracted were equally scum, those detested by decent arab society of the time. Using gangster methods, they imposed their system upon other decent arabs, and then upon a large part of the world.

    How’s that for blasphemy.

    • A different background from those of Lenin and Mao but the same end product – violence leading to totalitarianism.

    • You can also make a case for necrophilia, and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if his take on dogs is the result of a bite whilst attempting bestiality. He managed to practice most other sexual perversions as attested by the quran and hadiths.

    • Compare that to the story of the life of Christ. There is no comparison. And yet the West has thrown away it’s legacy of Christianity and for what?

  4. There’s two reasons the Progressive Left will never give up on protecting Islam:

    1) They have demonized conservatives and counter-jihadists for so long, and have a visceral hatred of them, that they cannot admit that conservatives were right all along. For Leftists, who are perpetually aggrieved, their hatred is an essential part of their self-identify, very much like the jihadis, and to admit they have been wrong is a direct challenge to who they see themselves to be. Self-examination isn’t likely by people who see themselves as better and more enlightened than the bitter-clingers of fly-over country, so we can expect them to double down on their defense of Islam.

    2) Acknowledging there is something inherently wrong with Islam smashes their multicultural Utopianism and is a serious political threat to their social engineering schemes, their fundamental transformation. One of the cultural Marxist’s attack on Western civilization is that it’s imperious and evil and other cultures are just as good, if not better, even edenic. So if, within this cultural milieu that has been thusly condemned, another culture is seen to be a threat to be resisted, then a foundational part of the Left’s argument against the West is seriously undermined: Why protect something if it not worth saving? And, if you’re going to save it, then it must be better than what you’re saving it from. (Of course, we are seeing how many leaders, such as Merkel, are not protecting it and have decided it’s not worth saving.) The Left cannot allow this line of thought to be pursued by the “undecideds” who would likely support the counter-jihad, i.e. conservatives, as this threatens their own civilizational jihad and political power.

    • Yes, Craig-in-Michigan, you’re spot on with your analysis. Perhaps I could add a third insight on the Progressives: That they have no feelings of self-worth, no self-esteem and an inherent guilt for transgressions committed eons ago. For this reason, liberal women in Western countries would happily wear the burqua and forfeit any rights regarding their personal freedoms. I’ve heard this especially among Millennial women who, for reasons they can’t identify, are eager to atone for the supposed white guilt of their ancestors.

      If this is even partially correct, then Western culture is ripe for the taking. Perhaps Islamists recognize this weakness and are ready to pounce. But whatever the reason, Progressives (Merkel especially) would be better off secreting themselves in a nunnery.

    • I recall that very soon after 9/11 there were leftists saying it must have been a response to something we did to them first, and we needed to do some soul-searching and change our ways. That has been the heart of the leftist view of Islamic terrorism ever since.

  5. About 12 years ago, I was in Toronto on business. Both CTV and CBC were covering a teenage girl who was stabbed to death by her father. The reporters and anchors went on and on, almost babbling, about how strange this was, since the family were just ordinary Canadians, no different from their neighbors. Somehow the fact that there were clearly Muslims in name, appearance, and dress was too trivial to notice.

    I followed the story via internet, and it turned out to be the classic case of an “honour killing.” The daughter was too Westernized for her immigrant parents, even dating a non-Muslim boy, so the father decided to take action. I wonder if CTV and CBC ever made the connection.

  6. If this so called Shiria code is inacted by Loretta Lynch, then no one will report any kind of crime to police (like the terrorists neighbor who refused to report suspicious activity because of racial profiling), because the perp could be a Muslim or another race, no matter what the crime like robbery, murder, etc. The person reporting to police could be accused of racial profiling.

  7. The motive may be “fundamentally unknowable.”

    Those two words are now my favorite phrase of left-wing stupidity.

  8. The multi cultural dream of rubbishing everyone into one big human and oidtype lowlife trash heap where no competent leader can emerge. Man did Islam get lucky. Did I hear a great deballed German gentleman dare speak to Saudi chums of delete to tone down the cash handouts to soldiers of Allah currently raining down on the leaderless “west”? Has it ever dawned on any of deletes that the Christian masses might be entering a state of terror?

    • Naturallies: Once a caliphate is established probably by next year or towards late 2016, mass killings and terror for all infidels or anyone resisting shiria law and new government. EU leaders will probably convert to Islam by saying a short Allah prayer, since they are obviously pro Muslim now allowing mass invaders in. Mass destruction of historical buildings, monuments, museums, churches, etc. will be the norm, rapes and forced marriages. Only a handful of EU patriots now, rest of the men are beta sissy males who will go along and convert to Allah. laura in alabama

Comments are closed.