Can I play too?
Want to see Arianna Huffington’s garage?
Want to see where bankers go camping?
Want to see Barbra Streisand’s little house in Malibu?
That’s enough blaspheming and “hurting the sentiments” for one day.
The BBC is more sympathetic than I am. The BBC takes it all rather seriously, or pretends to.
The US has defended comedian Jay Leno’s right to free speech after India condemned a reference he made to the holiest Sikh shrine.
A Leno skit showed the Golden Temple of Amritsar as the summer home of Republican candidate Mitt Romney.
Mr Romney has faced questions over his wealth and many Sikhs are angry the temple has been depicted as a place for the rich.
But then the BBC says something predictable but incredibly idiotic.
The Sikh community has launched an online petition over the comment.
It has? The whole community? All Sikhs acting as one have launched a petition?
I don’t believe that for a second. Neither would the BBC if it thought about it. Why does it say things like that? Why does it treat certain perceived groups as if they acted as a bloc? Why does it do that so determinedly and predictably that it ends up saying something as imbecilic as “The Sikh community has launched an online petition”? Why is the BBC so allergic to the very possibility that Sikhs or Muslims or Christian can disagree with each other? Why does the BBC simply assume that all Sikhs take the same view of this ludicrous pseudo-outrage about a minor joke?
An Indian minister called Leno’s comments “objectionable” and said “freedom does not mean hurting the sentiments of others”.
Oh shut up. Just shut up, all of you. Just shut up about the babyish “hurting the sentiments” nonsense. You used that to drive Tasleema Nasrin out of India, you used it to keep Salman Rushdie out of Jaipur, you use it every time some godbotherer takes a deep breath – just cut it out. Shut up.
And by the way -
Take my Golden Temple, please.
I’m looking for a place to store old magazines, this looks about right.
I look forward to your letters.
First up, we have Dr. Randeep Dhillon! Dr. Dhillon is suing Jay Leno. Is he suing Jay Leno for being a trite, phone-it-in placeholder? NO! There’s no California cause of action for that! SAG would never allow it! No, Randeep Dhillon is suing Jay Leno for a lame joke about Mitt Romney suggesting that his vacation home was the Golden Temple of Amritsar, a holy site for Sikhs! …
Congrats, Dr. Dhillon! You win a date with California’s robust anti-SLAPP statute! You’re going to pay Jay Leno’s attorney fees in this case, which I will estimate to be $50,000! And because some people will generalize about Sikhs based on the act of one asshole — you — you’ve just done more to expose Sikhs to hatred, contempt, ridicule, and obloquy than that threadbare hack Leno ever could! Way to go!
Exactly. That one stupid sentence of the BBC’s did more that way than Leno did or could.