Consider the "Terrorism Awards" parody without getting emotional about the content. British presenters and a British audience view three realisitically depicted terrorist acts in an award show format.
What is the unsettling truth that is at the heart of this parody? That the British people would celebrate and reward violence and terrorism as long as it is packaged the right way? Throw some glitz on it, and the British people start cheering?
The problem is that this simply isn't true. Britain has been the most stalwart of allies in the war on terrorism from day one. The London bombing of July 7, 2005 reminded everyone of the price that might be extracted for daring to stand against the terrorists. Britain paid that price, and continues to stand against terrorism.
A joke is a joke because it is based on a truth. A joke that is based on a lie is not a joke at all; it is an insult.
That's what bugs me about the "Terrorism Awards" parody. There is no truth in it. It's just an insult. It's a slap in the face of the British people, delivered by the taxpayer-funded BBC.
Can a parody like this be funny? I think so, but you have keep on eye on the truth. For example, replace the BBC presenters with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad grinning at the cameras. Replace the cheering British audience with an ululating Arab mob buring little Union Jacks while seated in the studio seats. Is that funny? Well, it shows Ahmadinejad and Assad supprting terrorism, which we know to be true. It shows that on the "Arab street", violence against Westerners and Western interests is very popular, which we know to be true.
The humour is in showing Ahmadinejad and Assad as ingratiating award show hosts, but the truth remains.
Actually, there is even a subtler truth under that. For all their professed hatred of things Western, terrorists and their paymasters seem to have no problems enjoying the fruits of Western civilization. Many even adopt Western styles of communication and philosophies of governance, and yet do not seem to recognize the irony. To depict them celebrating their attacks on the West via the medium of an award show, a Western mass media invention (and a trivial one at that), is to shine a light on that fundamental irony that undermines their cause.
Maybe I'm overanalyzing, but that would be funny to me. Well, I should say that it would approach being funny. At least it would be based on a truth, and that's what's missing here.
One more thing.
As Michelle Malkin points out, as offensive as this is, how many offended Americans and Britons are going to burn down British embassies and demand the beheading of top BBC officials? The answer is none, of course. I certainly don't think that's an appropriate reaction.
I bring that up as a defence against any suggestion that I can't take a joke. I can. I don't even care if the joke is not particularly funny. It's just that I can tell the difference between a joke and a cheap shot, and I don't think there is anything funny about a cheap shot.
