Atheist pardner on phone, highly agitated. Want know what I think about good, holy Muslim men murdering American ambassador Libya, Chris Stevens (peace be unto his corpse) and demand know what I going do. Tell him I, like him, stunned. Lost several verbs, couple articles and few other arbitrary words already, and this just first para. Syllables and all going now. Syntax falling apart, so beh-beh am I, as result Chris Stevens’ murder. Doesn’t appease him. Convinced people like me— what he mean? Newspaper columnists? Short, bald-head mofos? Agnostics with good reasons to doubt?—have duty help stamp out religiosity that leads to plain murder. Agree, of course, but hard figure out why atheist pardner so upset. Is not like is something new. Ignorant/holy Muslim men killing innocent people in God’ name both ever since, as say in Barbados, and fo’ spite, as say in Trinidad. Equally ignorant, equally holy Catholics, too. Sikhs, Hindus, Jews, every-religious-man-Jack, except Buddhists, who more tend burn selves to crisp before even bad-mouth anybody else. Atheist pardner especially upset Muslim men going militant-belligerent over a movie, and, even worse, movie not even good. Check previews on YouTube while speak atheist pardner. He right. Movie, Innocence of Muslims, very, very bad. Can’t believe cost US$5m. Where all money gone? Supposed be documentary, but actors playing historical figures. Acting atrocious. Can’t call it, “Hamming” in contkkext, though, better call it “haram.” One preview, young, probably Jewish, man acting Prophet part call donkey first Muslim animal, say donkey’ name is “Yahore.” Not sure if supposed be funny.
Atheist pardner say, if Islamists going protest, should at least protest good movie, not take such obvious basket. Atheist pardner say Jews had stronger grounds protest Passion of Christ. Better production values. Protesting Innocence of Muslims like protesting Ed Wood movie: put Prophet and Barnabas Collins on same footing. Is Dark Shadows in they nen-nen in truth. Tell atheist pardner mustn’t make joke like that nowadays, in case get instant fatwa (kinda like instant coffee, except just add Muslim fanatic, not water). Atheist pardner say movie dissing Muhammud/Mohammed just like quack preacher last year who want burn Quran/Koran. (Find self hedging instant fatwa bets now, don’t want bring one down on own head just because of infidel spell-checker.) Atheist pardner say irony too great to bear, Muslim militants getting so easily riled up by Jewish bigotry that have to display own Muslim bigotry. Atheist pardner want know what kind of God could pit man v man so? (Don’t have heart tell atheist pardner is really case of men pitting God v God, both sets men knowing full well their God is real God, other God is sham God.) Atheist pardner start boil down at last. Rage turn to bitterness, bitterness segue into ridicule, ridicule eventually rise into comedy, like Trinidad parliamentary session: you could only appreciate it when you start laugh at it; take it seriously and you have put gun in mouth and pull trigger. Atheist pardner start chuckle, trying figure out if Ambassador Stevens is Muslim or Christian martyr. One thing sure, atheist pardner say: nnocence of Muslims not going to win any awards, not even Razzie for Worst Film; young, stupid Muslim men like Chris Stevens’ murderers/Allah’s defenders will think Razzies good; and go on rampage again.
Atheist pardner hang up, chuckling, leaving me thinking ’bout similarity Muslim lunatics and People’s Partnership government. Believer brothers willing kill American ambassador because Israeli bigot make bad movie in Hollywood; and People’s Dotish-ship apparently seem willing throw Constitution out door to gain benefit for friends of party.
Bewildered by “section 34” brouhaha-hahahahaha. Better laugh at it, like how atheist pardner eventually decide snicker at instead of rage against Muslim madmen murdering ambassador. Section 34 of Administration Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act purport make mandatory judge discharge and record verdict “Not guilty” anyone with case more than ten years old, if case not started yet, eef they only bothers apply. Prominent (former?) UNC financiers Ishwar Galbaransingh and Steve Ferguson promptly applies for what look like backdoor not guilty. Never mind legal niceties and cogency of legal arguments or lack thereof—it just don’t look good. Went through statement of DPP and struck by boldness of language. No judicial-type restraint, like when judges speak about “a distinction without a difference” or witnesses “economical with the truth.” DPP say sec 34 “cannot stand on its own without absurdity.” Say legislation has “potential to disfigure the international visage of Trinidad & Tobago.” Say “it could not be reasonably expected that the act and in particular section 34 would come into operation in the opaque fashion it has.” Say, “the proclamation of section 34 took me by surprise. I learnt about it in the press.” And plenty more. DPP go out of his way to distance self from section 34, like beauty queen in white jumpsuit scampering away from drunk man covered in oil & grease Jouvert morning. Then read Congress of People release on brouhaha-hahaha signed by Joe Toney; but ’fraid quote it, in case of libel. Language of COP release like slap in face instead of handshake. No ambiguities. Ring atheist pardner back, ask him if think Trinis will protest Section 34. Atheist pardner laugh. Better chance, atheist pardner say, Innocence of Muslims open Palestine Film Festival.
BC Pires is ducking fatwas and fat chicks