The Borders Books CEO delivers a fine country a**-kicking to right-wing bloggers exhorting him to carry some obscure mag running the Mohammed cartoons. But he manages to tell the folks on the right to "pound sand" in a friendly and upbeat way!
Memeorandum has the reax. Since Charles Johnson of lgf is singled out, let's go there for an excerpt:
An Open Letter from ... uh ...
Heh™.
UPDATE at 3/31/06 1:30:57 pm:
And by the way, I don’t disagree with Gerard’s overall point. It shouldn’t be the responsibility of Borders Books to stand up against radical Islam..
UPDATE: The AP picks it up.
Boy, if he could bottle that stuff, he could get rich.
=============================
Posted by: kim | March 31, 2006 at 09:51 PM
I don't disagree with the CEO, but they REMOVED the mag, in SOME of their stores.
So he's right, and wrong, but more right than wrong.
Posted by: wickedpinto | March 31, 2006 at 09:54 PM
Cliff Notes version:
"We're scared."
Okay, that's a legitimate concern. After all, the heckler's veto is especially pungent when he's got a suicide vest strapped on.
But maybe pen a note - after all, he's good at them - to the leftwing blogs instructing them that the terror threat from radical Islam is not simply a scare tactic used by you-know-who to win elections.
SMG
Posted by: SteveMG | March 31, 2006 at 09:59 PM
Well, the irony is that those people who still use the hardcopy form of information might be informed that the only solid info on the muhammed cartoons might be by buying that one mag. Borders, and Barnes and Noble (walden not so much) pride themselves on creating an atmosphere suited to intellectuals and thoughtful people. B&N and Borders USE! freedom of speach and heute literature as a selling point, if you doubt me, find one of either without a capuccino machine ore a leather chair and reading table.
If it is Okay to judge Walmart for not carrying tagged CD's, which it IS OKAY to do, then it is DEFINATELY okay to judge the heauty teauty (what is the origin of that stupid phrase?) Borders and B&N for neglecting their intellectual, accademic sales pitch.
AT LEAST! they were honest about the reason. Fear of assault, an insult to security, and a danger for the customers, and for business. Unlike the other heauty teauty (REALLY that phrase sucks so bad, I can't help but repeat it) citadels of independant thought, like universities who make 1st ammendment issues, while shitting on the very thing they are defending.
Posted by: wickedpinto | March 31, 2006 at 10:00 PM
Is that for real? He just pissed of Muslims without the cartoons. Was that his point? I think it is a hoax. If he is the CEO of a company, he wouldn't have written that letter. His lawyer wouldn't have let him.
I liked the letter, btw.
Posted by: Sue | March 31, 2006 at 10:05 PM
I think it is hoity toity.
Posted by: Sue | March 31, 2006 at 10:07 PM
I usually don't use the "American Idol" system to take sides on an issue, but I'm with Josefowicz on this one. And not only because that is by far the greatest letter from a CEO to his detractors I have ever read. But he makes a good point. The President of the United States (the most powerful man in the world) ducked the issue, the State Department ducted the issue, the MSM ducked the issue, but a bookstore is supposed to stand up for what is right even if it endangers employees and customers. Because they drew the short straw? It's well and good to demand others stand on principle, but how many of Border's rock throwers are going to form a "human shield" around the stores to stop the rioters?
I agree that these nut jobs have to be confronted. But in common cause by every person in the world who believes in free speech (and freedom of religion). And when that happens, I believe Greg Josefowicz can be counted on to join the march.
Posted by: Lew Clark | March 31, 2006 at 10:09 PM
More like hotsie totsie. I'm glad this outlook is getting publicized. We're not in the mess Europe is, but we're not in the clear, either.
=====================================
Posted by: kim | March 31, 2006 at 10:11 PM
If you read the comments at LGF you will see that Charles acknowledges the letter is a hoax. No CEO I know of would write an open letter like that.
Posted by: Barney Frank | March 31, 2006 at 10:17 PM
Uh, I know it's not April 1 yet, but I think some of you folks got pwn3d on this one.
Posted by: doofus | March 31, 2006 at 10:18 PM
you folks got pwn3d on this one.
I plead guilty.
But Tim Russert told me it was good. Er, Andrea Mitchell? Woodward? Cronkite? Murrow?
SMG
Posted by: SteveMG | March 31, 2006 at 10:24 PM
Whew...I'm glad I voiced my skepticism when I did. I look somewhat smarter than I did yesterday. ::grin::
Posted by: Sue | March 31, 2006 at 10:25 PM
I hate April 1st!..
Posted by: clarice | March 31, 2006 at 10:38 PM
Not me. I love the stupid jokes. But in this case, I didn't think about it being April Fools Eve. Just didn't think a CEO would be allowed to write that letter. His lawyers would have shot him first.
Posted by: Sue | March 31, 2006 at 10:41 PM
Out of the mouths of babes and April Fools.
===========================
Posted by: kim | March 31, 2006 at 10:51 PM
I stand by my post! It is real! Because I AM the smartest guy in the room, and I don't get fooled!
Posted by: Lew Clark | March 31, 2006 at 10:53 PM
rather, jennings, matthews, beinart, PJ, and I have a scar from olberman telling me that the left is not affraid of the "muslim prophet." The just don't mention the name of the most holy prophet, or create images of that most holy prophet out of respect for the religion. "Later tonight! Sodomy Christ! a perfect recreation of the crucifix manipulated into the shape of a circumcised penis, is the HOTTEST new trend in male dildo usage, YOU pick which number it is in the countdown!!" But NO! the most holy prophet is not a sore subject with REAL journalists, we are willing to offend jesus as a phalice, in the same ways we will "challenge" islam by vaguely insinuating that every depiction of the most holy prophet is insulting to islam, but DON'T miss out on your COUNTDOWN TO THE ULTIMATE ASS RAMMING Crucifix Dildo. RIGHT HERE!
Posted by: wickedpinto | March 31, 2006 at 10:57 PM
Vanderleun struck again. He got me early and I sent out - Borders CEO reads American Thinker.
To Bloggers from Borders
Go read it and the comments. As with "GROWL" DO NOT HAVE A MOUTHFUL OF COFFEE - OR AT THIS HOUR PERHAPS BEER!
Posted by: larwyn | March 31, 2006 at 11:57 PM
This was my comment on reading "To Bloggers from Borders" early today - I was first comment.
He makes some very good points, but directs his wrath at the U S Government versus at all the other "surrender monkies" in that LIBERAL "WE ARE FOR ALL FORMS OF FREE SPEECH (including Kiddy Porn, whatever NAMBLA wishes to spew, and any anti-American dribble at our Universities and on and on) EXCEPT ANYTHING THAT MIGHT GET PEOPLE THAT REALLY MIGHT HURT US UPSET, SO WE SHOW OR WRITE WHAT THEY DO NOT WANT SAID OR SHOWN."
If these were the Christians of the Roman times, there would have been a lot of hungry lions.
He should have put out a call that every publication across America should publish the cartoons simultaneously!
See caption at NRO MEDIA BLOG on Scalia's photo:
"That's Sicilian for 'second-rate newspaper'"
Posted by LARWYN at March 31, 2006 11:57 AM
I'm trying to encourage Gerard to come and play with us.
Posted by: larwyn | April 01, 2006 at 12:29 AM
I think it is a satire.
Boycott Borders! Don't give in to Islamic extremist blackmail!
Posted by: James | April 01, 2006 at 12:43 AM
Happy April 1
Posted by: JJ | April 01, 2006 at 12:56 AM
I posted this at To Bloggers From Borders BUT YOU NEED TO HEAR THIS MORE THAN THEY DO!
GET TO THE POINT PEOPLE!!
Gregory P Josefowicz CEO/Chairman of the Board/President/Director, Borders Books blew it NOT ONCE but TWICE.
1) THESE ARE NOT CARTOONS! These are opinions expressed by twelve people in the free world that are no different than what you see on any newspapers editorial page. These caricatures of a belief system have within those drawings have if you look past the "cartoon" aspect true and deep meanings felt by those that drew them as to how they percieve a religion. AND THE VERY THING THAT THESE PEOPLE SEE AND EXPRESSED IS WHAT THIS CEO IS COWERING FROM AND AFRAID TO EXPOSE.
2) STOP TELLING US TO SEND IN THE MARINES, OUR 18, 19, 20 YEAR OLDS, ASKING THEM TO DIE FOR OUR FREEDOMS AND THEN TELL THE WORLD YOU WILL NOT EXERCISE THE FREEDOMS THEY DIED FOR IN THE PAST 36 MONTHS! Thousands of our young men and women volunteered and have died and this joker now says what they died for, freedom of expression, is not important? AND ALL THEY HAD WAS THE SECOND BEST WEAPON WE COULD GIVE THEM. THE PEN IS MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD IN DRIVING THESE RADICALS UNDER A ROCK IN THE DESERT BUT THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE POWER OF THE PEN, THE MEDIA, THE WRITERS, REFUSE TO UNLEASH THE POWER OF THE PEN, YET FINALLY 12 PEOPLE DID SO THROUGH THESE CARACATURES OF DARK AND EVIL FORCES AND THE COWARDS REFUSE TO EXERCISE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION. HAVE ASKED OUR KIDS TO DIE AND NEVER SEE THE AGE OF 22 YET THIS CEO IS MUCH OLDER THAN THESE KIDS AND STILL REFUSES TO PUT ON DISPLAY THE POWER OF THE PEN!!!!!!!!!
We ask our friends from 26 other nations to also put thier young people in harms way but the people that are dieing at such a young age from around the world are being told by this idiot CEO that he will not let their people at Borders in these other countries exercise the freedoms thier kids died for, the right to express thier opinions through caricatures.
FIRE THE BASTARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: RG | April 01, 2006 at 06:47 AM
We know people are plastic, and that culture determines behaviour. I think it might be worth analysing the various religions to see how they model humans. Surely, focussing on the extremists, distorts the picture of Islam, just as focussing on Crusaders distorts Christianity.
==========================
Posted by: kim | April 01, 2006 at 07:11 AM
TM you're being a lil' devil on this one.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 01, 2006 at 10:18 AM
I truly think that one emblem of the loss of the left's cutting edge creativity is their utter humourlessness.
==============================
Posted by: kim | April 01, 2006 at 10:28 AM
who wrote that? very funny!
Posted by: windansea | April 01, 2006 at 10:34 AM
Gerald van der Luen.
===========
Posted by: kim | April 01, 2006 at 10:56 AM
Yes, I did it with my little keyboard, in the conservatory, with the wench.
I blame too many episodes with hallucinatory materials in my mispent youth.
Posted by: Vanderleun | April 01, 2006 at 11:23 AM
But I think we all need to spread the link to the AP / NYT pick up on this story.
Posted by: Vanderleun | April 01, 2006 at 11:24 AM
OH, crap. It's April Fool's day and I've got e's from Pelosi AND Kerry in my inbox!
Any hints on how to tell the fakes from the fools?
Posted by: richard mcenroe | April 01, 2006 at 11:50 AM
"in the conservatory, with the wench."
Sounds like a fine way to spend any evening.
Posted by: mariner | April 01, 2006 at 12:01 PM
"in the conservatory, with the wench."
Sounds like a fine way to spend any evening.
Posted by: mariner | April 01, 2006 at 12:02 PM
The so-called left is anything but humorless - I give you Tbogg, the brilliant.
TBogg.
Jake
Posted by: Jake - but not the one | April 01, 2006 at 12:18 PM
Much as I hate to emerge in serious mode after being spoofed by the wench, I will say this about the TBogg piece - plenty of righties seem to be able to get laughs mocking their fellow righties - anyone who remembers IMAO Frank's stories about Rumsfeld the Strangler or Glenn Reynolds the Puppy-blender knows what I mean. Or the current Borders letter will do.
Is there any lefty who occasionally mocks other lefties? I might not notice if it happened, so I am not in a great position to say. Back to Jake...
Posted by: TM | April 01, 2006 at 12:44 PM
Huff Toast was equal opportunity...Glenn and Ann Althouse and his cherry? pie.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 01, 2006 at 12:52 PM
Are we beating a dying horse?
Posted by: richard mcenroe | April 01, 2006 at 01:07 PM
good job Gerald...the wench must be quite inspiring, and the conservatory well stocked
Posted by: windansea | April 01, 2006 at 01:09 PM
I took a look at TBogg and was occasionally amused. The humor is of the unfortunate modern teenage variety which seems to infect people nowadays regardless of political persuasion or age.
Here however, via a tip at Winds of Change, is a truly hilarious site:
http://houseoffame.blogspot.com/
Its also known as 'Geoffery Chaucer Hath a Blog.'
It may not be everyone's cup of tea, but I was crying.
Posted by: Barney Frank | April 01, 2006 at 01:21 PM
LRFD's comment at Gerard's new post of the AP's pick up - sums
it up nicely.
Congradulations Gerard. At this rate, you'll have caused an honest-to-goodness international incident before dinner on Tuesday.
Posted by LRFD at April 1, 2006 10:15 AM
New York Times Picks Up Borders CEO Letter - PUBLISHES AP REPORT:
Posted by: larwyn | April 01, 2006 at 02:06 PM
We put the cartoons on our blog and I think that was a good thing. I am glad we did it. But then again Borders is a private company and they do have a responsibility to employees and customers. If some fanatic with a short fuse decides he wants to kill some people he could walk in and open fire and it would not be any mouthy bloggers or CEO that got killed, it would be some girl at the cash register.
So maybe we need to stop jumping every time the cartoon thing comes up. Go get a subscription to the mag, open a stand and sell them yourselves but this is getting out of hand.
I feel like Pavlov's dog, all these crazy people have to do it riot and burn some flags and act stupid and there we are going after each other.
Posted by: Terrye | April 01, 2006 at 02:48 PM
Barney, he used lyrics by Randy Newman, for COL! It doesn't get much better than that.
ANd keep in mind, when you are mocking JG, you have to keep it simple and you have to talk about the little soldier. It's the rule.
BTW, I have enjoyed the Chaucer site on occasion. :)
See, we are not so different.
(OW! I think I bit my tongue :( )
Jake
Posted by: Jake - but not the one | April 01, 2006 at 03:54 PM
italic
TM, I looked for some lefty blog mocking a lefty anybody, but I didn't find anything really applicable in a quick scan.
I think that's because the right makes it too easy. When you can hit 'em from a chair on the porch, why go into the woods?
Jake
Posted by: Jake - but not the one | April 01, 2006 at 04:07 PM
, Ok, try this. Larwyn, you whacked it up.
Jake
Posted by: Jake - but not the one | April 01, 2006 at 04:08 PM
Nope. I think it has become a TM problem.
Or we speak in italics until we move on to another post.
Jake
Posted by: Jake - but not the one | April 01, 2006 at 04:09 PM
Was it me?
Posted by: larwyn | April 01, 2006 at 06:36 PM
Ooops it was! Sorry.
Posted by: larwyn | April 01, 2006 at 06:39 PM
Well Jake,
If you'll notice, any fun I poke at your side of the fence is usually of the gentle persuasion. I have plenty of friends who are leftish. Many of them are far more pleasant than many conservatives I know. They are of course invariably wrong about nearly everything under the sun but they're still nice people and most of them are fairly humorous. I will note however, with good natured exceptions such as yourself, the left is generally rather less tolerant of jokes about themselves especially those that concern their politics. Not sure why, but I have noted it and I expect that is the reason for the dirth of self reflecting humor TM notes on the left. Although your theory that lefties are lazy or poor shots may hold some water.
Geoffrie Chaucer's parody of Brokeback Mountain was hilarious and yet judging by his links he's no conservative. So I agree the left and the right are not so different at all. Well except you guys are nearly always wrong. Once you guys except that "alleged fact" as Jeff might put it, everything will be sympatico. :)
Posted by: Barney Frank | April 01, 2006 at 07:50 PM
Uh, G, was that a left-handed wench? Someone sent me after one.
==========================
Posted by: kim | April 01, 2006 at 08:05 PM
Why did the octopus cross the road?
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 02, 2006 at 12:43 AM
Jake
Doesn't matter and stop being poopy.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 02, 2006 at 12:50 AM
I could be crazy but when I click on TM's "AP picks it up" I could swear I see faux somewh...
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 02, 2006 at 12:52 AM
To get the Chinese newspaper.
Do you get it?
Neither do I. Neither does the octopus. That's why he crossed the road.
================================
Posted by: kim | April 02, 2006 at 12:58 AM
Kim
It wasn't because he was nailed to the chicken?
I'd cross the road to get a Japanese Craft Book though.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 02, 2006 at 01:07 AM
Kim and TS-9,
By coinky-dink I'm in China this morning, but I don't see no stinkin' octopi. What paper you guys want?
Posted by: Daddy | April 02, 2006 at 03:55 AM
The octopus hasn't left base, the Japanese traded Craft to the Dodgers, and the chicken is crossing the umpire.
=======================================
Posted by: kim | April 02, 2006 at 08:40 AM
Say hi to the MIddle King for me. I don't get the Crixtopi or the Chinese newspaper because I don't read Chinese, but I have a friend who forecasts eclipses and translates Confucius, but digs dirt for his grub. Dribbles toxic mulberry waste on his bib while letting his thoughts of his Grandma rise like the smoke and smell of his roasting meal.
================================
Posted by: kim | April 02, 2006 at 10:37 AM
It's his company, so he can do what he wants. And we can also correctly call him a gutless coward who has let Muslim terrorist scum neuter him. He's an unAmermican coward.
Posted by: TCO | April 02, 2006 at 12:53 PM
The bottom line is that the threat of force is stopping us from seeing information. That Borders CEO just went and pissed on the graves of all the 9-11 victims, of the flight that fought back, and of the firefighters. He's a worm.
Posted by: TCO | April 02, 2006 at 12:56 PM
Dayum...I forgot the date. Still, it has been amazing how many Americans are acting like neutered craven Euroscum...
Posted by: TCO | April 02, 2006 at 01:00 PM
“Realistically, one can have a discussion on smallpox without actually handing out the the live virus to the audience,” university{NYU} spokesman John Beckman said. “Any institution has a responsibility that events on its grounds go smoothly and without disruption."
Shame this isn't satire.
Andrew G. Bostom begins">http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5379"> NYU’s Cartoonish Quarantine
with a quote from late Richard Grenier’s book "The Marrakesh One-Two" was a trenchant fictional account of a doomed effort to film the life of the Muslim prophet Muhammad.
It’s going to be like The Mohammed Story, The Second Greatest Story Ever Told, like Mohammed Superstar. But Islam, a little detail, has this ferocious hostility to the graven image, rather well known in historical circles, and they don’t like tri-acetate either…There are places they’d kill you in a spirit of devoted piety for daring to represent the image of the Prophet. They take these things seriously…After conferring with the doctors [clerics] of Al Azzar [Al Azhar] in Cairo…we’ve got to cut out Mohammed. We’re doing the The Mohammed Story, you understand, but Mohammed’s got to go. Too holy to be portrayed. We’ve got to “shoot around” Mohammed. But also his immediate family has to go: This wealthy widow he married who gave him his start in life. All his ten or so other wives. His children, all the daughters. His famous sons-in-law. Ali goes. Omar goes. The four first caliphs go. Mohammed’s mother and father go. The ten companions of Mohammed go. That’s the ten apostles right there. Talk of Hamlet without the prince. This was Hamlet without the prince, king, queen, Ophelia, Polonious, Horatio, Laertes, Rosencrantz, and Guildenstern. It was going to be Hamlet with the gravediggers and Fortinbras. The only thing they would give me was I could have P.V. Mohammed. That is I could script shots from Mohammed’s Point of View, subjective camera. I could have faces reacting and people talking to Mohammed. But Mohammed couldn’t answer them because his voice would be too holy. I got to work it all in by hearsay. And Mohammed couldn’t cast a shadow. He was too holy to cast a shadow. That would be sacrilege too. Mohammed seems to have been about five foot four but when people speak to him in our movie they look up to him as if he’s the size of [6’11” former UCLA and NBA Hall of Fame basketball star] Bill Walton.
And if you are still not at the level of outrage that Dinocrat and VDH and Mark Steyn agree we should be feeling. Take a look at these cartoons which I feel sure NYU would have had no problems with displaying:
Egyptian cartoonists strike back at Denmark
Click here: The American Thinker
Posted by: larwyn | April 02, 2006 at 07:07 PM
That worm was turning. Don't ya' love the attitude
Posted by: kim | April 03, 2006 at 12:38 AM
Dayum, TCO, it got me too. I so wanted to believe someone was believing and writing that stuff. Parody and satire reach the pinnacle when they aren't, when they're just flat out true.
================================================
Posted by: kim | April 03, 2006 at 12:41 AM
One wonders whether this is an extremely subtle parody of a typically over-heated lefty, or an example of the humorless left. Back to Jake...
Posted by: TM | April 03, 2006 at 06:55 AM
Well since that post is weak on opinion and strong on his own facts, it looks self-parodying.
=====================================
Posted by: kim | April 03, 2006 at 07:56 AM
Perhaps apropos to the topic of humorlessness: over on the thread about the Libby response to the response to the motion to dismiss, I was fascinated by the discussion of the "any" snark that Team Libby slipped in. It seems that some of our leftish posters couldn't quite "get" just who it was who was making the Clintonesque argument, and who it was who was ridiculing the Clintonesque argument.
cathy :-)
Posted by: cathyf | April 03, 2006 at 10:24 AM
Well, evidence that this is self-parody includes the fact that his out of context quote ("happy and upbeat") is actually a misquote.
Posted by: TM | April 03, 2006 at 11:56 AM
That's a fact.
=========
Posted by: kim | April 03, 2006 at 12:08 PM
Larwyn: Illustrative. The recurring theme of pens as missiles and self-expression as selfish was revelatory. I especially like Ted Kennedy in the toilet.
===========================
Posted by: kim | April 04, 2006 at 06:15 AM