American Imperialist

Islam: Child molestation is legal

2006-01-13T09:31:00.000+11:00

This is why I repeatedly state that there is no mechanism for internal criticism within Islam. A women's rights activist complains about abhorrent, inhuman practices tolerated by Islam, yet the Muslim journalist interviewing her places her on trial:

Interviewer: Some people say that Ghada Jamshir is a Sunni, and that this is why she is leading the battle against (mut'ah) marriages, which are authorized by religious law among the Shiites.

Ghada Jamshir: Authorized by religious law?

Interviewer: Among the Shiites, yes.

Ghada Jamshir: Does the Islamic Shari'a authorize mut’ah marriages? Does the Islamic Shari'a authorize mut'ah according to the following classification: "Pleasure from sexual contact with her thighs." They have: "Pleasure from sexual touching." "pleasure from sexual contact with her breasts." "Pleasure from a little girl." Do you know what "pleasure from a little girl" means? It means that they derive sexual pleasure from a girl aged two, three, or four.

Interviewer: Let's not go into details...

Ghada Jamshir: Let me tell you what "Pleasure from sexual contact with her thighs" means...

Interviewer: Don't give me the details...

Ghada Jamshir: This is a violation of children's rights! This constitutes sexual assault of the girl. What does "pleasure from sexual contact with her thighs" mean? It means deriving sexual pleasure from an infant. How old is an infant? One year, a year and a half, a few months?

Is it conceivable for a grown man to have sex with an infant girl? And you people tell me that the Islamic Sharia authorizes this. Forget about the mut'ah. Let's talk about misyar. What do misyar marriages mean? You said that I'm a Sunni and that's why I'm attacking the Shiites. No!

Interviewer: Some people claim that.

Ghada Jamshir: No, no. What does the misyar marriage mean? A man marries a woman from another town, and goes to her once a month. He "visits" her. He calls her his "wife."

Interviewer: Not necessarily once a month. He might go there every day.

Ghada Jamshir: Brother Turki, this kind of marriage, this kind of behavior, diminishes the woman's honor as a human being.

All her life, the woman is a prisoner in her own home. In the past, she would not go out to work, or to study abroad. Very few women would go to university outside Bahrain. She is at home in order to cook, sweep, and raise the children. How will she get an education? There are women whose families are extremist. They even force them to marry against their will.

You tell me, why is female circumcision still practiced in the Arab world? Why? Because there is no education, no awareness. A few days ago, a four-year-old girl called An'am died in Sudan.

Interviewer: Why?

Ghada Jamshir: Because she was circumcised. Four years old, and she died of blood poisoning…. I am convinced that I was 100% right in everything I have done.

Interviewer: You have been accused of heresy by some places... some Internet forums.

Ghada Jamshir: So what? Even in mosques they accuse me of heresy. So what? You think that if they accuse me of heresy, it affects me?

Interviewer: You don't care?

Ghada Jamshir: No. Allah will decide whether I go to paradise or to hell, not them.

Interviewer: Don't you think that those who accuse you of heresy...

Ghada Jamshir: These are the methods of the weak.

Interviewer: They say they are right, and you say you are right.

Ghada Jamshir: Who gave them the right to accuse me of heresy?

Interviewer: Who gave you the right...

How dare she complain about Muslim men having sex with 2 year old girls. How dare she complain that Islam permits it!

Damned infidelic, heretical woman.

Is the NYT pro-Hamas?

2006-01-13T08:41:00.000+11:00

I think it inconceivable that any responsible news service could fail to recognise that Hamas is a terrorist organization, and has always been a terrorist organization.

The New York Times, it would seem, disagrees with that notion.

JERUSALEM, Jan. 12 - Israel's acting prime minister, Ehud Olmert, told President Bush today that Middle East peace efforts could falter if "terrorist organizations" like Hamas join the Palestinian government following elections this month, Mr. Olmert's office said in a statement.

Israeli politics had effectively been on hold since Prime Minister Ariel Sharon suffered a stroke on Jan. 4. But the brief moratorium appeared to be over today, as the Israelis and the Palestinians began gearing up for elections.

Mr. Bush called Mr. Olmert to express his concern over the condition of Mr. Sharon, who remained in a medically induced coma today, with no significant changes in his condition, according to Hadassah Ein Kerem Hospital in Jerusalem.

During the conversation, Mr. Olmert said that the Palestinian leader, Mahmoud Abbas, must crack down on groups like Hamas. "Otherwise, there can be no progress with an administration in which there are terrorist organizations as members," Mr. Olmert told Mr. Bush, the statement from the prime minister's office said.

The militant Islamic faction Hamas is competing for the first time in Palestinian parliamentary elections, set for Jan. 25. The group calls for the destruction of Israel and has carried out dozens of suicide bombings in recent years.

In the English language (in which the New York Times primarily writes), for reasons of clarity, do we differentiate between those who use guerilla tactics in order to engage military and political targets, and those who deliberately target civilian targets?

Yes, we do. The former is a guerrilla or a militant.

The latter is a terrorist, because their aim is not so much to weaken the enemy's military, but to attack civilian morale, spreading a sense of terror among the general populace.

If the New York Times cared anything for linguistic accuracy, they would be forced to use the latter term when referring to Hamas.

Nor can it be said that by avoiding the term, the NYT is being politically impartial. Quite the opposite. By refusing to acknowledge Hamas' actions as militarily illegitimate, it is tilting the scales in favor of the Islamists.

Israel limits its military attacks to terrorist targets, a process that is difficult and expensive. The surgical application of military force takes longer and costs more, in terms of lives and material. If Israel so wished, it could bomb Palestinian towns and villages to rubble. Not a single IDF soldier would be killed and they could be certain that all terrorists were killed. They behave in a consistently military manner, and are therefore credited with the term.

Palestine exists because Israel permits it to. Israel exists because the Palestinians can't destroy it. There are important distinctions to be made, and the press - much like Hollywood - aren't making them.

Hamas has repeatedly attacked civilian targets, even schoolbuses filled with children. This is, by definition, not a militant act, but an act of terror. The act defines the group, as the group sanctions and performs the act.

By refusing to recognise this, and instead deliberately overlooking it, the New York Times amply proves that it is sympathetic to Hamas, its actions and goals.

How idiotic

2006-01-11T23:14:00.000+11:00

Life in the UK is starting to take on all of the sober gravitas of Willi Wonka's chocolate faggot factory.

Don't hang all your "rules" on me, man

2006-01-09T11:57:00.000+11:00

Britain, the sceptred isle, is going insane. And more than a little fruity.

The Church of England is rapidly proving that there is a place for those who desperately want to feel a part of Christianity, without necessarily resembling a Christian in any way, shape or form.

British educators, once stoic, expert moulders of the Empire's young men and women, are following suit.

And so is the British "army".

This is beyond pathetic. I cannot believe that the few remaining sane Britons haven't risen in revolt.

Don't leave any stupid comments involving the words "tolerant" or "intolerant", please.

I tolerate the sexually diverse just fine. Tolerance doesn't meaning agreeing with another's perspective. It means refraining from bludgeoning the freakshow holder of those idiotic, unnatural beliefs to death.

An idle thought

2006-01-06T23:51:00.000+11:00

If Mohammed, a multiple wife-taking, war-making poet is the father of Islamic civilization, then surely Socrates is our - the west's - chief cultural progenitor.

It is, I think, what has made us great.

It may yet, also, be our undoing.

Annoying Hollywood

2005-12-31T18:49:00.000+11:00

I spent the entire film shaking my head.

Thousands of people, in the middle of the desert, starving and dying of dehydration. Euroweenie aid workers slamming their fists against things in frustration, because greedy corporations won't give them enough money and resources for them to fly in all the essentials of life.

Question: Must the people live in the desert?

Question: If I decide to live in the desert for no particular reason, who will fly/truck me in large amounts of water and food?

Question: Is there any compelling reason why the convoys of aid trucks cannot be used to transport the people to habitable, arable land?

Question: How might I otherwise have used the lifespan I wasted while watching this "film"?

Putin Earns His Dhimmi Stripes

2005-12-15T23:23:00.000+11:00

Russia seems to be generating leader after leader that's more of an entertaining sideshow act in the Siberian Circus than a serious politician.

We had those amusingly crusty Soviet era men who looked like they bathed in embalming fluid and were propped up by midgets as they waved to the crowds, we had the inimitable Gorby with his drinking 'issues' and haphazard reforms and now we have a reptilian ex-KGB thug who thinks that cozying up to the Islamic world is a Good Idea.

Putin Calls Russia Islamic World's Most Reliable Ally
By Sergei Blagov

Russia is the Islamic world's most reliable partner, President Vladimir Putin said in Chechnya on Monday, implying that by attacking Russia, terrorists were doing their cause a disservice.

Putin paid a surprise visit to Grozny, capital of the war-torn Islamic region, to address the opening of the first session of the local parliament."Russia has always been the most faithful, reliable and consistent defender of the interests of the Islamic world," he told Chechen lawmakers, to applause. "Russia has always been the best and most reliable partner and ally."

"By destroying Russia, these people [terrorists] destroy one of the main pillars of the Islamic world in the struggle for rights in the international arena, the struggle for their legitimate rights," Putin added.

Just remember, buddy, if you're not with us - you're against us.

Katrina Not a Member of the KKK

2005-12-15T18:17:00.000+11:00

It seems that our dear moonbat liberals jumped the gun a little on 'skewed' nature of Hurricane Katrina's death toll. The thinking at the time seemed to be: "New Orleans, eh? New Orleans has a large black population. Many blacks must have died. Probably more than whites. Probably the Administrations fault - the racist administrations fault. Let's float that one and see..."

Unfortunately for them, the bodycount has come back:

Statistics Suggest Race Not a Factor in Katrina Deaths
By Nathan Burchfiel

Statistics released by the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals suggest that fewer than half of the victims of Hurricane Katrina were black, and that whites died at the highest rate of all races in New Orleans.

Liberals in the aftermath of the storm were quick to allege that the Bush administration delayed its response to the catastrophe because most of the victims were black.

Damu Smith, founder of the National Black Environmental Justice Network, in September said that the federal government "ignored us, they forgot about us ... because we look like we look."

Boo freakin' hoo - publicly whimpering and accusing on the basis of whimsy deserves a belt over the ears with a large stick. Setting up a racist 'Justice Network' deserves a belting too.

Other contenders for the 'Should be beaten senseless for aggressive stupidity and insipidity' are:

Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan in October said that the Federal Emergency Management Agency wasn't fit to help the storm's victims because "there are not enough blacks high up in FEMA" and added that, "certainly the Red Cross is the same."

Rapper Kanye West used his time on NBC's telethon for the hurricane victims to charge that, "George Bush doesn't care about black people."

Same old, same old.

Accuse the Right of wrongdoing based on senseless facts and you can lay low until it blows over.

Do the same to the prissy, weener-infested Left of politics and you have a war with the media on your hands.

But the state's demographic information suggests that whites in New Orleans died at a higher rate than minorities. According to the 2000 census, whites make up 28 percent of the city's population, but the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals indicates that whites constitute 36.6 percent of the storm's fatalities in the city.

So it looks like the Left should erect some sort of monument to Katrina - she has, after all, helped along their agenda to wipe out eeeevil whitey at a generous rate.

Calls requesting comment from Damu Smith and the Nation of Islam were not returned Wednesday.

Unsurprising. They were likely too busy concocting the next batch of baseless BS to filter through to the media, most of which will eagerly lap it up and regurgitate it because it has come from a Reliable Source. 'Reliable' because it's an Association With Capitalized Letters.

Idiots.

Then and now

2005-12-13T23:05:00.000+11:00

Young Americans in wartime: A visual tribute to what was, and... sadly, what now is.

Young Man, 1941

Young Woman, 1942

Young Man, 2005

Young Woman, 2005

Protestor images taken from Zombie.

A healthy knee-jerk reaction

2005-12-12T22:06:00.000+11:00

You can comfortably rely on Australians for a few things in life.

To send unofficial ambassadors - usually in their early twenties and with backpacks - all around the world. Climb any unclimbable mountain, traverse any untraversible terrain, swim a raging torrent of a river...stagger into the nearest pub or watering hole, pulling leeches off your calves and prying an alligator's jaws off your left buttock...thinking that you must be - MUST BE - the first Western face anyone in the region has seen for decades, if EVER...and you'll usually find a couple of Aussies sitting there, grinning at you, halfway through a monstrous round of alcoholic beverages that would impress even an Eastern European.

To be friendly. It's surprising that a nation of people who live in a climate and continent seemingly hellbent on biting, burning, dehydrating, stinging or chewing them to death are so very cheery and nice. Perhaps it's a defense mechanism - perhaps they learn to charm sharks into swimming in the other direction when young? Who knows, no-one's ever been able to keep an Aussie still long enough for full laboratory exploration.

And to speak their minds - unvarnished truth has a particularly refreshing sound when it comes packaged in that curious Aussie twang.

In the last week, Sydney's residents have definitely been speaking their minds. The southern Sydney beach of Cronulla had been the site of sporadic violence - mainly by Lebanese gangs who would drive in from many suburbs away to terrorize the locals. Girls as young as 4 and 5 were apparently called 'sluts' when they bathed on the beach in swimming costumes, teenage girls were approached by gangs of men and asked if they were virgins, young men were routinely intimidated.

The violence escalated until two lifeguards - young men who volunteered their own time to protect the public - were savagely beaten by a group of 14 Lebanese men. Allegedly, they shouted comments to the effect that Australians should leave the beach because it was now theirs - in fact, it was only a matter of time before the country was going to be taken over.

The next day, a camera crew was beaten by another Muslim gang.

The locals decided that they had had enough. Many other Sydneysiders didn't like the way that things were panning out either - an SMS was sent out around the city to tens of thousands of phones. It wasn't particularly eloquent or in any way politically correct, but the message was clear - "Sunday, Cronulla beach - Aussies Vs Lebanese".

5000 heeded the call.

5000 Australians. A few stray Middle Eastern looking people who were foolhardy or foolish enough to be there bore the brunt of the anger.

But the Lebanese gangs were nowhere to be seen, not in daylight hours, not against several thousand angry Australians...until the next night, when they visited another suburb entirely and destroyed 100 cars with baseball bats.

World news outlets are making much of Sydney's 'race riots', but I think there's nothing negative about them at all.

Why?

Because it shows a healthy national attitude. Perhaps the pioneering spirit there hasn't had too many generations to die out. Likely, the fact that the environment regularly tries to kill them keeps them on their toes and rather practical.

Of course, for some in the crowd - namely white supremacists - the entire exercise was an excuse to physically and verbally abuse others. For many locals, though, it was a matter of standing up and saying 'Enough'. I have some friends living very nearby and the sentiment in the community - even the moms - is one of support for those who are standing up for their rights not to be accosted on their beach.

Although, interestingly enough, the media have started reporting the whole story quite differently in the last few days - where initial reports spoke of the inciting behavior of the Lebanese gangs, reading current reports, one might be mistaken for concluding that the riots sprang up from nowhere for no reason.

None of this is surprising to seasoned media watchers - we all understand that the MSM has a blind spot for their pet burka'ed culture-cause-celebre.

Either way, this isn't a nation that will take Islamification quietly and eagerly - it doesn't seem that it will take typical Islamic bullying techniques at all.

If only the rest of the West would have such strong, instant and violent reactions to encroachment on it's culture and intimidation of it's citizens.

All I have to say to those Australians who are standing up for their country and culture is - Good On Ya!

Spielberg's world

2005-12-10T16:08:00.000+11:00

One thing I'm growing tired of hearing in relation to Spielberg's latest movie Munich, is that it is a deep exploration of the "tit-for-tat nature" of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

While it is certainly true that Israelis and Palestinians kill one another in a tit-for-tat manner, only a child would see the situation in such simplistic terms. Only a child would be totally unable to contextualize those killings.

An adult, however, understands that in the world of war, deliberately targeting women, children and other innocents for mass slaughter is a war crime. Deliberately and surgically targeting terrorists - while taking great care to avoid civilian deaths - is not.

In Munich (which is really just a remake of the original movie interpretation - The Sword of Gideon - of the long discredited book Vengeance) that is precisely what Spielberg has avoided doing. He has exercised remarkable moral equivalence in his lame, two-dimensional attempt to portray the Israelis and Palestinians as being as bad as each other.

But are they? The Palestinians invented international terrorism as we know it. They've deliberately targeted civilian men, women, children and old handicapped people because of their affiliations with Israel or America. They have repeatedly blown up busloads of little children on purpose.

The Israeli assassination teams (Kidon or 'bayonet' teams) assembled after the slaughter of Israeli athletes in Munich did what? They surgically hunted down and killed known terrorists. They used professional methods which avoided harming innocents. To date, the killing of only one innocent victim is known, an Arab living in Scandinavia who bore a striking resemblance to a high-level terrorist. That was an accident. After that accident, the Kidon Teams were disbanded.

Spielberg's movie is fiction, based on a fictional account of one of these teams. While the real Kidon teams went out, killed righteous targets for their country, then came home and didn't lose a night's sleep over it, Spielberg's assassin goes through the usual pathetic character arc; shifting from zealous patriot to jaded cynic. At the end he thinks that it was all pointless, blah, blah, blah.

How could anyone in such a situation reach such a conclusion? Had this really been a former Israeli commando, he would be a man who sees his fellow citizens murdered every day, by remorseless killers who do not obey the rules of war. The men he killed would never again be able to slaughter an innocent person. Not worth it? How many lives had his efforts spared? How many children would not die?

That is how a man in his situation, living his life, would see his efforts. He may not enjoy killing, but he would have known it was required. Spielberg, not having bothered to speak to any of the Mossad agents themselves while researching the movie, just took an old movie with a transparent morally-equivalent agenda, and remade it with flashy special effects. That this movie was intended to lie about the real situation, and present a faux tale about characters terribly angst-ridden about their actions there can be no doubt. Spielberg didn't speak to any of the participants in the real Kidon assassinations, chose a pro-palestinian book to base his movie on, then changed the name of the lead character in that book - a fictional character named Avner - to the real leader of the Kidon teams, legendary Mossad agent Mike Harari. Then, atop this, he hires Angels in America screenwriter Tony Kushner (hardcore leftist celluloid activist) to write the screenplay. Do the words viciously intentional liberal slant mean anything?

Mike Harari is well known, not because he was some guilt-ridden crybaby, but because he was a ruthlessly devoted motherfucker who was so hardcore that he had to leave the Mossad. Then he ended up doing murky stuff for Noriega in Panama. Does that sound like a big, blubbery nancy-boy to you?

A line is used in the first movie interpretation: "If we all keep taking an eye for an eye, pretty soon the world will be blind". It's poetic, and it reveals the crude oversimplification that leftists must adhere to in order to make their views seem valid. They have to completely ignore the scorched remains of Israeli Olympians and little Jewish children to make their opinion seem rational.

Because as soon as you stop watching movies like this, and start examining the situation closely, you'll see that the two sides - and their tactics - aren't even remotely similar.

Additional: Even leftist movie reviewers are nauseated by the timidity of the film's wilting flower assassins:

Munich is saying that however well justified or rationalized those revenge killings may have been, the air was still befouled and the spiritual effects upon three of the Mossad team -- sensitive Israeli assassins played by Eric Bana, Mathieu Kosso- vitz and Ciaran Hinds -- were disturbing and unsettling.

(Honestly? I felt almost relieved that two other guys on the team -- Daniel Craig's character and some older guy -- don't seem to pay the price as much. I don't know why exactly, but I was vaguely comforted by these two being hardcore enough to just do the friggin' job sans guilt trips.)

Other reviewers are panning it, although not for the right reasons. Looks like - combined with scientology lunatic Tom Cruise stricken War of the Worlds, Steve-o isn't having too good of a year.

Global... changing

2005-12-08T07:58:00.000+11:00

Maybe that's what they should have called it. Because the whole global "warming" thing is just proving to be a little too restrictive for some environmental activists who want to ~~get rich~~ save the environment:

Threatened by warming, Arctic people file suit against US

The people of the Arctic filed a landmark human rights complaint against the United States, blaming the world's No. 1 carbon polluter for stoking the global warming that is destroying their habitat. The Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC), representing native people in the vast, sparsely-populated region girdling the Earth's far north, said they had petitioned an inter-American panel to seek relief for Canadian and US Inuit.

"For Inuit, warming is likely to disrupt or even destroy their hunting and food-sharing culture as reduced sea ice causes the animals on which they depend to decline, become less accessible, and possibly become extinct," said Robert Corell, who spearheaded an Arctic climate impact assessment.

More than 150,000 Inuit, formerly called eskimos, are spread throughout the vast frozen northern territories of Alaska, Canada, Greenland, Scandinavia and Russia.

Emissions in the USA have actually declined during the Bush administration, but that's no reason why these redskins shouldn't have a corvette at US taxpayer expense.

Especially when it seems that those evil Americans have stolen all of their coldness!

Record Low Temperatures in Parts of U.S.
By CATHERINE TSAI

DENVER - Bitterly cold air poured southward across the nation's midsection Wednesday, dropping temperatures to record lows from Montana to Illinois. The mercury dived to a record 45 below at West Yellowstone, Mont., the frequently cold spot at the west entrance to Yellowstone National Park, the National Weather Service said. The old record for Dec. 7 was 39 below, set in 1927.

The cold even extended south to the Texas Panhandle, where Lubbock shivered at a record low 6 above zero, the weather service said.

Greedy Americans.

At least Leonardo knows how serious all of this non-existent overheating is:

"Global warming is not only the No. 1 environmental challenge we face today, but one of the most important issues facing all of humanity," DiCaprio, 31, said in a statement.

He's going to make a documentary about global warming, you see. And he'll drive his personal snowmobile through the record snowdrifts to get it done - just watch.

Reuters chooses a side

2005-12-08T00:14:00.000+11:00

It ain't ours:

Anger drives Muslim insurgents in Russia's south
By Oliver Bullough

NALCHIK, Russia, Dec 7 (Reuters) - Timur Mamayev was repeatedly beaten by police, who insulted his religion and harassed his children, his wife says. He appealed for help to the authorities but got no answer.

Mamayev's patience snapped in mid-October when, as part of a group of 150 young Muslims, he attacked government buildings in the southern Russian town of Nalchik.
"It was a protest. They did not want to win independence, 150 people would not win anything. They sacrificed themselves in an attempt to change things," said his wife Fatima, 32. She says she has not seen her husband since the day of the attack.

To Russian officials, her husband is a terrorist who tried to overthrow secular rule. To his relatives, he was just a desperate man trying to make his point the only way he could.

They'd prefer it if you forgot that these poor, frustrated souls killed two dozen policemen in their attempt to overthrown the rule of law, and that they are a part of the same foul Muslim regional infection which spawned the Beslan massacre.

I don't know about you guys, but I'm tired of this stuff. It needs to end. Russia should exterminate the Muslim populace in that area. Open deathcamps, use chemical weapons, whatever. I don't care. These creatures are an infestation which needs to be ERASED.

Oh, and as Reuters seems to be on their side, all Reuters correspondents should be fair game too. Kill them on sight. Burn their buildings down and hurl the bodies on the flames.

Influencing the Media - Mohammed's Way

2005-12-04T09:51:00.000+11:00

What to do if you don't like something printed in a newspaper?

Why, call for the death of the author, of course - especially if you are a proponent of the Religion of Peace

Bounty put on prophet cartoonists' heads

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs warns Danish travellers to Pakistan of increased hazard after a Danish newspaper published cartoons of Muslim prophet Mohammed.

What began as a protest demonstration in Pakistani capital Islamabad two weeks ago, has ended in death threats and a price on the heads of a number of Danish illustrators who heeded the call of daily newspaper Jyllands-Posten to send in cartoons of Muslim prophet Mohammed.

The newspaper published twelve of the cartoons in September, sparking angry reactions from Denmark's Muslim population and a number of Muslim countries.

Daily newspaper Berlingske Tidende reported on Friday that a bounty of DKK 50,000 (EUR 7000) had been put on the head the cartoonist responsible for the drawings. The Pakistani group offering the reward mistakenly believes that the 12 cartoons were created by just one person.

Danish Ambassador to Pakistan Bent Wigotski said the bounty had been promised by religious party Jamaate-Islami and its youth organisation, which had also demanded Danish representatives expelled from the country.

Sometimes, I wish for a new game show to be created - Islamic Survivor - in which a handful of liberals are plunged into the depravity that is an Islamic state ruled by Sharia law. Cameras will follow as the liberal journalist is flayed alive for comments not fully supportive of the government, a couple more contestants will be imprisoned indefinitely for prosetylizing (they had bibles with them in their luggage) and the female contestants will be hauled off to Subjugation School where they will be taught that they are second class citizens, graduating with a complimentary clitoridectomy to be the 14th wife of some grubby mysoginistic pig. The winner will be the person who survives the ordeal and crawls into the US Embassy compound to beg for forgiveness and membership of the Republican party.

CAIR's Convenient History

2005-11-30T19:38:00.000+11:00

The Council on American-Islamic Relations 'Action Alerts' regularly ~~incite~~ encourage members to participate in various activities or give opinions on media pieces.

Of course, when ~~inciting~~ encouraging or ~~conning~~ educating followers to action, it helps if the facts look to be on your side.

So a link to the History Channel's programme The Crusades: Crescent and Cross is prefaced with

The shadow of war between Christian and Muslim hangs over us today, but it is a war that began nearly a thousand years ago. By the close of the 11th century, Jerusalem had been in Muslim hands for over 400 years. In 1095 Pope Urban II launched an unprecedented military campaign to seize it back--a "Crusade" to purge the Holy Land of "the infidel". Over 60,000 Christian warriors would journey 3000 miles and for almost three years to reclaim the Holy City in the name of God. But their adversaries, the Turkish warlords of the Middle East would resist them every step of the way. In a series of epic battles and bloody massacres, tens of thousands would die as the crusaders inched ever closer towards Jerusalem.

Makes it sound like those eeeevil Christians were simply sitting around one rainy Sunday in London and the following conversation occurred (the conversation is the product of my fevered brain, the names aren't):

Walter the Penniless: I'm bored.
Pope Urban II: We all are, Walter. It's cold, it's dreary, these stone castles are dank and they haven't invented Sky Sports yet.
Walter the Penniless: Yes, but, surely there's some sort of cheap entertainment around. Anyone?
Peter the Hermit: Can it be an activity that doesn't involve crowds? I despise crowds.
Godfrey of Bouillon: By God, men - why don't we go out and conquer something? We haven't conquered anything in aaaages.
Peter the Hermit: That doesn't sound like a solitary activity to me.
Walter the Penniless: And it's rather expensive.
Godfrey of Boullion: Stop being such a bunch of wet blankets. Think of the glory, the booty, the damsels.
Walter the Penniless: Booty?
Peter the (circumstantial) Hermit: Damsels?
Pope Urban II: You know boys, there are always those dratted Muslims to fight. I'll fund it, get the marketing department to start an all out 'They're infidels' smear campaign and we're good to go. We just need a name for the campaign...
Godfrey of Boullion: How about 'The Great Holy War'
Pope Urban II: Sounds a bit generic to me...
Peter the Hermit: The 'War of Blades'?
Godfrey of Boullion: The 'Tirades'?
Pope Urban II: No, no, no...we need something with spark, something that'll look good on posters...
Walter the Penniless: How about 'The Crusades'?
Pope Urban II: Perfect!
Godfrey of Boullion: Jolly good, old boy!
Walter the Penniless: Do I have right of royalties on the marketing materials? Because I'm in a bit of a tight spot at the moment...

When, in actual fact, if you go to the official site for the documentary, the history of the Crusades starts in 1095 and has a rather different flavor.

Pope Urban II calls for a Crusade to support Eastern Christians, including Byzantine Emperor Alexius, whose empire had been attacked by the Turks. Alexius hopes for a small group of mercenaries; what he gets is a force of 60,000 soldiers with goals beyond defending Alexius' Empire.

So yes, the help mustered went a little above and beyond the call of duty but it was by no means a random attack - rather a response to hostilities mounted from the Turkish side.

But that would be rather inconvenient for CAIR to flout, as their bread and butter is promoting the 'Muslim as historical victim' mentality.

Not all rappers are stupid..?

2005-11-29T08:05:00.000+11:00

This is news to me, too:

50 Cent and Kanye West are the only ones selected to be GQ's "Men of the Year" who have no false modesty about it — both of the hip-hop stars justify their big egos in the mag's pages.

But they also have more on their minds than just themselves. Like George W. Bush, for one. 50 thinks the president is "incredible ... a gangsta." "I wanna meet George Bush, just shake his hand and tell him how much of me I see in him," 50 told GQ. If the rapper's felony conviction didn't prevent him from voting, 50 said he would have voted for Bush.

I'll spare you what "Kanye" (is that a little girl's name?) "thinks" about Bush.

Imagine the Christians suggested this

2005-11-28T21:40:00.000+11:00

You'd hear the liberals laughing until judgement day. But as it's Muslims who want to build a gigantic Mosque complex directly beside the London Olympic stadium, it's being seriously considered:

Giant mosque for 40,000 may be built at London Olympics

A MASSIVE mosque that will hold 40,000 worshippers is being proposed beside the Olympic complex in London to be opened in time for the 2012 Games.

The project’s backers hope the mosque and its surrounding buildings would hold a total of 70,000 people, only 10,000 fewer than the Olympic stadium.

Its futuristic design features wind turbines instead of the traditional minarets, while a translucent latticed roof would replace the domes seen on most mosques. The complex is designed to become the “Muslim quarter” for the Games, acting as a hub for Islamic competitors and spectators.

“It will be something never seen before in this country. It is a mosque for the future as part of the British landscape,” said Abdul Khalique, a senior member of Tablighi Jamaat, a worldwide Islamic missionary group that is proposing the mosque as its new UK headquarters.

Tablighi Jamaat has come under scrutiny from western security agencies since 9/11. Two years ago, according to The New York Times, a senior FBI anti-terrorism official claimed it was a recruiting ground for Al-Qaeda. British police investigated a report that Mohammad Sidique Khan, leader of the July 7 London bombers, had attended its present headquarters in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire. In August, Bavaria expelled three members of the organisation on the grounds that it promoted Islamic extremism.

The wind turbines are a clever concession to their leftist allies.

I love this. This is brilliant. I'm sure others are upset, but me? No. I'm fucking ecstatic.

Why? Simple. Because this is about the most definitive proof possible for the hypocrisy of western liberal philosophy. They are allegedly the champions of secular humanism, and here they are, making special dispensation for the adherents of the single most bigoted, misogynistic, backward, violent, idiotic, pig-fucking-ignorant religion which was ever vomited forth upon the planet. All because those Muslims are currently in a war against the real champions of everything western civilizations stands for - conservatives.

Liberals hate us so much that they can actually delude themselves to the point where this monstrosity is plausible. What is wrong with them?? Can't they see the significance of this structure? It is a new Hagia Sophia, located at the original capital of the anglosphere. It is a political statement - one day, these lands will be ours.

You can't even build a tiny fucking little Christian chapel in Saudi Arabia without being killed for it, yet we are going to build them a new world headquarters on our ground.

WAKE THE FUCK UP, PEOPLE!!!!!!

AP: "The party's over". Reuters: "No, it isn't!!!"

2005-11-28T16:34:00.000+11:00

I know that's a bizarre, indy-movie-esque title, but it covers this lovely display of bitter leftist media dishonesty.

Why are they bitter? Well, as the title states, the party's over. The anti-war heroine who they created - Cindy Sheehan - is watching her star plummet. Some lefty media outfits may lament her passing, but at least they'll not seek to cover it up out of ideological desperation.

Sample one: Associated Press

Below, in the first picture, we see AP's coverage of Ms Sheehan's book signing in Crawford, Texas. This (second? third?) trip to harangue the president hasn't been anywhere near as successful as the first for Sheehan, who had previously been able to bask in the unabashed adoration and attention lavished upon her by press and peaceniks. Very few of either have shown up to cover the dozen or so people who are now making nuisances of themselves near the President's ranch.

Nonetheless, as direct proof of the media's antiwar agenda, what would barely rate a mention in a local town paper still draws the international liberal media heavies, like Reuters. They created Sheehan, and they have a vested interest in seeing to it that she succeeds.

She isn't going to, and even Associated Press have removed the blinders long enough to acknowledge it. The protest was a bomb, and Sheehan's book signing was a disaster.

Bush's ranch on Saturday, Nov. 26, 2005 in Crawford, Texas. Sheehan, whose 24-year-old Casey died in Iraq, called for anti-war activists to return to Crawford this week as Bush celebrated the Thanksgiving holiday. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

It's an honest photograph. It admits that the neo-sixties are over, yet it isn't a humiliating portrait. She doesn't look to be weeping uncontrollably; if anything, she looks a little reflective. Cindy Sheehan has a good deal to reflect about.

Sample two: Reuters

Now look at Reuters. This is a picture that says a great deal about the news organization. Both how it presents the news and how little it respects its audience:

Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan sits at a table waiting to sign the next copy of her book 'Not one more mother's child' in Crawford, Texas November 26, 2005. (Jim Young/Reuters)

Now that's dishonesty.

Just look at the image. Could the angle have been more unnatural and contrived? The flag is a redding herring and an item of concealment all at once. It decoys the reader's mind, making him or her believe that the bizarre angle was done so as to get the flag in shot. In reality, the flag is being used to cover the appalling absence of anyone wanting a book signed.

The text is, in this regard, most likely a flat-out lie. Look at Sheehan's posture. Look at her facial expression. She isn't waiting for the "next" customer. She's still bored; waiting, looking off into space, wondering where all of her adoring fans went. The jean and boot-clad legs which are visible clearly belong to one of the two photographers from the AP photo.

I'd speculate that not a single person unrelated to the media came in and had a book signed. Why? Because you bet your ass that he or she would have had a lovely closeup shot with Mother Sheehan for the assembled press. Yet neither AP nor Reuters can produce a single shot in which a single book is signed. Not one. Therefore, I think it most likely that Jim Young from Reuters is a liar. A liar from an organization of liars, who daily spin reality to such a dizzying extent that nobody knows which way is up anymore.

Here's the very next photo and caption provided by the anti-Bush, anti-America Reuters activist. Just in case you thought there was a vague chance that he wasn't really biased.

It's what the media like to call "balance". So, in there interests of balance, here's what Jim Young considers to be a picture that is representative of the people who support George Bush:

A supporter of U.S. President George W. Bush attends a rally in Crawford, Texas November 26, 2005. The poster shows an image of Bush and anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan, who continues to protest near Bush's ranch over his stance on troops still in Iraq. (Jim Young/Reuters)

Jim Young, you're a real asshole.

John F. Kerry: Cheap Jerk

2005-11-27T15:15:00.000+11:00

Portrait of a scumbag

John F. Kerry - once the only US Senator to ever be homeless - managed to secure his financial situation by marrying one millionairess, dumping her, then taking up with the (lunatic) billionairess widow of a dead Republican.

Thanks to her (dead) husband's hard work, John Kerry (Democrat) now has it pretty damn good. How good? This good:

Fox Chapel, Pennsylvania (Assessed value: $3.7 million)

Ketchum, Idaho ski getaway/vacation home (Assessed value: $4.916 million)

Washington, D.C - Georgetown area (assessment: $4.7 million)

Nantucket, Massachusetts waterfront retreat on Brant Point (Assessed value:
$9.18 million)

Boston, Massachusetts - Beacon Hill home (Assessed value: $6.9)

Now, there's nothing wrong with being rich. Oh, sure, some prudish, old-fashioned types might think it craven or unmanly to come to your riches by marrying lonely old rich women whose brains don't work so well anymore. The way I see it, rich is rich.

The thing of it is, once you are rich, it's expected that you will take at least a little of your vast, glimmering horde to give to people who deserve it. I'm not talking about those grubby homeless people in the street. I'm talking about the minimum-wage people who hover around you every day, serving you your beluga caviar and Lafite '45. They actually have to work for a living, so it's only right that you reward that work with a decent gratuity.

Most people in the service industry would consider a "decent" gratuity would fall somewhere within the 15-20% range. Anything less will be viewed unfavorably.

I know there are people out there who come from countries where tipping is not a common practice. That's (usually) because in those countries, the minimum wage is of a standard which allows waiters and waitresses to live purely on what their manager pays them. In the United States, they make just 2-3 dollars an hour. It's damned low, but the system balances out through the universal practice of gratuity. If the service is good (which it generally is in America), it's understood that you must tip. It's the wait staff's livelihood.

Of course, you won't be detained and beaten by a gang of bitter waiters if you don't, but I'd think twice about returning to the same place the next week and ordering something from the menu in which unpleasant bodily fluids can easily be secreted.

Most people, though, don't require the threat of a urine/saliva-coated Caesar salad to prompt them into doing the right thing. Most people only eat so much, and so only end up tipping a relatively small amount. It's no big deal.

You'd think that for those wealthier people who either do eat alot and/or choose especially expensive foods, the additional gratuity would be no hardship. It would be, if certain people weren't prone to cheapness. Like democrats, for instance. No, I'm not generalising, and I can prove it. From the loftiest symbol of democratic politics, to the lowliest east-coast millionaire, they're all a bunch of jerkoff tightwads.

Let's start with the top of the heap, and examine John F. Kerry in the service environment. Remember - this isn't charity. These people have provided him with a service, and he hasn't bothered to pay for it because, legally, he doesn't have to.

Here is how John F. Kerry treats wait staff, according to bitterwaitress.com:

John Kerry in Virginia:

Tipper's Name: John Kerry
Restaurant: Chart House
Where it happened: Alexandria, VA
Total bill / Tip amount / Percentage: $262.60 / $0.00 / 0%
What happened:
June 5, 04 Kerry, his wife, 4 unknown suits - We were happy to seat them in a semi-private area and gave them the same excellent service as we would give anyone - then got stiffed!

Tipper's Name: John Kerry
Restaurant: Ruth' s Chris Steakhouse
Where it happened: Alexandria, Va.
Total bill / Tip amount / Percentage: $247.28 / $2.72 / 1%
What happened:
Was rude and insulting!

John Kerry in St Louis:

Tipper's Name: John F. Kerry
Where it happened: St. Louis
Total bill / Tip amount / Percentage: $773.24 / $20.00 / 2%
What happened:
Added $20.00 on the signature line and then scribbled a little note to vote for him. What a load of crap.

John Kerry in Washington DC:

Tipper's Name: John Kerry
Restaurant: Nathan's
Where it happened: Washington, D.C.
Total bill / Tip amount / Percentage: $110.00 / $5.00 / 4%
What happened:
He was quite nice, but the wife was a real bitch.

John Kerry in Boston:

Tipper's Name: John Kerry
Restaurant: Boston Clam Shack
Where it happened: Boston
Total bill / Tip amount / Percentage: $1438.25 / $22.00 / 1%
What happened:
This cheap motehr fucker only left $22 on a $1438 tab. I am voting for Bush. Kerry the asshole

Tipper's Name: John Kerry
Restaurant: private
Where it happened: Boston
Total bill / Tip amount / Percentage: $436.78 / $25.00 / 5%
What happened:
Don't vote for this cheap ass!

My personal favorite:

Tipper's Name: John F. Kerry
Restaurant: Waffle House
Where it happened: Boston
Total bill / Tip amount / Percentage: $58.32 / $1.68 / 2%
What happened:
He really seemed to like the waffles.

This uncharitable meanness of character seems to be a trait prevalient among residents of core democratic states. In the United States, there is a strong tradition of giving to charity over the holidays.

Well, in some parts of the country, anyhow:

Bible Belt Residents Most Charitable in Country
Sunday, November 20, 2005

PORTLAND, Maine — New Englanders remain among the most tightfisted in the country when it comes to charitable giving while Bible Belt residents are among the most generous, according to an annual index.

For the fourth year running, New Hampshire was the most miserly state, according to the Catalogue of Philanthropy's Generosity Index. Mississippi remained at the top for generosity.

The index, which takes into account both "having" and "giving," is based on average adjusted gross incomes and the value of itemized charitable donations reported to the Internal Revenue Service on 2003 tax returns, the latest available.

However, its methodology has been criticized and has helped give rise to new studies of charitable giving.

"We believe that generosity is a function of how much one gives to the ability one has to give," said Martin Cohn, a spokesman for the Catalogue for Philanthropy, a Boston-based nonprofit that publishes a directory of nonprofit organizations.

Using that standard, the 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia.

The 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan*.

There you have it. Democrats. They don't think that low-wage workers deserve to be rewarded for superior service, and they don't think that poor people should be given a helping hand during the holidays. Sad.

* It is worth noting that, aside from being core democratic states, these are also some of the wealthiest states in the union.

Oh, Those Russians

2005-11-27T11:18:00.000+11:00

So goes the line at the end of Boney M's 'Ra-Ra-Rasputin', which I've always felt to be the most fitting exclamation to describe such a frustratingly obsinate bunch of otherwise pretty nice people.

What the ruling elite - composed of a foul pot-pourri of ex-KGB, current mafia and shady-as-shady-can-be characters - are thinking or planning half the time is a mystery. How they will react to goings on in most of the world can also be rather surprising.

If they didn't have a nuclear arsenal and quite so much experience whacking people they didn't much agree with, it would almost be fun to watch them. Like a lucky dip or one of those little game show wheels that goes round and round with options like 'Stay silent', 'Growl threateningly', 'Strategically position troops', 'Make official statement of condemnation', 'Make official statement of support', 'Send troops to support' &c.

Maybe that's what they have in Moscow - one of those big wheels - and they use it for the more difficult decisions. There might be one for domestic and one for foreign office. They might be manned by skimpily-clad Russian women who can be had for a buck apiece or a thousand bucks apiece (depending on whether or not you want to play Russky roulette with AIDS these days).

It's really the only way to understand why they're suddenly and brutally cracking down on Non Government Organizations (NGOs).

MOSCOW Russia moved Wednesday to impose greater government control over charities and other nongovernmental organizations, including some of the world's most prominent, in what critics described as the Kremlin's latest effort to stifle civil society and democracy.

The lower house of Parliament gave preliminary approval to legislation that would require tens of thousands of Russian organizations to register with the Ministry of Justice, impose restrictions on their ability to accept donations or hire foreigners and prohibit foreign organizations from opening branches in Russia.

Russia has a significant number of people living below the poverty line, is battling severe alcohol, drug and AIDS problems and is turning away aid?

This only makes sense in the context of what Russia's rulers - be they monarchic or despotic - have always been. Speak to a Russian and you will understand the true meaning of polarization - black or white, yes or no, love or hate - there is little room for the in-between. The beauty and depth of Russian literature, I believe, stems from a culture dealing with the aftereffects of absolutist thinking. Enjoy every moment now - notice the beauty of every flower - because you never know when it will suddenly and irreversibly be taken from you.

So now, though it be a new type of ruling system, it is still populated by those darned absolutist Russkies with their polarized way of thinking. And if there's one thing that a Russky understands is needed to rule, it is power. And if it is to be power, then let it be as much power as possible...over as many things as possible. And then he must defend that power from those others that come, even if it be to ostensibly help, because they may try to influence him, or his ministry, or his people - and that takes away his power.

A brutal and stereotyped view? Believe me when I say I speak with some authority.

Some of the bill's supporters defended it as an effort to bring order to the registration of 450,000 nongovernmental organizations. But others said it was aimed at preventing foreign efforts to support political opposition movements, like the one that swept to power in Ukraine's "Orange Revolution" last fall. The legislation follows sharply worded remarks by Putin and the director of the Federal Security Service, the successor of the Soviet-era KGB, that foreign organizations often undermine Russian interests. And it follows the prosecutions of individual organizations, including the Russian-Chechen Friendship Society, a group funded from America and Europe that the government has accused of extremism and that it has moved to close.

"Let us resolve the internal political problems of Russia ourselves," Putin said during the summer, criticizing nongovernmental organizations involved in what he called political activities.
The director of the Federal Security Service, Nikolai Patrushev, went even further earlier this year. He accused Western organizations, including the Peace Corps and the British medical charity Merlin, of being fronts for espionage.

With the attempt at seizing more power comes the inevitable paranoia. Nothing new in Russia at all.

Something else not new at all is the form that the legislation takes.

The legislation could yet be significantly revised, but if it is approved as now written it would force organizations like the Ford Foundation, Greenpeace and Amnesty International to close their offices in Russia and re-register instead as purely Russian organizations - something the legislation, in an apparent contradiction, appears to disallow.

Ahhh, the comfort of familiarity. A Russian legal system without catch-22's, loopholes and contradictions just ain't the genuine article.

Don't get me wrong - I love Russia and have a deep affinity for Russians. They are a noble, deeply cultured and long-suffering people...but I see no way forward for the nation until it's leaders lose more than a mite of their obstinacy.

Can we still say Santa Claus or will we be arrested?

2005-11-26T23:52:00.000+11:00

*sighs*

Yep. It's the War of the Words this 'Holiday' season.

Although I don't condone violence or in any way wish to induce any individual to any kind of illegal or immoral action through what are merely musings on my part...(takes a deep breath and turns to thank the lawyer)

...I can't help thinking just how much fun it would be to capture a morally righteous liberal, strap them to a chair and play them Christmas carols until they promise not to fuck with our society again.

Stamp of Disapproval

2005-11-26T23:27:00.000+11:00

It seems that there's a brewing suspicion that the USPS won't be issuing any more Madonna & Child Christmas stamps.

As has been her custom for as long as I can remember, my mom prepares her Christmas cards over the Thanksgiving weekend in order to have them ready to mail the first week of December. She enjoys purchasing beautiful cards, writing notes, addressing them by hand and affixing whatever Christmas stamp the USPS issues that year. So she stops by her local US Post Office a few days ago then asks the man behind the counter for this year's Christmas stamps. He pulls out a sheet of something called Holiday Cookies. To know my mom is to know that she has never indulged in cutesy stuff. Every year she always selects the Christmas stamp that features a classic painting of Madonna and Child. She asks if they have any classic Christmas stamps and the man pulls out a couple of sheets of last year's Madonna and Child. Mom notices he doesn't seem happy and he says to her, "These are all I have and they'll be the last you ever see." Mom asks, "What do you mean?" He explains the USPS will not be issuing any more "religious" stamps.

Ever.

Mom is momentarily stunned. She then raises her eyebrows a bit and asks, "Are you allowed to say 'Merry Christmas' to us?"

The man's face falls and he lowers his voice in answer, "No. We can only say 'Happy Holidays,'" he tries to smile at her, "But if you say 'Merry Christmas' to me directly I will respond in kind."

Christmas is a holiday celebrated by the founding culture of the United States, the culture (and religion) on which our entire society's mores and values are based.

I find it utterly shameful that a handful of loud, whining liberals is slowly doing more to destroy our country than a thousand exploding Islamofascists ever could.

Mffmee Amfsiffnghg

2005-11-26T23:07:00.000+11:00

That's 'Happy Thanksgiving' as said in the Arel household, where a mouth devoid of some sort of filling is seen as a mortal sin.

Ergo Arel is not a lean Imperialist, but Arel's wife subscribes to the 'meat on bones is nice to cuddle into' theory. I have long since understood the dynamics of marriage when it comes to disagreements:

* She's wrong, and it's worth the missing teeth to win this one.
* She's right. (Or, she's wrong and it's not worth the missing teeth)

I'm happy for the whole debate about my circumfrence to lie in the latter category, so this Thanksgiving my jaw has only stopped moving when I have - usually accompanied by loud snoring.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone. Although I may moan bitterly about the state of the world today, I still have so much to be thankful for...my wonderful family whom I am privileged to love with all my heart, my health and a citizenship to the greatest nation on earth. Here's wishing you a safe and happy holiday.

Boston cancels Christmas

2005-11-26T17:50:00.000+11:00

And al-Reuters has a hard time concealing their support:

BOSTON (Reuters) - Boston set off a furor this week when it officially renamed a giant tree erected in a city park a "holiday tree" instead of a "Christmas tree."

In Reutersworld, only hard-core, right wing, Christian maniacs could have a problem with such a thing:

The move drew an angry response from Christian conservatives, including evangelist Jerry Falwell who heckled Boston officials and pressed the city to change the name back.

"There's been a concerted effort to steal Christmas," Falwell told Fox Television.

The Nova Scotia logger who cut down the 48-foot (14-meter) tree was indignant and said he would not have donated the tree if he had known of the name change.

"I'd have cut it down and put it through the chipper," Donnie Hatt told a Canadian newspaper. "If they decide it should be a holiday tree, I'll tell them to send it back. If it was a holiday tree, you might as well put it up at Easter."

Falwell and the conservative Liberty Counsel led a campaign that threatened to sue anyone who spreads what they see as misinformation about Christmas celebrations in public spaces.

So, there. You see? The majority of people are for this, because only the fringe loonies follow Falwell and his band of puritans. Right?

Wrong. From the story's 10th paragraph:

Christmas has become too politically correct, said 64 percent of people who responded to an online poll by a CBS television affiliate in Boston.

And that was a CBS poll. Imagine if it had been a Fox poll, with regular Fox viewers (ie: mainstream Americans) calling in.

Far leftists turn dumpster-diving into a lifestyle

2005-11-26T17:39:00.000+11:00

It's called being a filthy, disgusting hobo, you freaks:

Why the middle classes go scavenging in dustbins
From James Bone in New York

THE Thanksgiving holiday is over and the frenzied Christmas shopping season has begun. This is bonanza time for the tribe of rummaging Americans known as “freegans”.

The anti-capitalist freegans — the name combines “free” and “vegan” — are so appalled by the waste of the consumer society that they try to live on the leftovers, scavenging for food in supermarket dustbins.

“It’s fun. It’s a thrill. It’s more fun and more satisfying than just going to the store and saying, ‘I wanted some bread and I got it’. It’s the surprise — and the prize,” said Janet Kalish, a New York high school teacher who describes herself as “60 per cent freegan”.

The article goes on to try to show how these people aren't insane, and that their unhygenic practice is just a natural extension of progressive conservationism. I mean, look at the title of the article. From the outset, this reporter was determined to show why these people live like jackals, not merely expose the fact that these bizarre people scorn work, wages, consumerism and all that awful stuff the "norms" do.

Adam Weissman, a freegan activist and sometime security guard in New Jersey, says freeganism grew out of the radical 1960s “yippie” movement but also has affinities with the hobos of the Great Depression who travelled around the country by stealing rides on the railways.

“I have pity for people who have not figured out this lifestyle,” he said. “I am able to take long vacations from work, I have all kinds of consumer goods, and I eat a really healthy diet of really wonderful food: white asparagus and cactus fruit, three different kinds of mushrooms and four different kinds of pre-cut salad. And I’m just thinking of what is in my refrigerator right now.

“Essentially, the sky’s the limit. We found flat-screen TVs, working boom-boxes and stereos. I have put together most of my wardrobe. Last year’s designer clothing in perfect shape is discarded because it’s no longer fashionable, so I wear a lot of designer labels.”

And so long as there are plenty of hateful consumers out there, purchasing heedlessly, these superior, smug Morlocks will have a livelihood.

And yes, keep their stomachs full:

For Thanksgiving dinner on Thursday, Ms Nelson bought the turkey, but most of the rest of the food was freegan.

Fucking animals.

A little perspective, please

2005-11-25T14:12:00.000+11:00

After decades of ramming his homosexuality down our throats (pardon the imagery), Elton John has decided on a quiet wedding to his long-term partner, David Furnish.

The couple's big day was expected to be a star-studded occasion attended by their celebrity friends, including the Beckhams and Liz Hurley.

But they have decided to keep the ceremony uncharacteristically low-key - although they will follow it up with a lavish evening reception.

...

Sir Elton and Furnish, a Canadian-born film-maker, have been together for 12 years.
They will tie the knot on December 21, becoming one of the first same-sex couples to "marry" following the introduction of the Civil Partnership Act.

Furnish told Attitude magazine: "As far as I'm concerned, I've always considered myself committed to Elton and he's the person that I want to spend the rest of my life with. So in that sense I don't feel like the dynamic of our relationship is going to change."

No, your relationship might not change but society's definition of a union of marriage most certainly has to in order to accommodate your non-traditional relations.

But hey, when you spend your life selfishly navel-gazing, the impact of what you do on wider society doesn't really register on the 'me, me, me!' radar.

"But from a social standpoint, I think it's hugely significant. It is a major, major change. It is one of the defining issues of our times. And I applaud Britain for embracing the diversity of our society."

Paris is burning, the US, UK, Australia and other Allies are engaged in an ongoing struggle for the survival of civilisation, the EU is is looking about as solid as a corn chip aaaaand you think this is the defining issue of our times?

Twat.

We interrupt the complete lack of transmission to announce...

2005-11-25T13:59:00.000+11:00

Sorry.

Cuz isn't well and I've been travelling - not realising that no-one was posting here.

Bad us. Bad, bad us.

Standby for some sarcastic commentary on recent news stories and maybe a little grovelling.

A

Give it up, asshole

2005-11-22T23:48:00.000+11:00

Echoes of Sheehanian futility can be seen in celebrity liberal cartoonist Gary Trudeau's refusal to give up pushing the anti-war saga of the humble American everyman, the patriotic wonderdupe, B.D. These days B.D. is something of a mental and emotional cripple, suffering Vietnam-esque flashbacks of his Iraq service. It's the mentally and physically crippled vet cliche, vividly reborn with all the smug condescension of Fonda-era seditionists.

For more on Trudeau and his deliberate attempts to aid jihadists by robbing the American people of their will to face terror, see here.

The latest irrelevant, uneducated, supremely ugly expert on Iraq

2005-11-22T22:01:00.000+11:00

Mick Jagger Slams Tony Blair
By: Scott Colothan on Nov 20, 2005

Mick Jagger has launched a scathing attack on Tony Blair for going to war in Iraq.

The news will be like a knife to the heart for old Tony, who is a big fan of the Stones and recently tried to boost his appeal to the music industry by attending the Music Hall of Fame.

The big lipped Rolling Stones frontman told Spanish reporters: “It makes me angry that Blair already knew that arms of mass destruction were simply an excuse and had nothing planned for the day after."

He continued: “In Iraq, you have three irreconcilable groups - the Shiites, the Sunnies and the Kurds. Either you establish a very well thought-out system of confederation, or something will break. Only now is the United States discovering the reality of Iraq."

It’s not the first time The Rolling Stones have slammed politicians. Their song ‘Sweet Neo Con’ is an attack on Bush’s administration, containing lines like: "You call yourself a Christian, I call you a hypocrite / You call yourself a patriot, well I think you're full of shit.

It continues: "How come you're so wrong? My sweet neo-con, where's the money gone, in the Pentagon."

"Sir" Mick Jagger and his wild, rebellious band of nonconformists, it will be recalled, are now wholly-owned subsidiaries of Mercedes Benz.

I'm moving to Belgium

2005-11-22T20:49:00.000+11:00

They're idiots, but at least they're considering extending the welfare state into stimulating new frontiers:

Jurgen Van Acker is 27 years old and severely handicapped. He cannot walk, talk, sit or eat, but mentally there is nothing wrong with him. With the help of his computer he can communicate. Recently he became a television celebrity in Belgium when he asked that the welfare office pay his prostitutes.

When Jurgen turned 18, his mother Frie Van Acker told him all about sex and asked whether he would like to have sex. Jurgen indicated “No.” One evening three years later, however, he wrote on his computer: “I want sex.” That same evening, Frie contacted a prostitute. Every month for the past six years prostitutes have come to the house for Jurgen. They charge 100 euros for half an hour. Jurgen finds one session a month inadequate. He wants sex at least once a week, but his mother cannot pay that much. Jurgen and his Mum are now demanding that the government subsidize the sex sessions, but the Fund for the Social Integration of the Handicapped only finances masturbation equipment, including vibrators and pumps, for the handicapped in Belgium, but not prostitutes.

You've got to feel for a guy whose situation is so dire that Mommy has actually considered giving him a little action:

“My son cannot masturbate, but he is entitled to have sex at least once week,” Frie Van Acker says. “Giving him a free masturbation set does not help. He cannot use it. As I am his mother I cannot assist him there. That would almost be incest.”

Almost?? What the hell is wrong with these Europeans?

Islam-friendly Britons

2005-11-22T20:28:00.000+11:00

Now, I think I'm fairly safe in saying that 30% of the British population isn't Islamic, because my calender says "2005" and not "2015".

But that doesn't mean that Islam will be impeded from making serious gains in Britain, in terms of conversion. It seems that many native Brits already have the requisite ~~fucktardedness~~ mindset:

One in three blames women for being raped
David Fickling

One in three people believes that women who behave flirtatiously are at least partially responsible if they are raped, a report published today reveals. A similar number think that women are partially or wholly responsible for being raped if they are drunk, and more than a quarter believe women are responsible if they wear sexy or revealing clothing.

The Amnesty International report was described as "shocking" by the group's UK director, Kate Allen. "The government's policies on tackling rape are failing and failing badly," she said. Nearly 15% of respondents thought a woman would be partly responsible for being raped if she was known to have many sexual partners, and 8% totally responsible.

What I want to know is... why does al-Guardian care? Isn't this perfectly in line with the Islamist/leftist agenda?

A question of choice

2005-11-22T00:44:00.000+11:00

Michelle Leslie, an Australian girl found in posession of ecstasy tablets in Indonesia, was recently given a rather lenient sentence - so lenient that she was released within a week of sentencing as she had already served it during the trial process.

She turned up to every court date in a hijab, having converted to Islam during her stint in a Balinese jail cell.

Flying back into Australia the other day, though, she was no longer in modest dress - wearing a tank top and jeans.

Criticism has flown in thick and fast from the Islamic community for her choice of dress - it being deemed not 'Muslim' and modest enough. They're tweaking to the idea that maybe, just maybe, she converted in order to advance her case.

The thing that interests me here is that the spokespeople for the Islamic community have always tried to defend the hijab by squawking shrilly that it is worn by choice, not by force. That a Muslim woman has a right - nay, a privilege - to cover herself if she deems that it is a way she would like to express her faith. That the hijab is not forced onto Muslim women at all. If this is truly so - then why the outcry and deeming of her not acting like a 'real' Muslim? Could it possibly be that Muslim women are under constant pressure - from the community and their families - to wear this primitive and demeaning sackcloth?

Secondly, why would a conversion to Islam be a benefit in a legal case? Could it possibly be that in Islamic countries, legal and government systems are endemically biased toward one religion?

Islam isn't the gentle religion of peace that the crazies in its marketing department try to make out. It is oppressive, mysoginistic, violent, primitive and aggresively expansionist. Oh, and it's as slick on the marketing as anything we in America see on the networks - don't be fooled.

NOI not really Islamic?

2005-11-21T22:25:00.000+11:00

It seems like the Nation of Islam doesn't cut the cloth with "real" Muslims:

Haram: Haram is the Arabic word for that which is forbidden. Many things are Haram. Haram is a similar concept to immoral, generally that which is immoral to a Jew or a Christian will be Haram to a Muslim. Haram also has the meaning of unclean, that which will defile a person.

The worst form of Haram is Shirk. Shirk means to pair someone or something with God (Allah). Nothing is like God but God, nothing can be compared to God. A Muslim must not worship or pray to anyone or anything except God. No one is to be regarded as divine except God. This is why cults like the so-called "Nation of Islam", the followers of Farrakhan, can not be considered to be Islamic, they commit Shirk by ascribing divinity to certain men, such as Wallace Deen Fard (a.k.a. Fard Mohammed).

Someone had better tell them that all that stuff they're doing really is no more authentically religious than my own personal (somewhat heretical) worship of the Goddess Chelsea Charms.

Give democracy, create extremism

2005-11-21T22:04:00.000+11:00

This is the sort of complete jibberish that Muslims - of all ages - are espousing to try to explain why it is that an uncommon number of them seem to live only to kill non-Muslims:

UK Muslim Youth Give Blair a Piece of Their Mind

CAIRO, November 18, 2005 (IslamOnline.net) – Seeking a hands-on experience on challenges facing the Muslim minority in Britain, Prime Minister Tony Blair has met with a group of young British Muslims to discuss their views on extremism, Britishness and the role of religion.

"We're losing confidence and trust in you," Hayder Khan, a young British Muslim, told Blair during a meeting Thursday at a Leeds community center, The Independent said Friday, November 18.

Bright, entrepreneurial, sports-loving and a university student, Khan said that the British foreign policy and the Iraq war have been a main cause in fueling extremism among the Muslim minority. [Yet not one of the British terrorists killed or captured were Iraqis. This is a clever way of stating support for al-Zarqawi - Ed]

"With this foreign policy Muslims feel you are attacking them. We all used to vote Labour but not any more. You need to row back and take us with you."

Blair, on his first visit to Leeds since the July 7 attacks, also discussed with the young British Muslims at a primary school in Chapeltown their views on education and what it meant to be British.

Waseem Naeem, 22, a business studies student at Huddersfield University, agreed with his colleague.

"The Government's foreign policy was a factor in many Muslims turning away from the Government."

He added that the Iraq war was not only opposed by the Muslims, but many non-Muslims also disagreed with the war.

A report released last week by a taskforce of prominent British Muslim leaders set up by the government following the July 7 attacks blamed the British foreign policies and the US-British led occupation of Iraq on fueling extremism among members of the Muslim minority in Britain.

I'm sorry, but the logic that I'm sure is featured (somewhere) in those arguments has completely passed me by. Overthrow a murderous, secular dictator who was, by all accounts, no real friend of Islam, and attempt to gift an ungrateful populace with self-governance and you will be repaid only with British-born Muslims blowing up London trains and buses. Someone needs to explain that to me, because my brain isn't sufficiently ~~damaged~~ Muslim.

Get a load of the wonderful suggestions these young Muslim inheritors of Britainstan make:

During the meeting with Blair, young Muslims put forward a number of proposals for the government to help give a better knowledge of Islam and improve the image of Muslims in the country.

"Making Eid a public holiday for all would delight the non-Muslims and make them examine what the festival means", an optimistic young woman told Blair.

Her male colleague added that a compulsory course on comparative religion would also have the same effect, according to the daily.

Aneela Mather, one of the few white faces in the room, said divorcing the concepts of terrorism and Islam would also be a step forward.

"Every time there is a picture of the suicide bombers on the television, it is followed by people praying at a mosque," she told the Prime Minister.

Her colleague further suggested that divorcing nationality from religion would also help.

"I'm Muslim but that has nothing to do with my Britishness, which is about being free to go out for a drink and to dance."

Huh? Sorry, but since you're a Muslim you can't drink, and you can't dance. Those are aspects of evil western culture. But they don't need to worry about that. It's on the decline in soon-to-be Muslim Britain.

Too little, too late, too conditional

2005-11-21T21:58:00.000+11:00

Muslims only seem to actively oppose terrorism when it's being done to them. Then they seem to be able to pull out all the stops:

Zarqawi's close family publicly denounces him
By César G. Soriano

BAGHDAD — Standing in a pile of rubble that was once his home, a bandaged and bloody Jameel Younan Nissan described twin suicide bombs that killed seven of his neighbors near the Hamra Hotel.

"Nobody here supports the insurgency," says Nissan, 47, blaming the attack Friday on Jordanian-born terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. "Even before this attack, the feelings against Zarqawi were growing. He has no religion, no sect, no humanity. He is the devil."

Nissan's sentiments may reflect eroding support for Zarqawi, who has a $25 million bounty on his head and is the most-wanted man in Iraq. He has claimed responsibility for kidnappings and the most destructive suicide bombings in Iraq.

Thousands of Jordanians have taken to the streets recently to protest Zarqawi after a series of suicide bombs killed 60 people in the capital of Amman on Nov. 9. Many of the victims were guests at a wedding party.

On Sunday, the family of Zarqawi — born Ahmed Fadheel Nazzal al-Khalayleh — denounced their former tribesman and his terrorist activities in advertisements published in Jordanian newspapers.

"A Jordanian doesn't stab himself with his own spear," said the statement signed by 57 members of the al-Khalayleh family, including Zarqawi's brother and cousin. "We sever links with him until doomsday."

While murdering innocent civilians and US soldiers in Iraq is acceptable behaviour, killing Muslims in Jordan is a disownable offense.

Darwin would approve

2005-11-21T21:17:00.000+11:00

This would have to be happening in France:

France keeps watch on 'breatharian' retreat

French authorities have put a retreat organised by Australian self-styled guru Ellen Greve under surveillance, the Le Parisien newspaper reports.

The newspaper says the authorities are worried that it is a dangerous cult that has had a role in the deaths of three people around the world.

Jean-Michel Roulet, the head of the French Government's anti-sect unit Miviludes, has told the newspaper that the prolonged fasting preached by Ms Greve is "aberrant".

Mr Roulet says Ms Greve's group has used "a veritable attack on an individual's freedom by way of mental manipulation".

A seminar in the south-eastern village of Devesset headed by Ms Greve, who calls herself 'Jasmuheen', is under "high surveillance".

However, officials say those attending are all adults and that, barring a mishap during the gathering, there are no grounds for police to break it up.

Ms Greve, 48, teaches that people can live almost entirely without food or water under an approach she calls "breatharianism".

She herself claims to have eaten nothing since 1993, surviving only on air and light.

Three people believed to have been influenced by her principles have died.

The way I see it, if you're stupid enough to believe that you'll stay in fighting trim on a diet of oxygen and sunlight, you deserve to become extinct.

This is torture?

2005-11-21T18:06:00.000+11:00

From the WTI report on torture & interrogation:

Humiliation/sexual abuse

Severe humiliation through nakedness, violations of Muslim customs, and other methods have been pervasive.

According to a PHR source familiar with conditions in Guantánamo, female interrogators sat on detainees' laps and fondled themselves or detainees, opened their blouses and pushed their breasts in the faces of detainees, kissed detainees and if rejected, accused them of liking men, and forced detainees to look at pornographic pictures or videos.

That's it. I'm swapping sides. I plan to be captured by these fiendish Americans at the earliest possible opportunity.

Don't write your congressman demanding my release. I can take it.

Reality TV

2005-11-21T10:47:00.000+11:00

No, there's no leftist, pro-Muslim bias on TV at all. It's just good, clean, realistic programming:

E-RING: JT (Benjamin Bratt) and a Special Ops team head for Detroit to deal with an act of homegrown terrorism: the takeover of a mosque – with people inside – by radical Christians. It's a tricky situation in more ways than one; among other things, JT's people are limited as to what they can do at the scene because the law requires the FBI to handle it.

So... the real-world restrictions on the use of US military forces within the United States (posse comitatus) is rigidly adhered to on the show - presumably to add realism - yet the Mosque is being overrun... by Christians.

Nope. No agenda there at all. Very realistic. I'm sure that we all remember the last time an American Christian terror group did something to a mosque. Somewhere. At some point.

Am I missing something?

2005-11-21T09:37:00.000+11:00

Iran's doing something very, very naughty. If we listen to our gut instincts, we know this.

It's a little like walking into the kitchen, finding your kid standing there with his hands behind his back looking far, FAR too innocent. With a smear of chocolate on his cheek.

You ask him to show you his hands. He refuses.

...at this point, any sane adult would be mentally going through any of the half dozen chocolaty items in the kitchen, wondering which has been in some way 'dissappeared'.

Let's apply this simple, non-political domestic scenario to Iran.

You walk in on Iran and find it feeding a new batch of uranium into a facility that converts yellowcake into uranium tetra-fluoride. This is a step in enriching uranium. Iran doesn't technically need to enrich uranium in order to heat it's water and power it's alJazeera-spewing TV sets.

You ask Iran to allow you to tour the facilities. It refuses.

...at this point you...??

a) Futz around, getting all your friends together before you present critical evidence to the UN security council.

Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee Chairman Alaeddin Boroujerdi, a former deputy foreign minister, said that he did not expect Tehran to be sent to the top UN security body unless the United States stepped up its pressure on the European Union. Britain, France and Germany have been negotiating with the Iranian government on behalf of the European Union since 2003. Iran brought the talks to an end by resuming suspended activities at a nuclear plant in the central city of Isfahan.

When talks come to an end like that, isn't it time for the shooting to begin?

b) Realise that you're the UN and have far more pressing issues on your mind. Like the REALLY scary fact that there are lots of machines hooked up to the internet. Lots of tracking devices and UPS packages with little barcodes and scary things like that. Write and release a report on this critical, world-altering fact.

Remote computer-controlled household appliances are already appearing, as well as prototype cars with collision-avoidance sensors.

Mobile phones can be used as electronic train tickets while meat exports from Namibia or goods for US retail chain Wal-Mart are tagged with sensors to allow them to be tracked.

The ITU's vision goes further, highlighting refrigerators that independently communicate with grocery stores, washing machines that communicate with clothing, implanted tags with medical equipment and vehicles with stationary or moving objects.

Industrial products would also become increasingly "smart", gaining autonomy and the intelligence thanks to miniaturised but more powerful computing capacity.

"Even particles and 'dust' might be tagged and networked", the ITU said.

How about being scared of the radioactive fallout dust that might result from doing nothing about Iran NOW?

c) Talk a lot. Do nothing. Wag your finger at Iran's increasingly poorly disguised nuclear ambitions. Wake up one morning to find a Western city is no longer there and that the crater glows an eerie green in the dark.

We seem to be doing a and b concurrently and just waiting for c to happen. I propose plan d:

d) Give the order for your troops to finish things off in Iraq (really finish things off - finally, ruthlessly, bloodily). Cease sitting back while Iraq's new government (the one you fought for and lost American lives for) implements goddamned Sharia Law, just give the sonsofbitches a plan of action and no options in it's implementation. Invade Iran...quickly, ruthlessly, bloodily...install a democratic government with no wiggle room for dictatorship or Islamic law. Invade Syria...quickly, ruthlessly....

Yes, I know it's not diplomatic - but I don't see the point of dragging the inevitable out for decades.

We can't leave the cultural and technological cesspit that is Middle East to just fester like a sore on the backside of Europe. It is an ideological breeding ground for democracy and freedom hating terrorists that invade our countries in their erroneous quest to convert us to barbarism. Simply swatting them away individually is a costly and difficult exercise - in the long term, it seems wiser to me to completely eliminate the source of the threat.

Allowing Iran to pursue any kind of nuclear technology is beyond foolish - it is ultimately irresponsible and a breach of the duty of care that our politicians and global leaders have to us in the West.

To my leaders - wake up. Ignore the self-loathing liberal thinking that is preventing you from effectively defending us and launch the preemptive attacks necessary to safeguard me, my family and my civilization...before we have to resort to purely defensive measures against an enemy that should never have reached technological maturity on our watch.

...pretty please?

Secular... except for Islam

2005-11-21T08:52:00.000+11:00

Public schools in the United States are supposed to be free of proselytising influence - be it Christian, Jewish or Islamic in form.

But that's just the theory. If it really were rigidly adhered to, this kind of insanity wouldn't take place:

A case brought by parents and children challenging a California school district for its practice of teaching 12-year-old students to "become Muslims" will be heard in U.S. appeals court today.

As WND reported, the lawsuit was filed by the Thomas More Law Center against the Byron Union School District and various school officials to stop the "Islam simulation" materials and methods used in the Excelsior Elementary School in Byron, Calif.

The United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco, widely considered the nation's most liberal, will hear oral arguments in the case.

The Thomas More Law Center says that for three weeks, "impressionable 12-year-old students" were, among other things, placed into Islamic city groups; took Islamic names; wore identification tags that displayed their new Islamic name and the star and crescent moon; handed materials that instructed them to 'Remember Allah always so that you may prosper'; completed the Islamic Five Pillars of Faith, including fasting; and memorized and recited the 'Bismillah' or 'In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate,' which students also wrote on banners hung on the classroom walls.

Eagle-eyed readers will recall that this was a case that I covered on my old blog, The Daily Cuz. So, what's new? The verdict is in, that's what:

Court says Muslim roleplaying in school OK

SAN FRANCISCO, Nov. 18 (UPI) -- Christian students and parents cannot sue a school district because some seventh-graders pretended to be Muslims for a history course, a court has ruled.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the role-playing game was not a religious exercise that violated anybody's constitutional rights.

The court upheld a lower court ruling, saying only that the activities at the Byron, Calif., school weren't "overt religious exercises" that would raise concerns under the First Amendment prohibition of "establishment of religion."

The decision was issued one day after the U.S. House of Representatives chastised the 9th Circuit for ruling earlier this month that parents can't sue public schools for providing information about sex. That decision "deplorably infringed on parental rights," said the House resolution.

This article makes the three week long immersion in Muslim cheerleading out to be a five minute "role playing exercise".

While Atheists are attempting to take the word "God" out of the pledge of allegiance, why is this egregious case of religious indoctrination exempted? Because it is Islam and not the Christianity which sneering liberals despise most? Or is it because leftists now are openly assisting their anti-America, anti-Israeli, anti-Christian allies?

We should not tolerate this kind of reprehensible double standard.

A true believer

2005-11-21T00:29:00.000+11:00

At first, I thought this article by Diane Winston in the LA Times was an isolated case of an American academic being just a little too well-disposed to Islam. Then, to my horror, I realized that this was perhaps the most amazing piece of crap that anyone has ever asked me to digest :

6 million Muslim stories waiting to be told
By Diane Winston, Diane Winston is Knight chair in media and religion at USC. She can be reached at dhwinston@gmail.com.

KARIMA ALAVI, an American convert to Islam, has a quick comeback for critics of hijab, the head covering worn by Muslim women: Get over it!

"People make assumptions when they look at me because of the fabric on my head," Alavi told a group of journalists attending a seminar this month on media coverage of Islam and Muslims in the United States. "I was at a Dunkin' Donuts in Virginia, and a man was staring at me. Finally he came over and said, 'How could you?' "

Alavi is a program director at Dar al Islam, an Islamic education center in Abiquiu, N.M. Her forthright manner neatly skewers facile assumptions about Muslim womanhood. But the discrepancies between fact and fiction extend far beyond Americans' misconceptions.

At the five-day seminar at USC, I discovered how little I knew about the estimated 6 million Muslims in our midst. My biggest surprise was how passionately committed second-generation Muslim Americans are to social justice and political activism.

These Gen-Xers, similar to the cohort of 20- and 30-something Christians and Jews, confirm the findings of two recent studies on religion and young adults conducted by the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA and by Anna Greenberg for Reboot, a nonprofit organization. This generation, the studies found, is spiritually oriented, even religiously committed, and socially progressive.

Islam is socially progressive??? What an appallingly wrongminded thing to say. Perhaps she hit her head on something before beginning to write. She'd better have, because that kind of statement is either the result of advanced mental retardation or a remarkably shameless degree of dishonesty.

I will admit that at least part of what she said is true, although the way in which she said it is grossly misleading. It's certainly true that second and third generation Muslim immigrants, born and living in the west are far more zealous in their self-identification as Muslims than their parents and grandparents.

But it isn't for the sweet, fluffy reasons this academic advances. They are defining themselves not by what they are, but what they are not. They are not part of the west. Theirs is more than a simple antithetical rejection of western secularism - theirs is a zealous (and, for the most part, completely nonsensical) embrace of that which opposes that which they despise. This is why so many young social-reject leftists become Muslims. Islam opposes America, which (in their warped mind) rejected them. Victimology 101.

Not that I think that it's entirely their fault. Blame must be laid primarily at the feet of people like Diane Winston, who have abused their positions in presenting vile propaganda under the guise of critical analysis. These young people were brought up in the west, suffering through a elementary, secondary and tertiary education system staffed by idiotic jerks like her. All along, they were told that they were victims of oppression, that the country which had accepted and afforded their ancestors citizenship was a cruel, genocidal and repressive regime, that their faith was historically pure (and historically victimized), and that the faith of Christians and Jews was based upon oppression and hatred.

Not Islam, though. Islam, according to people like Diane, is the exact opposite to those negative Judeo-Christian elements:

Sept. 11, 2001, was a turning point for Muslim Americans who came of age this century. To them, Islam is not the faith of fanatics. Rather, the religion's emphasis on submission to God and service to others makes it a corrective to hate, injustice and inequality.

This is the common link in all of her work. The complete absence of any criticality in regard to Islam. If only her sins finished there. But they don't. As we saw above, she is not merely attempting to omit those parts of Islamic law and practice that sensitive westerners would be repulsed by. She is going beyond this, actively seeking to disguise what is a very conservative, backward, anti-liberal religion as an adjunct of the progressivist movement.

It isn't. Oh, sure, you see Muslims at liberal rallies. But they're not there on behalf of social causes, civil rights or women's rights, as Diane fraudulently claims. They are there (as is so easily evidenced) to slam Israel, Jews and the democratization of Iraq.

Gary Glitter digs naked children

2005-11-21T00:19:00.000+11:00

The ex-rocker who was caught with kiddie porn in the UK and later expelled from Cambodia for "undisclosed reasons" has been arrested for having sex with children in Vietnam.

I wish they'd just skip to the part with the firing squad. Die, you sick old fucker.

Less than heartwarming

2005-11-20T11:27:00.000+11:00

I know a lot of my conservative brethren are celebrating the massive anti-Zarqawi protests currently being conducted in Jordan. The rejection of political violence by Muslims is something to be celebrated, as it generally doesn't ever happen.

And that's the crux of my problem. Where were these massive protests - not just in Jordan, but across the Muslim world - after 9-11? Where were they after Beslan? Not a peep was heard from them after 7/7. So why are they now just starting to behave like rational people?

Jordanian citizen Nabil Daoud has the answer:

In the town's center, Nabil Daoud said he supported bin Laden when he fought the Soviets and, later, the Americans in Afghanistan, just like he backed al-Zarqawi's insurgency against the U.S.-led occupation in Iraq. "But when they started targeting Muslims, I stopped sympathizing with them," said Daoud, who is in his early 20s. "I don't understand it anymore."

At last, some honesty.

Aww... how cute!

2005-11-19T17:04:00.000+11:00

Palestinian children play a game called 'Arab and Jews' in the Rafah refugee camp, south of the Gaza Strip.

Get a load of those toy guns. If you tried to walk onto a train or bus with one in America, a transit cop would blow your head off.

Now imagine you're a green IDF recruit, sent into an area where Palestinians are rioting, hurling rocks and shooting. If you saw a teenager bring one of those to bear on you, would you really say to yourself "I won't shoot, it's probably just a toy".

Islam really is peaceful

2005-11-19T16:51:00.000+11:00

That's why India is frantically erecting a 2,500 mile long barrier fence on its border with Bangladesh - a country India fears is about to become an Islamic Republic:

India fences off Bangladesh to keep out Muslim terror
Dean Nelson, Dhaka

INDIA is accelerating the construction of a 2,500-mile fence to seal its border with Bangladesh amid growing fears that its Muslim neighbour could become “a new Afghanistan”.

Indian officials and western diplomats have been alarmed by an increase in terrorist attacks by militant groups linked to Al-Qaeda and by the Dhaka government’s failure to crack down on them.

One group said to have links with the government claimed responsibility for 500 synchronised explosions in 63 of Bangladesh’s 64 districts in August.

India’s cabinet has decided to speed up work on the 8ft security fence, which is intended to keep out terrorists and arms smugglers. The fence, which cuts a swathe through some of India’s densest rainforests, will be finished by the end of next year and patrolled by a border security force. Key stretches are being electrified.

I'll wager the mainstream media's coverage of this will be restricted to those op-ed pieces decrying the inhumanity of fence-building Indians.

They'll be calling them racists, next.

State of denial

2005-11-18T08:55:00.000+11:00

This is a real quote from a real French police spokesman:

"The situation has returned to normal because about 100 vehicles are set on fire each night in France."

And in case you didn't know it, there were some Muslim participants amongst the rioting "youths". But al-Reuters knows that you really have to focus on the non-Muslim participants:

About 9,000 vehicles have been set on fire and 3,000 people detained since the start of the rioting by some white youngsters as well as youths of Arab and African origin, torching cars and setting fire to buildings such as schools and churches.

[...]

"There weren't just Mohammads and Alis in those groups (of rioters) -- there were Tonys and Daniels too," said Dalil Boubakeur, the Paris Grand Mosque rector who is also head of France's official Muslim Council.

Considering that the vast majority of the vandalism took place within known "no go" areas for non-Muslims, I can't help but ponder the accuracy of that statement.

Reality check

2005-11-18T08:46:00.000+11:00

More great propaganda work from al-Reuters:

French Muslim leaders reject blame for youth riots
By Tom Heneghan

PARIS, Nov 17 (Reuters) - French Muslim leaders denounced on Thursday efforts to blame Muslims and Islam for recent riots in the country's rundown suburbs and said they saw worrying signs of growing prejudice against their faith here.

Many young rioters may have been from Muslim backgrounds, but their violent outburst was a protest against unemployment, poor housing and other bias they faced because of their foreign origins, they told journalists.

Urban violence, which some politicians in France and some media abroad portrayed as a kind of Muslim uprising, fell back to normal levels on Thursday after three weeks in which 9,000 vehicles and many buildings were set on fire.

Which politicians? Which journalists? Again, the allegation is made, but not evidenced. Mainly, I suspect, because it is a terribly difficult thing to evidence. It would be an outright lie to claim that anywhere less than 95% of the world's media has dutifully spun the French Muslim riots into some kind of "youthful" social agitation in reaction to French racism.

The absurdly determinist concept that high rates of unemployment necessarily lead directly to mass acts of national vandalism and the occasional murder wasn't questioned by anyone outside of a few bloggers, to my knowledge.

If anyone should be complaining about the media's coverage of the riots, it should be non-Muslim conservatives, who were repeatedly lied to or left deliberately uninformed for the sake of political correctness.

Stupid Meatheads

2005-11-17T16:29:00.000+11:00

This is an older article that I'm rehashing on American Imperialist.

Liberals don't like soldiers. During the sixties, they pretended to empathise with those who were drafted into Vietnam service, but didn't refrain from hurling a bucket of pig's blood on those who were politically insensitive enough to wear their uniforms with the sleeves still attached. As we saw last week in the diaries of the Australian former opposition leader, not much has changed. People who enlist for service are to be scorned, even by those lying elite liberals who profess a common love of country.

This truth manifests itself everywhere that one can find liberals. This poster was produced by a taxpayer-funded student union, at a university in Australia.

The fact that virtually all of the officers in the Australian army already possess university degrees would tend to negate the thrust of their inference; that in life one must choose between being intelligent (liberal - weighed down with government-financed arts degrees you will never pay off) or a soldier (stupid, mindless killing machine feted to die somewhere ignobly for George McChimpy Halliburton). The possibility that young men and women might actually want to serve their country, motivated not by bloodlust or blind stupidity, never occurs to a liberal, whose selfish state of mind is completely hardcoded into their being.

One doesn't sacrifice. One doesn't give back. Those are the hallmarks of the "gullible", the "naive" and the "brainwashed". This kind of inverted thinking is a natural byproduct of a generation who was educated from kindergarten onward by teachers who shunned traditional education (belief in country, belief in authority figures, the conventional as opposed to the revisionist view of history, etc) in favor of overtly cynical postmodernist reinterpretations. They at least had the benefit of knowing both sides of the story. Their students, the really brainwashed little student union leftists meandering around ten thousand campus's worldwide did not begin with a conventional educational foundation, which then incorporated liberal cynicism. They were taught the cynicisms as traditional knowledge. There is, of course, very little critique of the critique (aside from the few conservative columnists, TV identities and bloggers) and as such, today's young leftists are as oblivious to alternate possibilities and alternate viewpoints as most conservatives were in the early 1950s.

But I digress from my main point, which is the leftist distain of the military. The military is the antithesis of leftism. It is a body of rugged, unselfish men and women, devoted to the task of insuring the safety of their nation. Their antithetical core lies in the fact that unlike liberals, who question everything all the time, soldiers accept their place in a set hierarchy, and faithfully obey the orders of their superior officers. Important distinction - they do not blindly obey anyone. If ordered to massacre civilians, most western soldiers would probably arrest their senior officer. But as most orders are just, and rules of engagement are now strictly governed, they obey.

This state of being runs so contrary to the leftist assumption of smug, individual superiority that it cannot be effectively expressed. Indeed, most leftists, if confronted by a situation in which they must just accept the word of someone else, and not leap into a Socratic examination of why it is a good idea to get away from the live hand grenade, most liberals will merely become angrily profain, leaping into imaginative new contortions of George "Chimpy" Bush's name.

This inability to understand the soldierly mindset has led liberals down many avenues. Most have no inclination to embue soldiers with humanity, so they simplify complex human beings into Nazi killing machines, who enjoy blood and death. This "viewpoint" is given wonderful expression in the cartoons of Ted Rall:

Killer assassins

The first cartoon nicely shows the inability/unwillingness of leftists to distinguish between soldiers who obey responsible orders, and those who are mindless, participating stooges heaped in criminal genocide. To say this is a gross oversimplification of real life is a massive understatement. Not that factual accuracy has ever been a characteristic of Ted Rall's "work".

The enemy as victim

Liberal cartoonists, in making the desperate stretch necessary to present the American/allied forces in Iraq appear as awful as possible, will often go so far as to take the enemy's side, presenting a perspective of events that the enemy most certainly would like the world to believe. Here, omission is the chief tool. Think about it. A man is drunk in a bar, and he punches another man's wife. The husband naturally intervenes, slugging the guy to the ground. Now, if a picture is presented of the senario, minus the initial assualt on the woman, the man on the ground seems like the victim. This is the methodology at play in the above cartoon. No mention of the Taliban sheltering Al-Qaeda is made. No mention of the grotesque attacks made, around the world, by the terrorist organization. In Rallworld, all Afghans killed in Afghanistan are innocent.

Moral equivalence

When confronted with a situation in which the enemy is unarguably operating in a complete moral vacuum, it becomes rather difficult to make the opposing American forces look worse. In such cases, cartoonists will resort to moral equivalence, attempting to draw parallels between the two sides. Unfortunately for Mr Rall and his likeminded associates, the United States has yet to fly any fully-loaded passenger jets into high rise office towers. So the comparison is made virtually impossible. That doesn't mean that the strategy of moral equivalence is abandoned. Instead, it evolves to suit the circumstance. Why compare America to a bunch of illiterate terrorists when they can be compared to the Third Reich, after all?

The criminal deceit that this cartoon attempts to commit against the reading public is astonishing. Ted Rall obviously relies upon the ignorant, the insane and the slow of mind to make up his readership numbers, because anyone blessed with even just an elementary school level education can differentiate between liberal democracy and totalitarian fascism. Hitler didn't deal in Democracy. He invaded and annexed countries without pretension. If anyone is inclined to believe the same is true of the United States, then they have only to look at free, independent Kuwait to realise their error. Had the USA so wished, they could have annexed Kuwait and controlled a huge percentage of the world's oil. But they didn't. Because they didn't want to, not because they couldn't. And that was under the auspices of George Snr.

But the worst crime of this cartoon is undoubtedly perpetrated against the soldiers themselves. How many reporters were imbedded with the SS divisions as they carved a bloody swathe through the Soviet Union? A single marine shoots a militiaman feigning death in Fallujah, and all of a sudden it is the Einsatzgruppen revisited? No sense of scale, no comparison to be made. At all. In today's army, targets have to meet with a strict guideline of legal and moral acceptability, and each is evaluated by JAG lawyers to determine if it is or isn't within the rules of engagement. There were no JAG lawyers at Auschwitz.

The value of lies

Here we see a wonderful example of overkill. Rall must have been feeling particularly hateful that day, as he's managed to combine almost all of the techniques described in a single cartoon. But what I find most interesting about this particular strip is the first frame, in which a general (presumably) is telling lots of hysterical lies about WMDs. This, in any sense, is a dishonest misrepresentation. The military had nothing to do with estimates of Saddam's WMD program. The CIA (a civilian intelligence agency) were the ones who advised Bush that Saddam was close to acquiring nukes, and that he had a large stockpile of deployable chemical and biological weapons. The military then acted upon the president's orders. The president's orders were based upon decisions he reached, based largely on advice from Langley. Surely if there is anyone to blame for a failure of intelligence, it is the liberal-controlled, anti-Bush CIA.

Naivety

Not all liberal cartoonists are as crudely dishonest as Ted Rall. Garry Trudeau, via his popular cartoon Doonesbury, is just as dishonest as Rall, but he has the wit to hide his dishonesty and contempt for the American soldiers behind a veil of condescension. Here the American soldier is not portrayed as monster so much as an ordinary, simple Joe, an uncomplicated guy from the suburbs who was cruelly taken in by the lies of an evil government. Naive enough to think that enlisting and serving his country was a good idea, his courage and service was repayed with loss and misery. Trudeau claims that he is not against the soldiers, but his actions through his work say otherwise. His long-suffering character "B.D." is a dupe, a fool, a sap who continually thinks of his efforts in Iraq as noble and worthwhile, even as his world grows more and more hopeless. This technique of focussing entirely upon the negative aspects of a conflict should not be confused with empathy. It is a deliberate attempt to sap public morale, and portray the conflict as unnecessary, futile and disastrous. This exact same technique has been adopted and adapted to the music industry's own anti-war propaganda specialists, Greenday, through their laborious and innane series of anti-American videoclips, showing mayhem and misery on the streets of Iraq, and poor, innocent, naive young Americans caught up in it. The voluntary nature of their service is effectively nullified by making them appear innocent to the point of childishness; unable to make their own decisions, and that is why they are making the wrong one in enlisting.

The soldier-as-child theme was joyfully exploited by celebrity deathmom Cindy Sheehan, who is (hopefully) wrestling privately with questions of how her son would view her exploitation of him. The inmates of Camp Casey constantly referred to the soldiers as "kids" and "children". This is perhaps understandable in the instances when it was a mother or father speaking of their own children. But even they ought to understand the fact that their children have become adults, mature enough to make their own decisions.

Soldiers are not naive, any more than they are killhappy nazi zombies out to secure oil for Chimpmaster Hallibush. They are young men and women who have set themselves apart from the mainstream by their willingness to sacrifice, to fight and perhaps even die in pursuit of the most noble cause anyone has ever fought and died for. That they do so for the sake of people who aren't from their country, don't speak their language and don't share their religion is only greater testimony to the remarkable nature of this new generation of thoughtful warriors.

They have earned victory on the field of battle, and they ought not to have to struggle for the respect of the people back at home as well.

Additional ~
From today's Melbourne Age comes a wonderful example of this pervasive contempt for the military:

Reincarnation of Michael Hutchence? No chance
Reality TV has lost the plot in trying to replace the INXS frontman, writes Patrick Donovan.

You can't cultivate real rock'n'roll; the best bands just fall into place.

INXS was all about frontman Michael Hutchence. He was the quintessential '80s rock star: cool, good looking and zen with a hint of sleaze and danger. He dated supermodels and corrupted our Kylie. He had a seemingly insatiable appetite for the hedonistic lifestyle that led to his death on the back of a door in a lonely hotel room.

He was a natural frontman, courted by Mick Jagger and Bono. His latest replacement, 31-year-old Canadian singer J. D. Fortune, may have been the best option out of a murky pool of B-grade cover band singers, but he voluntarily enlisted in the Canadian army and spent time as an Elvis impersonator.

He voluntarily [insert hysterical liberal screaming here] enlisted to serve his country, and should therefore be seen as less qualified to act as a credible rock n' roll frontman. And what the hell is wrong with impersonating Elvis?

If you can explain all that to me, you're probably not the sort of person who I'd speak to in the first place.

Worthless whitey

2005-11-17T12:19:00.000+11:00

It seems that the BBC truly does value the life of a young white male less than that of a young black male. How do I know? Simple mathematics.

Take two instances of racially-motivated homicide. They are both virtually identical in detail, except that in one case a black male was killed, and in the other a white male. Both died at a similar age.

In an ideal world, each would be equally mourned and their killers decried. Not so in Beebworld. While dead black male A, Anthony Walker, is given a loud, furious lament by the BBC, dead white male A, Christopher Yates only provokes a single question.

"Christopher who?"

King hypocrite

2005-11-17T11:54:00.000+11:00

As mentioned earlier, Bill Clinton took a lame swipe at George Bush over the invasion of Iraq. Claiming that it was a "big mistake", he also had this to say:

"Saddam is gone. It's a good thing, but I don't agree with what was done, " Clinton told students at the American University of Dubai.

"It was a big mistake. The American government made several errors ... one of which is how easy it would be to get rid of Saddam and how hard it would be to unite the country."

From those remarks we get the idea that Bill thinks it would have been a better idea to simply leave Saddam be, because invading and overthrowing him (the only viable alternative) was a big mistake.

Here's what President Clinton had to say about Saddam in 1998:

Clinton: Iraq has abused its last chance

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- From the Oval Office, President Clinton told the nation Wednesday evening why he ordered new military strikes against Iraq.

The president said Iraq's refusal to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors presented a threat to the entire world.

"Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said.

Operation Desert Fox, a strong, sustained series of attacks, will be carried out over several days by U.S. and British forces, Clinton said.

"Earlier today I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces," Clinton said.

"Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors," said Clinton.

Clinton also stated that, while other countries also had weapons of mass destruction, Hussein is in a different category because he has used such weapons against his own people and against his neighbors.

'Without delay, diplomacy or warning'

The Iraqi leader was given a final warning six weeks ago, Clinton said, when Baghdad promised to cooperate with U.N. inspectors at the last minute just as U.S. warplanes were headed its way.

"Along with Prime Minister (Tony) Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning," Clinton said.

The president said the report handed in Tuesday by Richard Butler, head of the United Nations Special Commission in charge of finding and destroying Iraqi weapons, was stark and sobering.

Iraq failed to cooperate with the inspectors and placed new restrictions on them, Clinton said. He said Iraqi officials also destroyed records and moved everything, even the furniture, out of suspected sites before inspectors were allowed in.

"Instead of inspectors disarming Saddam, Saddam has disarmed the inspectors," Clinton said.

"In halting our airstrikes in November, I gave Saddam a chance -- not a license. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed," the president explained.

Clinton said he made the decision to strike Wednesday with the unanimous agreement of his security advisors.

Timing was important, said the president, because without a strong inspection system in place, Iraq could rebuild its chemical, biological and nuclear programs in a matter of months, not years.

"If Saddam can cripple the weapons inspections system and get away with it, he would conclude the international community, led by the United States, has simply lost its will," said Clinton. "He would surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction."

Clinton also called Hussein a threat to his people and to the security of the world.

"The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people," Clinton said.

Such a change in Baghdad would take time and effort, Clinton said, adding that his administration would work with Iraqi opposition forces.

Clinton also addressed the ongoing impeachment crisis in the White House.

"Saddam Hussein and the other enemies of peace may have thought that the serious debate currently before the House of Representatives would distract Americans or weaken our resolve to face him down," he said.

"But once more, the United States has proven that although we are never eager to use force, when we must act in America's vital interests, we will do so."

Clinton's idea of "facing Saddam down"? Fire a few cruise missiles at empty buildings, then sit back smugly at the zero friendly body count. You know, kinda exactly what he tried to do (just as ineffectually) with Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan.

His tough talk is and always was nothing more than empty words from a morally bankrupt politician. But it is nice to see just how different the democrat position on Iraq, Saddam and WMDs was before the Bush invasion.

ADL's Foxman loses the plot

2005-11-17T08:45:00.000+11:00

What the hell is the matter with this guy? Atheists are busy attempting to eliminate every last vestige of Christianity from American governmental life, and he is worried about the Christian right taking over?

What happened to the alliance? Is he trying to curry favor with liberal Jews?

ADL Breaks With Pack On Church-State
James D. Besser/Washington - Washington Correspondent

Warning that the Evangelical right has made alarming gains in social and political influence, a leading Jewish church-state watchdog is calling for a tougher and more unified Jewish response.

Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, speaking to the group’s national leadership here last week, signaled a sharp shift in ADL policy by directly attacking several prominent religious right groups and challenging their motives, which he said include nothing less than “Christianizing America.”

Among the groups he cited were the powerful Focus on the Family ministry and the Family Research Council.

Foxman said as these groups seek to use the government to further their missionizing goal, Democrats and Republicans alike are “pandering” to the religious conservatives.

The ADL leader also called for a national Jewish summit to respond to the growing challenge.

Foxman may face stiff resistance, however, from colleagues in other organizations who believe a more confrontational strategy would be a big mistake for American Jews and for Israel.

In an interview this week, Foxman said the shift in ADL’s approach on the Evangelicals was necessitated by their growing political and social clout.

“What we’re seeing is a pervasive, intensive assault on the traditional balance between religion and state in this country,” he said. “They’re trying to bring Christianity to all aspects of American life. They’re not just talking just about God and religious values but about Jesus and about Christian values.”

Of course they are. America is a majority Christian nation. They want to keep it that way.

Could you see a leader of the Evangelical movement claiming that Orthodoxy Jews have too much influence in Israel? I think not.

Foxman needs to shut the hell up before he does some real damage to a much-valued alliance.

Norwegian men are gay or stupid

2005-11-17T08:20:00.000+11:00

The headline makes more sense once you read the news excerpt:

Female rapist sentenced

The 24-year-old woman found guilty on Thursday of forcing sex on a sleeping man has been sentenced to eight months in prison by a Bergen court.

The woman was sentenced according to rape laws, for having obtained sexual access to a sleeping man. This was the appeals trial, after she had been sentenced to nine months for the same offense.

The assault took place at a post-party gathering in a Bergen apartment on Sunday, Jan. 4, 2004. The woman admitted to taking the man's erect penis in her mouth but claimed that he was awake and approved.

The man awoke and became extremely upset and has had psychological difficulties as a result of the incident. The appeals jury again found in favor of the man's version, the woman having suffered a severe loss of credibility by changing her story just before the first trial began.

While I would uphold that a woman can and should be charged with rape if the situation is contextually appropriate (a woman holds a gun to a man's head - yeah, like that happens. Not to me, dammit) this case appears to be way too ambiguous.

Think about it. You're asleep. You wake up feeling really, really groovy. You realise that the reason you're feeling so groovy is because a 24 year old Norwegian babe is orally attached to you.

Are you really going to become "extremely upset" and suffer "psychological difficulties"?

I'm sorry, but... that's crap. Men don't do that. Never. In that situation (which, as I may have mentioned, happens far, far too infrequently) we wonder about two things only.

1) Whether or not we've eaten a sufficient amount of kiwifruit lately.
2) To warn or not to warn. That is the question.

The "religion of peace" kills (yet) more innocents

2005-11-17T02:41:00.000+11:00

This is just getting fucking crazy. How many fucking posts do I have to do, day after fucking day, showing Muslims killing innocent people, chopping off schoolgirls' heads, before people get it?

This is just getting pathetic. These people are nuts. Fucked in the head nuts:

Suspected Thai Muslim insurgents attack families, killing 9

Suspected Muslim separatists stormed two houses in a southern village early Wednesday and opened fire on the families with assault rifles, killing nine people and injuring nine others, authorities said.

About 10 armed men entered the homes in the Rangae district of Narathiwat province and killed four men, one woman and four children. Nine others were admitted to the local hospital, police Lt. Jenwit Hunsiem said.

Authorities had not yet entered the area where the attack occurred because about 500 villagers had gathered and were blocking them from entering, said Narathiwat Gov. Pracha Terat.

The hospitalized victims and hospital officials notified police of the attacks, he said.

"The initial report we've heard is that there are nine people dead in the houses, but authorities cannot enter the area because they fear that the situation will become (violent) like in Tanyonglimo," Pracha told The Associated Press by telephone.

Kashmir, Thailand, The Philippines, Indonesia, Chechnya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan... How many times do Muslims have to do the same fucking thing (mass immigrate, form a population cluster, revolt) before people get it into their fucking heads that these assholes are out to conquer the planet, biting off one piece at a time?

"Small minority of extremists" strong at the polls

2005-11-17T02:36:00.000+11:00

Funny, isn't it, that liberals keep insisting that terrorists don't enjoy a broad base of "moderate" Muslim support. Yet, as was seen in the Palestinian elections, when the terrorists run for office, they don't suffer from a shortage of supporters:

Islamic group 'wins Egypt seats'

The Muslim Brotherhood says it has won at least 33 seats in the first round of national assembly elections in Egypt.

Initial results announced at some polling stations following a round of run-off voting on Tuesday indicated similar gains.

If confirmed officially, the results would more than double the seats held by the Islamic political group.

The organisation is banned in Egypt but tolerated by the authorities and fields electoral candidates as independents.

Not that it's hard to win Muslim votes, as George Galloway recently showed.

Just rant about Israel and America, weep about Muslim hardship and frustration, and decry the allied soldiers who risk their lives every day to bring democracy to Iraq. You'll be a shoe-in.

Muslim mass-murderer walks free

2005-11-17T02:23:00.000+11:00

It's a beautiful thing to be Muslim when standing before a EU "war crimes tribunal". It seems the usual positive discrimination rules apply:

BOSNIA: MUSLIM EX-ARMY CHIEF ACQUITTED OF WAR CRIMES

The Hague, 16 Nov. (AKI) - A former Bosnian Muslim army commander has been acquitted by the UN war crimes tribunal in the Hague of charges relating to the 1993 massacres of Croatian civilians.

Sefer Halilovic, 53, ex-chief of staff of the Muslim-dominated Bosnian army, is the most senior Muslim indictee to be judged by the court. The three-judge panel said prosecutors had failed to prove Halilovic had been in charge of troops who carried out the killings in the villages of Grabovica and Uzdol.

Prosecutors 'failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt' that Sefer Halilovic was responsible for the killings, said Liu Daqun, the chief judge at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY).

The judges said that vicious murders of women, children and innocent people in their beds had been committed, but that the prosecution had produced insufficient proof that Halilovic had effective control over the units that committed the crimes.

The villages were occupied during an operation by Muslim forces to capture territory held by Bosnian Croats to end a blockade of the city of Mostar in 1993.

He was the army chief of staff! How could he have not known??

Not that I have much sympathy for the Croats. If they hadn't broken away from Yugoslavia, they never would have faced maraudering bands of Muslim scum cutting a swathe through their villages.

EU spies on... itself

2005-11-17T02:16:00.000+11:00

A characteristic of every great totalitarian political system is the obsession the government has with spying more on its own citizens, than its citizens' enemies.

The EU is a big believer in this tradition:

EU setting up system of spy satellites
By David Rennie

BRUSSELS -- The European Union is building its own network of spy satellites, allowing Brussels to ensure nations and private individuals are obeying its policies.

The multibillion-dollar system, known as Global Monitoring for Environment and Security, should be up and running by 2010, a commission spokesman said Monday.

Announcing the launch of a "pilot stage" for GMES, the commission stressed its "user-friendly" application in guiding relief work after disasters or providing real-time images of forest fires or oil spills.

But a commission statement also acknowledged that GMES would play a key role in the "implementation, review and monitoring of EU policies," including watching for agriculture and fisheries fraud and boosting "internal security."

Standby for the hordes of leftist activisits who won't complain about this particular militarization of space.

What liberal media?

2005-11-17T02:09:00.000+11:00

If you attempt to make an infamously liberal public broadcaster include a greater conservative content (say, from "none" to "some") you're just a zealous, biased Nazi:

Exec's political bias cited in PBS probe

WASHINGTON (Hollywood Reporter) - In his zeal to force conservative views onto the public airwaves, the former head of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting interfered with PBS programming decisions and may have required the corporation's new president to pass "political tests," an internal investigation revealed.

Kenneth Tomlinson, a Republican, also sought to withhold funding from PBS unless the taxpayer-supported network "balanced their programming" with more conservative voices, according to the report released Tuesday by CPB inspector general Kenneth Konz.

Tomlinson was chairman of the corporation until September and resigned as a board member this month after Konz privately shared his findings with the board. CPB said it was taking action to prevent a recurrence, setting up a corporate governance committee and an executive compensation committee.

"These are bold and decisive actions to respond to important issues," CPB chairman Cheryl Halpern said. "The board is unified in its views and in its determination to take meaningful steps to maintain and strengthen public confidence in public broadcasting."

"The board is unified in its views". Yes, we know. So did Tomlinson. That's why he wanted to shake things up.

Clinton makes noises

2005-11-17T02:00:00.000+11:00

The man who accomplished precisely nothing toward the goal of ending Saddam's regime, the same man who put in place the sanctions which killed hundreds of thousands of the wrong Iraqis, the man who pulled US forces out of Somalia after a handful of casualties (caused by an operation his administration had meddled in) emboldening Osama bin Laden to proceed with the 9/11 attacks, Bill Clinton, has somehow convinced himself that he's in a position to criticise Bush over foreign policy matters:

Clinton says Iraq invasion was a big mistake

The United States made a "big mistake" when it invaded Iraq, former President Bill Clinton said Wednesday, citing the lack of planning for what would happen after dictator Saddam Hussein was overthrown.

"Saddam is gone. It's a good thing, but I don't agree with what was done, " Clinton told students at the American University of Dubai.

"It was a big mistake. The American government made several errors ... one of which is how easy it would be to get rid of Saddam and how hard it would be to unite the country."

Clinton did however say that the United States had done some good things in Iraq: the removal of Saddam, the ratification of a new constitution, and the holding of parliamentary elections.

I'm just wondering why it is that people print his opinions anymore.

Learn from Muhammad

2005-11-15T23:29:00.000+11:00

I've recently been reading up on the history of Islam for kicks and target practice. If there's one thing about history that constantly strikes me, it's the universal themes, the universal rules that apply to statesmanship and general flock-leading.

Muhammad is shaping up to be a pretty ordinary, if rather intelligent guy in the whole scheme of things. Taking the mystical "Gabriel popped in for a glass of sugary tea and a revelation last night" out of the equation and you're faced with a man who - miraculously, in a time of zealous tribal thinking - could see the bigger picture. The Arab tribes were hopelessly divided, no more than separate groups roaming the deserts, vying to be top ... err ... dog? Is that offensive to the Religion of Peace? Do I care? No. Let's get on with the story. Feel free to tear open a packet of pork rinds and wash 'em down with some beer. Peaceful protest has never felt so good, eh?

Anyhow.

The leading tribe - the Quaraish - had had some idea of uniting the tribes under some central body, so when Muhammad turned up in the city with his own personal endorsement from Allah and began to strongly suggest the merging of all tribes under one God, his views held some currency. Interestingly enough, there used to be a whole pantheon of Gods to choose from and worship, but Muhammad held to the Henry Ford model of consumer choice: "Choose any God you want as long as it's Allah."

The usual things that happen with great social upheaval followed - skirmishes, trials, tribulations, battles that Martin Scorcese will probably recreate badly in some movie sometime, migrations back, migrations forth, arguing with the Jews.

In the end, though, Muhammad proved himself to be a strong leader - spiritually AND militarily. He was focused and ruthless - both in assimilating Arabian tribes and in dealing with enemies - and in the end, he got what he wanted, a united and therefore strong Arabic 'nation', held together by religious dogma (good enough in those days).

It was a religion that battled to be born and battled to expand - because it HAD to in order to survive. This fosters a particular kind of leader and breeds a particular kind of follower, especially when followers blindly memorize and regurgitate the words of a spiritual leader that was just as handy with the military tactics as he was with fatherly guidance.

His parting words would set the scene and the tone, for the four 'rightly minded' caliphs who would be his immediate successors, and for those that followed:

"Know that every Muslim is a Muslim's brother and that all Muslims are brethren, fighting between them should be avoided, and the bloodshed in ancient days should be avenged, Muslims should fight all other men until they say, 'There is no God but Allah.'"

And the result of heeding these very telling, impassioned instructions to the heirs of his legacy?

"Abu Bakr's [first caliph] reign lasted only two years, and he was succeeded by Umar, under whom the Islamic expansion continued at an incredible pace. In 635, Damascus was taken; in 636, Antioch; in 638, Jerusalem. By 640, all of Syria was in Muslim hands; by 641, all Persia and Egypt.

Within two decades of the death of Muhammad, the rule of the House of Islam extended from North Africa to the Caucasus; and in the east, beyond Iran from the Oxus River (Amu Darya) to present-day Afghanistan.

...

The third legitimate caliph was an old man named Uthman. Under his rule, the conquests continued into Libya in the west and the Indian subcontinent in the east."

The lesson? A couple.

Firstly, Islam's most fundamental nature is to expand, to conquer and to convert because of the nature of its 'birth' as well as the personality of and goals of its very militaristic creator, Muhammad. You can talk about fundamentalist Muslims and moderate Muslims, but in the end, they're all following the same text that preaches assimilation, conversion and conquest. The danger with Islam, it seems to me, is how damned dogmatic it is. Where Christianity has moved on to the New Testament and softened the smiting somewhat, Islam is still young and raw and a little boggle-eyed crazy.

The second lesson is the most important lesson for us. For the West. It is unity that wins, it is linking arms with like-minded allies and having an external focus (like a common enemy or expanding territory*) that forges and protects societies, civilizations, ways of living. Our present chronic attack of self-loathing navel gazing isn't just tiresome, it's ultimately lethal.

So much as it is easy to look at the external threat and analyze it... or, as it sometimes feels on blogs like this, to jump up and down on the guard towers of our countries, madly ring the warning bell and point frantically at an enemy scaling the walls... all to a populace that seems willfully oblivious... tempting though that this, it's not the most important thing to do right now. My spouse reminded me of that today when I had a small fit of 'The world is falling apart-itis.' The book on Islam confirmed the thought.

The most important thing we can do right now is unite - on a grand scale we need to unite with like-minded countries in coalitions. On a smaller scale - a scale that you and I can influence - we need to unite behind our armed forces and elected officials, behind the ideas that we're fighting for. I don't know about you, but it gives me the warm and fuzzies out there in the big, bad, cold world to hear a likeminded person express their support for Bush and for our war effort. Be it at the supermarket checkout or at a casual get together, I don't hold back on my political views.

Of course, sometimes this isn't feasible - sometimes it's dangerous to express certain political views at work, for example. But a lot of the time, the worst that it will do is spark some pretty heated debate. What it definitely does is make the liberal-peacenik-Bush-hating-appeasement-monkey standing nearby think twice about delivering the 'commonly accepted wisdom' quite so smugly and assuredly.

What it might do, though, is the most magical thing of all. It might make someone else feel that they're not quite so alone in the gut feeling they have that what we're doing is right. It might make them go ahead and read up a little on things, research a little, read the paper. It might give them the confidence to make up their mind on some things, it might make them vote Republican at the next election. It might make them write to their senator or run for congress...who knows what it might do?

So flap your wings, little Butterfly of American Imperialist Political Chaos Theory and you might just create a storm.

* My, oh, my am I having an attack of the politically incorrects today. Yes, I did say 'expanding territory'. Yes, that's just like colonialization. No, there's no need to enslave people - it's just spreading the Democracy meme at gunpoint before some other meme comes to us at gunpoint, or bombpoint, or aircraft-pointed-at-skyscraper-point. I think you get my meaning.

How do you know rap culture is violent?

2005-11-15T15:26:00.000+11:00

When the press use headlines expressing surprise that, during an international rap music award ceremony, no-one was murdered:

Mariah wins at violence-free Vibe Awards

Mariah Wins Big, Mary J. Gets Emotional At Peaceful Vibe Awards

Mariah Tops Melee-Free Vibe Awards

Artists try to avoid violence at Vibe Awards

Top artists play it cool at Vibe Awards

Hip-hop stars on best behaviour at awards show

All calm on 2005 Vibe Awards front

Smooth Sailing At Vibe Awards

Vive Awards ceremony goes smoothly

Mariah Carey wins big at calm Vibe Awards

Hip-hop stars behave

Violence conspicuously absent from awards show

And my personal favorite?

Mariah Carey Wins Big, Nobody Stabbed At Vibe Awards

Assholes. What the hell do rappers have to get stressed over? They're being paid millions of dollars by gullible consumers who like the way they speak quickly. Oh, and they're occasionally accompanied by tunes written by white 80's bands, with a deafening bass added by a sound technician.

I wish there was more shooting in the rap industry. More shooting and less rapping.

While the west is banning pigs...

2005-11-15T15:18:00.000+11:00

Islamic countries are banning Christian Churches:

Christian groups in Indonesia say their right to worship freely is being hindered by conservative Muslim groups that have forced more than 30 churches to close this year. However, Muslim groups charge that Christians are violating the law by using shops and houses as places of worship.
As real estate it is not much. Wedged in beside a major highway, off a dirty little lane and behind a Muslim boarding school, it is hard to imagine that these two houses have become the focus of a dispute in the Jakarta suburb of Jatimulya.

Last month, a group of white-robed young men, wearing the peci caps of devout Muslims, arrived and blockaded the houses, which had been serving as the Jatimulya Protestant church.

A sign declares that the buildings were closed on behalf of local government, because nearby Muslim residents objected to the house being used as a place of worship. Under the law, religious groups must obtain permission from local residents before they can build a mosque or a church.

But Reverend Ana Nenoharan, the minister of the Jatimulya church, says it was not local residents, but students from a boarding school outside the suburb, who forced the church closed. She says that the closures are always done by outsiders, because her congregation knows all the Muslims in the area.

Christian groups say more than 30 churches have been forced to close in Indonesia over the past year. Most reportedly were intimidated by a group called the Anti-Apostasy Alliance. Their tactic is to accuse Christians of breaking the law by praying in unlicensed churches, and claiming that local Muslims object to the churches.

Can't have people testing their faith by dabbling in others, now can we?

But forget the Churches. If you really want to examine just how respectful Muslims are of other faiths in Islamic countries (while Muslims are busy demanding respect and tolerance from us in ours) then you only need look at what happens to a local Muslim teacher who committed the heinous sin of discussing the Christian bible and saying nice things about Jews:

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia (Reuters) -- A court sentenced a teacher to 40 months in prison and 750 lashes for "mocking religion" after he discussed the Bible and praised Jews, a Saudi newspaper reported yesterday.

Al-Madina newspaper said secondary-school teacher Mohammad al-Harbi, who will be flogged in public, was taken to court by his colleagues and students.

He was charged with promoting a "dubious ideology, mocking religion, saying the Jews were right, discussing the Gospel and preventing students from leaving class to wash for prayer," the newspaper said.

Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of Islam, strictly upholds the austere Wahhabi school of Islam and bases its constitution on the Koran and the sayings of the prophet Muhammad. Public practice of any other religion is banned.

I never want to hear another leftist lie to me about Islamic tolerance.

How to sound like a Dhimmi

2005-11-13T23:29:00.000+11:00

This article is the worst instance of "sneering west coast liberal desperately seeks Muslim approval" I've ever seen. It also provides a wonderful insight into the mind of a starry-eyed leftist who could probably name (alphabetically) all of the moonbat theories hurled at the Bush Administration over the last few years, but is strangely ignorant when it comes to the less savoury historical activities of Islam:

Revealed: Muslim traveler who rivaled Marco Polo
Susan Spano

Someday I would like to see the Empty Quarter in the Arabian Desert; the Syrian trading entrepôt Aleppo; the ancient Persian capital of Esfahan; Central Asia's Tien Shan mountains; Borobudur Temple on the island of Java; the Vale of Kashmir in the Himalayas; Mecca; all the great sights of Dar al-Islam, historically a broad swath of Eurasia and Africa that was converted and colonized by followers of Muhammad.

Someone ought to inform her that she will never see Mecca, as non-Muslims are barred from entering the city. She'd also want to avoid marrying a Muslim man, because he probably won't even permit her to continue working, let alone travelling.

Such places are relatively new entries on my must-see list, inspired by a book I just discovered, "The Adventures of Ibn Battuta: A Muslim Traveler in the 14th Century."

In it, author Ross E. Dunn, a San Diego State University history professor, tells the story of an amazing, 24-year road trip that took Battuta, a young legal scholar, from Morocco to China in the 1300s. The irony is that I found Dunn's book and started hankering to see Dar al-Islam's landmarks at an inopportune time for traveling there.

"The Adventures of Ibn Battuta" was first published in 1986 and came out this year in a new, revised edition. It spins a wild but apparently true yarn about a trip that roughly paralleled but in many ways surpassed that of Marco Polo, the Venetian merchant who took to the road a generation before Battuta. Both left books about their wanderings -- the "Book of Marco Polo" and Battuta's "The Rihla."

"Apparently true"? I suspect that the sources which Dunn relied upon weren't awesomely convincing. Considering the sketchiness of truly reliable sources from that era, and the tendencies Muslim scholars have to fantasize about Islamic historical exploits, I wouldn't be at all surprised if this was more a work of fiction than non-fiction.

Battuta's was a sort of travelogue intended for the Muslim intelligentsia and was unknown to Westerners until the 1850s, when two French priests discovered several almost-complete copies in Algeria.

Although "The Rihla" has been translated into English, it is apparently a difficult read for non- academics. So, Dunn wrote a version of the narrative, enhanced by the accounts of other medieval travelers, and his own knowledge of history and geography and travel observations.

Sounds like a lot of creative "filling in the gaps" went on, doesn't it?

Battuta set out from his birthplace of Tangier, Morocco, at the western edge of Dar al-Islam, to make the pilgrimage, or hajj, to Medina and Mecca, a sacred duty for all able believers.

The 21-year-old crossed North Africa by hooking up with trade and diplomatic caravans; stopped in Cairo, the intellectual and cultural capital of the Muslim world at the time; then detoured north to Jerusalem and Damascus.

Along the way, Battuta met scholars, state officials and holy men who gave him food, lodging, camels, clothes, slaves and the occasional purse of gold, a wayfarer's due, according to the Quran. With little trouble, Battuta made it to Mecca in about 19 months, where he performed the prescribed rites, listened to scholarly lectures, socialized and rested. And then he simply kept wandering.

He tramped across the Arabian Desert to such fabled Persian cities as Esfahan and Shiraz, both in present-day Iran, hop-scotched down the eastern coast of Africa by boat, turned north across present-day Turkey, then wandered into the steppes of Central Asia, ancestral home of the Mongols, who had conquered most of Eurasia in the century before Battuta was born.

India was next on his peripatetic itinerary, by way of the Hindu Kush and the Indus River. He made a fortune working for a sultan in New Delhi, then lost it in a shipwreck on the Malabar Coast of eastern India that left him with only his trousers.

Southwest of the subcontinent, on the Maldive Islands, Battuta hobnobbed with royalty and fomented revolution. In Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), he climbed Adam's Peak, holy to Buddhists, Hindus and Muslims. On a sailing ship, he passed through the Strait of Malacca, a lair of pirates, and reached the eastern coast of China, where he finally turned around.

On the way home, he traveled west from the Orient into the path of the Black Death, which struck the Mediterranean basin in 1348.

That doesn't make much sense. Had he really passed through the fertile crescent and Persia a decade earlier (while still heading east), he would have already passed through lands left desolate by the plague. There are records of the population in Persia being decimated by it as early as 1335. It strikes me as something akin to insane; the act of safely passing through a plague death zone, only to tempt fate by willingly returning through them a few years later.

The plague killed untold millions in the Eastern Hemisphere, but it did not get Ibn Battuta. He returned fit and ready for a last trip across the Sahara Desert to the Islamic African empire of Mali before finally settling down to the humdrum life of a provincial judge in Morocco.

It wasn't just Battuta's itinerary that fascinated me. I was amazed to find that anyone could have traveled so widely before airplanes, wheeled luggage and frequent-flier miles. Moreover, I put the book down thinking of the world differently. I reoriented geography and history.

Somehow, in between these spells of drooling, pro-Muslim sycophancy, she earns extra credit by degrading her own "ethnocentric" European education as worthless. Because, you see, western civilization really was just a "sideshow".

In her view, the "main event" was in the Dar al-Islam or the "lands of Islam". Strangely, also omitted from her article was the way Muslims then (and now) refer to all non-Muslim countries, Dar al-Harb, or "lands of war" (lands which need to be warred upon until they submit to Islam):

I had studied medieval Europe ethnocentrically but now can only conclude that during Battuta's time, it was a cultural, political and technological sideshow. In the 14th century, the main event was Dar al-Islam.

I had to ask Dunn, the author and historian, why has everyone heard of Marco Polo but not of Ibn Battuta?

"The easy answer is that education in the U.S. is centered on the study of Western civilization. Marco Polo was a European. He came to be seen as an icon of discovery, a precursor to Christopher Columbus, someone who opened up Asia to trade," Dunn said.

"Of course, that's complete nonsense. Muslims started traveling and trading in Asia as early as the beginning of Islam in the 7th century."

Which the Greeks had done more than 1,000 years before them, but let's not burst his "Muslims created the whole world" fantasy bubble.

"The Rihla" is one of the most important and extensive documents about what happened in Afro-Eurasia during the second quarter of the 14th century, according to Dunn, but for a long time, it was known only to Orientalists. "Now Ibn Battuta has begun to find his way into world history textbooks," he said.

I also wanted to know what, besides relative peace in much of the Eastern Hemisphere, kept Battuta traveling for a total of almost 30 years.

"First of all, he wanted to make the holy pilgrimage to Mecca. He traveled to study and visit living Muslim saints. He went to India explicitly to look for a job. ... On the frontiers of Islam it was easier for an Arabic speaker with some Quranic knowledge to get ahead," Dunn said. "Finally, I'd have to say he went all those places just because they were there."

The inhumane treatment of non-Muslims in those wonderfully exotic Muslim lands (dhimmitude) is completely left out of this article, as it is (no doubt) absent from Dunn's book.

The trouble with books like this is that they delude people into the belief that the "blossoming" of Islamic culture in the medieval period happened in a vacuum. That Muslim scholars developed this and that and the other, all on their own, without any assistance from the west.

While it's true that Europe was yet to enjoy the wondrous advances made possible by the Rennaissance and the Age of Enlightenment, it is an act of willful dishonesty or ignorance to overlook the massive impact made on the east by the Greeks and Romans. Without Hellenization (which took place in the aftermath of Alexander's conquest of Persia) it is extremely doubtful that the east would have left the period of cultural and technological stagnation which it had lapsed into over the course of centuries.

It was the works of Aristotle, Herodotus and numerous other Greek academics - which the Muslims discovered and translated - which enabled them to make some advances, mainly in the field of mathematics.

This was the seed of prosperity which was sown, and its source was undeniably western.

Muslims react calmly to burned Koran

2005-11-13T23:15:00.000+11:00

Yeah, right:

Muslim crowd burns 2 churches in Pakistan

LAHORE , Pakistan (AP) - A crowd of about 1,500 Muslims attacked and burned two churches in eastern Pakistan on Saturday following reports that a Christian man had desecrated Islam's holy book, the Qur'an, police said.

A school, student hostel and the home of a priest were also torched in the incident near the town of Sangla Hill, about 130 kilometres northeast of the major eastern city of Lahore, said area police official Ali Asghar Dogar.

The attacks came a day after a local Muslim resident accused Yousaf Masih, a Christian, of burning a one-room Islamic school along with copies of the Qur'an.

Naturally, Muslim religious leaders attempted to calm the small minority of extremists who went burn-happy.

Yeah, right:

Local Muslim leaders used mosque public address systems to urge Muslims to attack the churches.

That's what the media and politicians refuse to see... there are no "extremist" Muslims. There are Muslims who adhere to the violent doctrines encouraged by the Koran, and those who limit themselves to cheering the others on. The guys doing the bombing and shootings and burnings aren't "lesser" Muslims. If anything, they are seen as the heroes of Islam.

Do what we say...

2005-11-13T23:04:00.000+11:00

Or else we'll riot, and you'll be slandered in the news as racists. That's the veiled threat Muslims are now starting to use on western governments outside France, in order to get their way:

Muslim warns of community fears

A leading Welsh Muslim has warned that the detention of a Libyan man in Cardiff six weeks ago is damaging race relations in Wales.

Mohammed Javed, chair of the Cardiff Police Advisory Committee, said the case had panicked the community.

The man - one of five people detained during raids the same day in the UK - is awaiting an immigration tribunal.

The Home Office and the Department of Constitutional Affairs have refused to comment on specific cases.

Speaking on the Politics Show on BBC Wales on Sunday, Mr Javad - chair of the Cardiff Police Advisory Committee - said the seizure of the Libyan national in the wake of the July bombings had already made "quite a bit of difference" to race relations in Wales.

Mr Javed said people in Islamic communities were asking "Who is next?"

Anyone who breaks the law, presumably.

Not to worry, I'm sure that Mr Javad, as chair of the Cardiff Police Advisory Committee (only the Welsh would be sufficiently fucked in the head to appoint a Muslim agitator to the post) will see to it that no Muslim is unduly scrutinized. And if a Muslim is looked at twice by a policeman in the street, Javad will be there to remind them just how easy it would be for the faithful to start burning cars, leading the international media to the natural conclusion that white racists are being unpleasant to tanned people again.

Some good news for a change

2005-11-13T22:55:00.000+11:00

Sorry for the lack of posts, I've just been a little down of late. France is on fire, Muslims are undeniably to blame, there is no excuse, but the international media has succeeded in convincing most people that "youths" are to blame, and it's chronic unemployment and racism that are the motives. Pathetic.

Happily, there is some good news to report. A British man may be the first human being to beat HIV:

British man 'beats' HIV

A British man has allegedly become the first person in the world to beat HIV.

A number of newspapers reported that Andrew Stimpson, 25, was diagnosed with the virus in 2002. He later tested negative in 2003. (Pic: News of the World/ Mail on Sunday)

Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust, which carried out the tests, now want him to undergo more before it can be established how he apparently beat the disease. Mr Stimpson said he did not take any medication for HIV.

A spokeswoman said: "These tests were accurate and they were his, but what we don't know at the moment is why that has happened, and we want him to come back in for more tests. It is potentially a fantastic thing."

Stimpson was tested three times in August 2002 at the Victoria clinic for sexual health in central London.

The results showed he was producing HIV antibodies to fight the killer disease.

He took vitamins and other dietary supplements in the hopes that this might prevent full-blown Aids from developing.

After impressing doctors with his good health, Stimpson was offered a new test in 2003.

It came back negative, and further tests in December 2003 and March 2004 also proved negative.

He told a newspaper: "It was the last thing I expected. I was astonished. I was baffled too.

"I couldn't understand how anyone could cure themselves of HIV . . . I thought it had to be wrong because no one can recover from HIV, it just doesn't happen."

I hope he took the time to thank the Almighty. Because this is one hell of a miracle.

Slight double standard

2005-11-12T01:24:00.000+11:00

House of dumb eloquently observes the double standards liberal media outlets like the BBC adhere to when examining matters of religion:

We’re invited to a pity party for all those Islamopaths denied the chance to parade round the schoolyard in full Islamic regalia, but isn’t there a degree of humbuggery here ? Which side of the political spectrum is it that turns all Linda-Blair-in-The Exorcist when faith schools are mentioned ? Surely the French are just taking Liberalism to its logical conclusion, mmmmm ? But no, after all those years of mocking the religious – not to say the approximately 200 000 dramas in which the local Priest is bonking a parishioner – the BBC has suddenly decided that religious feelings need to be respected, after all.

In a similar vein, the BBC has been prepared to give houseroom to even the most absurd stories about George W Bush’s religious beliefs, yet when faced with people who really are pushing ideology in the guise of religion, the dogs not only don’t bark, they roll over with their legs in the air. If someone is seriously religious – even to the point of wearing religious garb in their daily life – it is surely valid to consider what the tenets of that religion are, and how they might influence their behavior. The BBC is surely double-dipping here: if these people’s religion is so important to them that not being able to wear its regalia on school grounds causes them such distress, then it’ll surely affect them in other areas of life, yet the whole tone of the latter part of the BBC report suggests that wearing a scarf is merely some harmless quirk.

I know that, when sufficiently pissed off, I have a penchant for accusing journalists of being treasonable in their apologetic treatment of Islam. Some, of course, are. But the majority aren't deliberately treasonable. If confronted by a young boy being hung for alleged homosexual acts, or a woman being stoned to death for adultery (both being regular features in the Sharia legal system), they will feel repulsed in much the same way as any conservative.

Yet their reporting in regard to Islam is undeniably slanted. Why?

The answer is alarmingly simple. Underneath all the empathic talk about isolation and frustration, they know what Muslims are really about, and they're very afraid of them. It's this pervasive timidity and caution when dealing with the Mohammedans that have led them to strenuously avoid using the word "terrorist", for instance. Anyone who believes their excuse of "not wanting to take sides", need only look at the way they cover anything to do with George W. Bush.

But that's the point. A BBC reporter can stand in the White House rose garden and ask the most powerful man in the world whatever he or she would like. They can even be overtly flippant and disrespectful, without fear of one of the Secret Service agents taking them into a dark corner.

They can't do that with an Imam walking down a street in the middle east, as I recently saw in an attempted BBC interview with the brother of Ayman al Zarqawi (no link available). Not having the excuse of being flanked by menacing Islamist bodyguards (not flanked by anyone aside from a few children obviously curious about the camera) the BBC reporter who attempted to gain an interview with the man was nonetheless an exemplar of pure obsequiousness. The BBC journalist must have had the distinct impression that this 5 foot tall, quiet man in glasses might - at any given moment - suddenly turn into a rampaging alligator. The BBC journalist even repeatedly stammered as he (in turn) asked grovellingly for a few seconds of the man's time and apologised for having the temerity to ask for it.

That is why we will not get the full story about Islam from the press. Not now, not ever.

I have only one message for all of the cowards in AFP, AP, Reuters, the BBC, et al: If you won't do the job right, bloggers will. Now get out of our way.

Vintage Steyn

2005-11-11T08:45:00.000+11:00

Mark Steyn brings out the big guns in response to the French "youth" riots (Spectator registration required):

Just for the record, I don’t think everything’s about jihad. Rather, I think everything’s about demography. It wasn’t a subject I took much interest in pre-9/11. A decade ago, for example, I tended to accept the experts’ line that Japan’s rising sun had gone into eclipse because its economy was riddled with protectionism, cronyism and inefficient special-interest groups. But so what? You could have said the same 30 years ago, when the joint was booming. The only real difference is that Japan’s population was a lot younger back then. What happened in the 1990s was what Yamada Masahiro of Tokyo’s Gakugei University calls the first ‘low birth-rate recession’. It’s not the economy, stupid. It’s the stupidity, economists — the stupidity of thinking you can buck demography.

Let’s take that evasive media characterisation of the rioters — ‘youths’ — at face value. What is the salient point about youths? They’re youthful. Very few octogenarians want to go torching Renaults every night. It’s not easy lobbing a Molotov cocktail into a police station and then hobbling back on your Zimmer frame across the street before the searing heat of the explosion melts your hip replacement. Civil disobedience is a young man’s game.

Now go back to that bland statistic you hear a lot these days: ‘about 10 per cent of France’s population is Muslim’. Give or take a million here, a million there, that’s broadly correct, as far as it goes. But the population spread isn’t even. And when it comes to those living in France aged 20 and under, about 30 per cent are said to be Muslim and in the major urban centres about 45 per cent. If it came down to street-by-street fighting, as Michel Gurfinkiel, the editor of Valeurs Actuelles, points out, ‘the combatant ratio in any ethnic war may thus be one to one’ — already, right now, in 2005. It is not necessary, incidentally, for Islam to become a statistical majority in order to function as one. At the height of its power in the 8th century, the ‘Islamic world’ stretched from Spain to India, yet its population was only minority Muslim. Nonetheless, by 2010, more elderly white Catholic ethnic frogs will have croaked and more fit healthy Muslim youths will be hitting the streets. One day they’ll even be on the beach at St Trop, and if you and your infidel whore happen to be lying there wearing nothing but two coats of Ambre Solaire when they show up, you better hope that the BBC and CNN are right about there being no religio-ethno-cultural component to their ‘grievances’.

[...]

...I’d have been happy to recycle for another decade or so the same Clinton blowjob jokes that provided me with a very easy living during the 1990s were it not for the fact that I’ve got three kids under the age of ten, and it seems to me that by the time they’re in young adulthood a lot of the places I know and love — including, believe it or not, France — will be a lot less congenial, if not lost for ever. I’m in this thing for me and mine. I am the story. And so’s Mr Doyle. And so are you. And, if you reckon you’re not, you’d better be a childless centenarian in the late stages of avian flu. Unless you act, you’re going to lose your world.

Personally, I think this is one of the best articles he's written in a long time.

Before this day...

2005-11-09T23:47:00.000+11:00

I had never visited SwordPenTrumpet.com.

I could offer a good reason why, but it would be like saying that French Muslims riot because they're frustrated. And I'm just not that convincing a liar.

Is the EU doomed?

2005-11-09T23:31:00.000+11:00

I've long thought so, and now it seems that more and more Europeans are starting to acknowledge the inevitable:

Support for EU crashes across the Continent
By Fraser Nelson

CONFIDENCE in the European Union (EU) is in freefall across almost every member state, according to the EU’s own opinion poll. The pan-European survey, prepared for the European Commission, also reveals that only one-third of Britons see benefit in continued membership, the lowest in the 25 countries polled.

Trust in the Brussels commission, the executive branch of the EU, has plunged from 52% to 46% throughout the union. In Britain, the commission is trusted by 31% and distrusted by 38%.

Fall-out from the recent French and Dutch campaigns for the EU constitution referendum has prompted a fundamental rethink across Europe about the future of Brussels, the majority of Europeans believing the European Commission’s budget should be frozen.

The cascade of negative data from the study is the most severe since records began in 1975, according to Taylor Nelson Sofres, the research firm which conducted the survey. In what it describes as the largest opinion poll in the world, the Eurobarometer project conducted face-to-face interviews with 30,000 respondents and found a sharp reversal on the steady build of goodwill towards the EU recorded in recent years.

Particular dismay with the EU was found in Britain, where a majority – 42% to 40% – believe the UK has not benefited from its 30-year membership and only 36% of those questioned considered membership “a good thing”.

Of the 25 members, only 10 countries say they have a “positive image” of the EU. Again, Britain is at the bottom of this poll, with only 28% regarding Brussels in a positive light. Ireland records the highest satisfaction, with 68%.

Yeah, you know something's running at peak efficiency when the Irish give it the thumbs up.

The end product of decades of socialism

2005-11-09T23:25:00.000+11:00

Really, I'm beyond words. You will be too. Click the link and prepare to become a hardened conservative.

A reminder - it's not just Paris

2005-11-09T14:04:00.000+11:00

According to the Brussels Journal, the European media and governments have decided to downplay what is most definitely an escalating situation. How unfortunate for them that we're not as gullible as they presume.

According to some reports the French media are downplaying the extent of the violence and lawlessness in France. This seems perfectly credible to me, since the same is happening in Brussels. This morning the Belgian state radio announced that the Brussels Fire Brigade had to intervene “some twenty times” last night to put out fires lit by vandals. A spokesman of the Fire Brigade acknowledged that ten cars and six garbage bins had been set alight. The authorities speak of “isolated incidents.” By midday the news broadcast mentioned only “five burned out cars.” According to the Fire Brigade, “they would rather not give more information so as not to give any publicity to these acts of violence.” Cars were also set alight in the towns of Dilbeek and Sint-Niklaas. In Liège “youths” threw a molotov cocktail at a bus stop and damaged a car. Today it was revealed, with a delay of three days, that two cars had been torched in Liège last Saturday.

People will eventually find out, and they'll just be more incensed when they realise details have been kept from them.

Paris, regional France, Brussels, Berlin is the list that I've heard so far - how many more have been kept out of the media?

France: Curfew FAILS

2005-11-08T21:46:00.000+11:00

If you don't declare martial law and you don't have troops on the streets armed and ready to shoot curfew violators, this is what happens:

French youths riot again
By Tom Heneghan

PARIS (Reuters) - Youths rioted across France overnight, torching more than 1,000 vehicles, despite government plans to impose curfews to quell almost two weeks of unrest.

The protests, blamed on racism and unemployment, receded in the Paris region after shots were fired at police the previous night but continued unabated in other parts of France in the early hours of Tuesday, the Interior Ministry said.

Other countries watched nervously and some issued travel warnings. Five cars were torched overnight in Brussels, in addition to five set ablaze on Sunday, in what officials say might have been copycat attacks.

The renewed violence followed a warning by Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin that he would take a firm line against lawbreakers, including reinforcements for police and curfews, not seen in France since the Algerian war of 1954-1962.

At least the then President DeGaulle might have authorized troops and police to open fire on insurrectionists.

And what is this complete nonsense in the reporter's second paragraph?

The protests, blamed on racism and unemployment, receded in the Paris region after shots were fired at police the previous night but continued unabated in other parts of France in the early hours of Tuesday, the Interior Ministry said.

I know I shouldn't expect anything from al-Reuters but unmitigated apologetics when it comes to Muslims, but really, come on.

The protests were "blamed on racism and unemployment"? By who? The press, that's who.

Again and again, this lie is being peddled, a deliberate falsehood by a dishonest, biased media. If someone has expressed the opinion (as opposed to fact) that these riots are caused by "racism" or "unemployment", then let them be identified with the quote, so that the reader might grant the opinion the degree of credibility it deserves.

But that's the thing; only the media is saying this. They are injecting their leftist opinions into what are supposed to be purely factual accounts. Oh, I'm sure that, if they wanted to, they could find some postdoctoral social science student to mutter a few appropriately apologetic remarks, but when no-one is going to challenge them to do their job properly, why bother?

The fact is, these rioters are rioting because they do not feel a part of French society. They do not feel a part of it because they choose not to be. Many do not speak French - something which may, incidentally, contribute to the high unemployment rates amongst them - and certainly the rioters themselves are not opposed to clearly stating why it is that they are burning cars, schools, churches and just about everything else (except mosques) across France:

"In the day we sleep, go see our girlfriends, and play video games. And in the evening we have a good time: we go and fight the police."

But al-Reuters doesn't want you to see it that way at all. They know the rioter's motives better than the rioters themselves:

France's conservative government has struggled to formulate a response that could halt the unrest, blamed by many youths on frustration over unemployment, harsh treatment by police and racism.

Got that? France's staunchly socialist, pro-welfare, pro-Muslim, anti-Israel, anti-Iraq war government is conservative.

Case closed.

I'm sorry, my leftist friends, but your perspective does not hold water. Your determinist viewpoint totally robs these "youths" of free will. Why aren't Poles similarly rioting in France? They aren't treated terribly well by the French, and despite many having French language and educational deficiencies, their rates of employment are high. Why? Because they work hard in the menial jobs they can acquire. They are far more worried about putting food on their family's table than gaining the "respect" of the French people through massive displays of unchecked violence.

Update: I forgot to consult moonbatical leftist rag, SFGate. The Paris riots are actually the fault of the CIA.

Why I welcome Islamic terrorists & rioters

2005-11-08T19:31:00.000+11:00

I'm serious. I'm really quite pleased that they are doing what they're doing, day after day. No, it isn't so that I will be gifted with a ready supply of daily atrocities to blog about. I'm shallow, but not that shallow.

What I'm talking about are the attacks, the murders, the bombings, the hijackings, the wild threats to wipe out entire nations, and the determined efforts to burn every last French car, school, Church and Synagogue to ashes. For all of their destructive efforts, I am really quite grateful. I'm sorry that people have to die, really, I am, but that much is unavoidable.

But why am I grateful for all the wanton destruction? The reason is surprisingly simple. Without it, the west would probably lose this war.

Islamism was doing gangbusters before 9-11. Clinton did less than nothing to impede the malignant growth of Jihadist groups throughout the middle east and central asia. Instead of oppose the greatest ideological threat the western liberal democracies still face, he aided them by militarily preventing Serbs from reconquering the Balkans for Christendom. Instead of gratitude, from the likes of Osama bin Laden, he recieved 9-11, which was concieved and planned during the Clinton presidency.

Before 9-11, Islam was the fastest growing religion in the west. I wouldn't be surprised if it still was, but certainly it would not be enjoying conversion rates such as it could previously boast. Sure, there was still the occasional bombings and killings, but they were mainly in Israel, and as the media contantly assured us, the evil little Jewish schoolchildren incinerated by proud Palestinian patriots had it coming.

Before 9-11, many soon-to-be September 12 conservatives were still convinced that America was the number one bad guy par excellence. All of their efforts went into convincing the world of this, as their unconverted former brethren still among the ranks of the moonbat left continue to do.

Before 9-11, people who criticized Islam as backward, intolerant, violent and misogynistic were swiftly smeared as "racists". We still are, but the smear carries far less stigma today than it did then.

Before 9-11, leftist immigration philosophy ("c'mon in, the door's wide open!") was unquestioned, and the longer-term implications of large numbers of immigrants from a culture directly opposed to our own settling and refusing to integrate weren't pondered.

Before 9-11, birthrates of the liberal populations of the west were as abyssmal as they are now (especially so in Europe) and Muslim birthrates were - as they are now - sky-high. Nothing has changed in that regard, except for the fact that more people are paying serious and worried attention to it.

Before 9-11, slowly but surely, Islam was out-converting and out-breeding everyone else. Had the trend continued over a sufficient number of generations (and it would, second and third generation Muslims are less integrated into the society of the west than their parents and grandparents) it would have been inevitable that sufficient Muslim voter blocks would have been assembled in all of the western democracies to slowly but surely reverse the liberal progression of western civilization. Liberals who worry about red-state religionists reversing Roe Vs Wade or introducing "Intelligent Design" into schools really would have had something to worry about.

Had all Muslims been patient, they could have fully exploited the self-loathing, self-destructive stupidity of the postmodernist left in the west, and quickly (within generations) over-run many nations without ever seeming to present an actual threat.

9-11 changed all that. For the 3,000 dead, we should mourn. But, from an objective viewpoint (if one can ever be objective about such a terrible loss of innocent human life) it was better for us and our ancestors that it happened, than not. Islam would have swept the globe, overwhelming the sneering, smug leftists who would have lived just long enough to realise that, all of a sudden, their were far fewer little kids going to school in regular clothes - and a lot more in Burkhas - than they previously remembered.

Before 9-11, liberals, through their myopic ignorance and societal selfishness, would have let the west be overrun smoothly and slowly.

Of course, 9-11 has not definitively changed that. Many leftists - people completely unwilling to admit the falsity of their beliefs and the danger which Islam poses to their own way of life continue to willfully ignore or excuse the now completely undeniable evil which Islam incites. People are naturally apathetic (an unfortunate byproduct of comfortable civilization) and many non-political citizens would probably still go along with the leftist theory of a "small minority of extremists" who are painting a false picture of what is otherwise a terribly lovely religion.

Unfortunately, they are wrong. All Muslims are united in the devout wish to see Islam dominate the world. This is not a matter for debate. It isn't a theory or a wild allegation. It's fact. The only way in which the "militant" and the "moderate" Islamist differ is how quickly and how violently it should be brought about. Before the Iranian revolution, the moderates more or less had things their way, and Islam was gradually expanding. The militants have grown up in the shadow of the Iranian Ayatollahs; men who deposed the Shah and defied the west. These are impatient Muslims. What the moderates are prepared to do slowly, they want now.

That is the single most important point that liberals must recognise. All Muslims seek the destruction of that which liberals supposedly cherish. Plurality, tolerance for religious diversity, women's rights and the progressive agenda (abortion, euthanasia, drugs, etc) in general. All of this will be wiped away. Not tinkered with, as the feared "religious right" Christians have sought to do peacefully and politically for decades, but explosively and immediately lost.

If the "impatient" Muslims have their way, and continue to violently disrupt the gradual tide of moderate Islamic expansion, my agenda will eventually triumph. Why? Because, over time, things will become so bad that every last leftist (except for the irretrievably insane ones) will have to eventually acknowledge that we conservatives were right all along.

The left and the right will unite in defense of our liberties and our way of life, and Islamism will be crush mercilessly, as all malign, murderous ideologies have been.

So please, terrorists, burn another car. Trash another school. We'll rebuild them. And with every car and school and church you burn, you'll lose another supportive voice in the west. Eventually, your fires and bombs will drown their excuse making and apologetics out all together.

When you do, may Allah have mercy on your soul. Because a united, wrathful west will come down upon you with full force, and fuck you up so badly that you'll pray for the sweet release of death.

Just to reinforce my earlier point...

2005-11-08T19:23:00.000+11:00

Charles, King of Moonbats, decides to end his tour of liberal America by visiting... wait for it...

Prince Charles, second from left, and his wife, Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, thid from left, pose for a photograph outside of Martin Luther King Middle School after touring the school's organic vegetable garden in Berkeley, Calif., Monday, Nov. 7, 2005. Charles and the duchess are on a tour of the United States. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)

Some gay theatre in San Francisco, a visit to the liberal version of down-home-folk in Marin County, and a suitably non-white school in Berkeley. Yep, sounds like the kind of place which would re-elect George W. Bush.

Let's see...

Homosexuality advocated... check.
Anti-war aside made... check.
Pro-Islamic sentiments expressed... check.
Red-state America utterly ignored... you betcha.

Thanks for stopping by, but don't come back, Charles.

"Small minority of extremists" update

2005-11-08T08:19:00.000+11:00

There was a time when I might have been surprised by this:

Poll: Palestinians trust insurgents more than their government

LONDON — A new poll has found that Palestinians trust insurgency groups more than the Palestinian Authority.

Results of the survey of 1,500 Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza showed the highest level of trust for such insurgency groups as Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad. The poll, conducted in July 2005, reported a much lower level of confidence in PA security agencies.

The survey was conducted by the Geneva-based Graduate Institute for Development Studies and the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces.

"The survey results show that after the Civil Defense, non-statutory armed groups such as the Al Aqsa and Al Qassem Brigades are the most trusted organizations amongst Palestinian security organizations in the occupied Palestinian territories," the report said.

It takes a special kind of human being to "trust" an organization which deliberately seeks to blow up busloads of children.

Map of a non-existent civil war

2005-11-08T08:09:00.000+11:00

Via the Telegraph.

Social protestors burn Christian Churches

2005-11-08T03:13:00.000+11:00

Those poor, misunderstood, unemployed, oppressed waifs have expressed their "frustration" and "sense of marginalization" with the "racist" social policies of France by burning Christian Churches, schools and daycare centers:

Arsonists burned two schools and a bus in the central city of Saint-Etienne and its suburbs, and two people were injured in the bus attack. Churches were set ablaze in northern Lens and southern Sete, he said.

In Colombes in suburban Paris, youths pelted a bus with rocks, sending a 13-month-old child to the hospital with a head injury, Hamon said, while a daycare center was burned in Saint-Maurice, another Paris suburb.

Much of the youths' anger has focused on law-and-order Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, whose reference to the troublemakers as "scum" appeared to inflame passions.

I have two words for any Europeans who have ears to listen.

To arms.

How is this not racism?

2005-11-08T03:01:00.000+11:00

Because white people don't benefit, I suppose:

Chicago plans high school for black males

CHICAGO, Nov. 6 (UPI) -- The Chicago school district plans to open an all-boys high school primarily for black teenagers.

The Urban Prep Charter Academy for Young Men must be approved by the Board of Education this month, the Chicago Tribune reported.

Can you imagine the media's reaction if this had been a proposed "white males only" school for poor whites in Alabama?

This is not a civil war... This is not a civil war...

2005-11-08T02:36:00.000+11:00

So will continue the mantra of the jihadist public relations department, otherwise known as the "western media".

It's a neat technique, denying the obvious. It works with a surprising number of people. It works because those people want to be fooled. Take the 1980 takeover of the Iranian Embassy in London. As the British SAS blew the windows, rappelled down walls and began shooting people, the police hostage negotiator kept one terrorist busy by simply repeating down the phone line that "this is not an assault... this is not an assault...". It worked, and the terrorist presumably believed him right up until the point where the nice man in the black jumpsuit shifted his vital organs away from his torso.

This form of deliberate dishonesty - designed to paralyze a subject with indecision - is being used by the media, so that their jihadi pals will continue to meet little resistance.

Only now, it is becoming rather hard to deny that what is happening in France is a civil war:

Rioting Spreads to 300 Towns in France
By ANGELA DOLAND

Rioting by French youths spread to 300 towns overnight, and a 61-year- old man hurt in the violence died of his wounds, the first fatality in 11 days of unrest that has shocked the country, police said Monday.

As urban unrest spread to neighboring Belgium and possibly Germany, the French government faced growing criticism for its inability to stop the violence, despite massive police deployment and continued calls for calm.

Meanwhile, governments worldwide urged their citizens to be careful in France.

On Sunday night, vandals burned more than 1,400 vehicles, and clashes around the country left 36 police injured, setting a new high for overnight arson and violence since rioting started last month, national police chief Michel Gaudin told a news conference.

Australia, Britain, Germany and Japan advised their citizens to exercise care in France, joining the United States, Russia and at least a half dozen other countries in warning tourists to stay away from violence-hit areas.

The victim was identified as Jean-Jacques Le Chenadec, a retired auto industry worker who died after being beaten by an attacker. He was trying to extinguish a trash can fire Friday at his housing project in the northeastern suburb of Stains when an attacker caught him by surprise and beat him into a coma, police said.

Apparent copycat attacks spread outside France for the first time, with five cars torched outside Brussels' main train station, police in the Belgian capital said.

France is looking more like Iraq by the day, and the violence is trickling over into Germany and the Low Countries. Appeasing the Muslims, refusing to go into Iraq and continually condemning Israel has really worked out well for them, hasn't it?

What will their reaction be to this, I wonder. More "crisis meetings"?

The way I see it, their options are now drastically limited. If they wish to restore any semblance of law and order, they must:

1) Declare Martial Law.
2) Mobilise what armed forces they have, and hope that they will fight on their side.
3) Anyone found violating curfew is to be shot on sight. No exceptions.

Either they do this, or they completely surrender national integrity. The Balkanization of Western Europe will begin.

No wonder they won't use the army

2005-11-08T00:55:00.000+11:00

Stunningly, 15% of the French armed forces are Muslim, and their fellow (non-Muslim) soldiers don't trust them:

France has been detecting, or at least fearing, loyalty problems among the fifteen percent of its soldiers who are Moslem. The military insists that these second and third generation soldiers of, for the most part, Arab descent, are loyal. But many Christian soldiers, NCOs and officers are not so sure.

There's the future nucleus of the Al Qaeda-in-France insurgency right there. Trained and equipped by France itself.

Intifada Watch

2005-11-08T00:44:00.000+11:00

There are times when I'm angry at the lack of international recrimination and response to Paris' current riots. There are times when I'm shocked. There are also times when I think that it might just finally be time to purchase a bunker, install cable, haul down some water, freeze dried food and lots of ammunition and give in to the fact that the West is fiddling while Europe is burning, not realising that we're next on the hit list.

France sees worst night of violence yet

BY ANGELA DOLAND ASSOCIATED PRESS

PARIS-- France's national police chief Monday said overnight riots sent a "shock wave" across France, as youths injured three dozen officers and burned more than 1,400 vehicles in the worst night of violence since the unrest began.

Apparent copycat attacks spread to other European cities for the first time, with five cars torched outside Brussels' main train station, police in the Belgian capital said.

So it's worse - much worse - overnight, despite Chirac's heroic effort to blow out the flames with long-winded speeches.

The violence is escalating dramatically, the numbers speak for themselves.

Clashes around France left 36 police injured, and vandals burned 1,408 vehicles overnight Sunday-Monday, setting a new high for overnight arson and violence since the rioting started Oct. 27,
...

Attacks overnight were reported in 274 towns, and police made 395 arrests,

...

Among the injured police, 10 were injured by youths firing fine-grain birdshot in a late night clash in the southern Paris suburb of Grigny, national police spokesman Patrick Hamon said. Two were hospitalized but their lives were not in danger. One was wounded in the neck, the other in the legs.

...

There have been 4,700 cars burned in France since the rioting began, and 1,200 suspects have been detained at least temporarily.

...

Arsonists burned two schools and a bus in the central city of Saint-Etienne and its suburbs, and two people were injured in the bus attack. Churches were set ablaze in northern Lens and southern Sete, he said.

In Colombes in suburban Paris, youths pelted rocks at a bus, sending a 13-month-old child to the hospital with a head injury

The French government has a duty to it's citizens to restore order immediately - the fact that order hasn't been restored already should be a matter of national shame.

It's obvious that increased police presence isn't helping to quell the violence, the only result so far has been many more injured police officers - so what's the solution?

One faction seems to be asking France to go down the appeasement route - ask the rioters what they want, give it to them and they'll immediately transform into good, law-abiding citizens. This is an exceptionally short-sighted point of view, as the English found out around 1000AD...Vikings would regularly raid the little island and only leave once handsome ransoms were paid. Between 991 and 1018 AD, 200,000 pounds of silver were paid to the Vikings in 'tribute'. You see, once someone learns that all they have to do is rattle the cage a little to get what they want, they will rattle the cage every time they want something.

If France gives in to these criminals, she will have to keep giving in every single time they threaten violence. Since the rioters have been identified as Muslims and since France has a Muslim population of 5 million - we can probably assume that there are a lot of cage-rattlers in situ with an agenda to change the country into one where they will feel more 'integrated' and 'accepted'. For an inflexible culture, comfort can only be found in tailoring surroundings to rigidly held belief systems. Et voila! Would you like a headscarf with your French visa? No? I'm afraid it might not be an option soon - France won't be able to afford offending the cage rattlers.

The alternative is simple - a very, very firm 'Non!' - the kind that France had the gall to give to the EU constitution. This 'Non!' should be in the form of military persence in affected areas, immediate and harsh action against each outburst of violence and the floor given over to politicians such as Sarkozy who know how to identify scum when they see it. Eventually, it would be nice for France to exhibit the national pride and arrogance that is so well known for and start saying 'Non!' to the very un-French mores of it's Muslim and north African population.

I can dream, can't I?

Damned if (Bush) does

2005-11-07T23:42:00.000+11:00

Betrayed

2005-11-07T08:34:00.000+11:00

There was a time when the British army stood behind its soldiers accused of a crime, right up until the point where they were found guilty in a court of law.

Those times have long passed:

Cleared Para 'betrayed' by Army

A paratrooper cleared of murdering an Iraqi civilian has said he feels betrayed by the Army.

Corporal Scott Evans, 32, from Birmingham told the Daily Mail he had been "hung out to dry" by his regiment.

He was one of seven UK soldiers cleared of killing Nadhem Abdullah at a court martial on Thursday.

Cpl Evans, a father-of-two, has now handed in his notice and is to move back home. The Ministry of Defence said he was entitled to his views.

His views are the only thing they think him entitled to. They didn't even support the soldier's family while he awaited the trial. Pathetic.

Moral equivalence

2005-11-07T00:43:00.000+11:00

Is a demented philosophy leftards use in order to avoid being classified as clinically insane. Wikipedia put it more carefully, defining the perspective as being:

"...used in political debate, usually to negatively characterize the humanist claim that 'there can be no moral or ethical hierarchy decided between two sides in a conflict, nor in the actions or tactics of the two sides.' The term has some limited currency in polemic debates about the Cold War, and more currently, the Israel-Palestine conflict. "Moral equivalence" arose as a polemic term-of-retort to "moral relativism," which had been gaining use as an indictment against political foreign policy that appeared to use only a situation-based application of widely-held ethical standards."

Leftists require moral equivalence, because without it, practically all of their arguments would fall to pieces. Once a person sees beyond the veil of moral equivalence, they begin to make value judgements, something which leftards strenuously warn against.

Take me. I'm an evil, oppressive conservative. I often say things that cause leftards to fall upon the ground, wailing and leaking blood from their ears.

One of the upsetting things that I like to say is that western civilization is superior to Islamic civilization. I say this because the west is tolerant, multicultural and pluralistic. The Islamic world is directly opposed to all of those things. In the west, a person whose religion is oppressed can sue the person doing the oppressing. In an Islamic nation, a person caught possessing a Christian bible is relocated to the local jail. In the west, a woman can wear what she wants, work where she wants, and date who she pleases. In an Islamic nation, she cannot leave the house without the permission of her guardian, drive a car anywhere, or speak to the wrong man, lest she be killed for bringing dishonor upon herself and her family. In the western world, people are actively engaged in the pursuit of happiness. In the Islamic world, people aren't allowed to dance.

I could go on, and through this blog, I intend to. But let's reduce the argument in scope. Let's look at basics. I think we can all agree that a culture is well judged by how it treats its children. In Nazi Germany, the young were bred like killer robots to go murder for the Fuhrer. In the USSR, children were programmed to hate the west. In the Islamic world, children are instilled with both of these doctrines:

Suicide bombers on Iran kids' TV
By Toby Harnden, Chief Foreign Correspondent

Iranian state television has broadcast a cartoon that glorifies suicide bombings against Israelis, depicting a young boy blowing himself up after being told: "Go and show the Zionists how brave and heroic are the children of Palestine."

The cartoon, one of a series shown by the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting on "Jerusalem Day" nine days ago, presents the actions of a boy who kills himself to strike back against Israelis as a noble example for children to follow.

The cartoon follows the story of Abd who dies in a suicide attack
More professionally produced and graphic than previous Iranian propaganda aimed at children, the cartoon appears to be part of a campaign led by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to elevate the issue of the destruction of Israel. The day before the cartoon was shown, he declared at a World Without Zionism conference: "This stain of disgrace [Israel] will be wiped off the face of the world - and this is attainable."

In the west, children are busy watching Blue's Clues.

Don't listen to leftists. Our culture and that of the Islamists is not the same. They are not equally worthy, just or decent.

Our way of life must survive and flourish. Theirs must be wiped out as ruthlessly as we wiped out the Nazis and Soviets.

Jihad in Oz

2005-11-06T23:58:00.000+11:00

Jihad has become more of a multinational organisation than an obscure religious call to arms these days. It has even found a foothold in Australia.

Muslim call to arms

By MATTHEW SCHULZ

AN inflammatory pamphlet urging Muslims to oppose Western governments was handed out at an important Islamic festival in Melbourne yesterday.

The flyer, distributed at a family carnival to mark the end of the holy month of Ramadan in Preston, bore the name of the fundamentalist group Hizb ut-Tahrir – which is banned in Britain and Germany.

...

The pamphlet said: "The Muslims have awoken to the true ugly face of western colonialism, and realise with full perception that the west is responsible for flooding their countries with blood, poverty, corruption and turmoil, after it divided its lands, impoverished its peoples and dishonoured its noble sons and daughters".

Western civilisation is the only civilisation the Middle East has seen for eons. We didn't take anything away from the sand burrowing savages so much as provide a stark and frightening contrast to their third-world way of life.

The pamphlet claimed the west had, through draconian legislation, given Muslims three options: face deportation; adopt and embrace western values by abandoning Islam; or face persecution and humiliation.

No, no, no. That's what the West should be doing. What we're actually doing is giving Muslims the option to run roughshod over our cultures, laws and - in France - over our property, life and liberty.

"Fear none but Allah. Pledge your obedience to Him and to the work that gives victory to His Deen. Ally yourselves with those who work day and night to confront this war against Islam," the pamphlet says, in what was virtually a call to arms.

Virtually? A few centuries ago, those would be called Fighting Words and there would be a hell of a lot of smiting going on about now.

It's not so hard to understand - a large swathe of the Muslim community aren't comfortable with our way of life. The more radical followers of Mohammed want to convert us to their way of life or kill us. Those that don't openly, consciously subscribe to that point of view are still certainly well groomed to be good little Soldiers of Islam when the time comes. It really doesn't take a great mind to connect the dots. It helps to remember this when you read any press or hear of any events to do with Muslims anywhere in the world.

Above the law

2005-11-06T23:05:00.000+11:00

It seems that, as a woman, you are afforded degrees of protection under the law in Australia - depending on your nationality and cultural group. If your husband regularly beats you and you happen to be a Muslim, the police should now be 'sensitive to your culture' in their response to the crime.

Police told to respect traditions
Liam Houlihan, religious affairs reporter

POLICE are being advised to treat Muslim domestic violence cases differently out of respect for Islamic traditions and habits.

...

They are told it would be appreciated in cases of domestic violence if police consult the local Muslim religious leader who will work against "fragmenting the family unit".

Islamic Women's Welfare Council head Joumanah El Matrah called the guidelines appalling and dangerous.

"The implication is one needs to be more tolerant of violence against Muslim women but they should be entitled to the same protection," Ms El Matrah said.

I'd say that fragmenting the family unit is exactly what you need to do when one member of the family unit is beating another.

Get Out Of Jail Free cards are being distributed to a wide swathe of the community:

The instructions come in a religious diversity handbook given to Victorian police officers that also recommends special treatment for suspects of Aboriginal, Hindu and Buddhist background.

...

The guide also advises officers not to hold interviews with Aboriginal suspects or set court hearings during Aboriginal ceremonies involving "initiation, birth, death, burials, mourning periods, women's meetings and cultural ceremonies in general".

They are told to interview Baha'i suspects only after sunset in the fasting month.
And they are cautioned that when a Sikh is reading the Sikh Holy Script -- a process that normally takes 50 hours -- "he should not be disturbed".

The 50,000 handbooks instruct police to take shoes off before entering Buddhist and Hindu houses and mosques, and remove hats before entering or searching churches.

They are warned that taking photos or samples from Aboriginal suspects could raise fears they could be used for sorcery and spiritual mischief.

I'd wager that there is a large section of Australian society, members of the mainstream culture, that are particularly offended when police officers are instructed to bend the laws of the land to accommodate unintegrated immigrants.

I'd also wager that the author of the handbook didn't give a thought to the impact of this new code of behavior on the victims of crime. If you've just been assaulted by a member of your family, you want the police officer to be sensitive to you, not to the sonofabitch that perpetrated the crime.

Living in or visiting a country means that you give yourself up to their laws. Most countries understand this - if you'd like to try some particularly harsh ones out, try to smuggle a little heroin into Singapore. Law will only be respected where it is clear, fair and universally applied.

Star Wars III - They Forgot the Plot

2005-11-06T22:42:00.000+11:00

Hideous. Pretty, but hideous.

When you're an hour into a movie and you're still not really sure what it is you're supposed to be wanting to happen (other than, perhaps, the premature and painful death of pretty and completely devoid of acting talent Pantene-posterboy Anakin Skywalker), you know you're in trouble.

Let me save you a few hours of your life and give you a very brief synopsis:

* Action sequence. Inexplicable - who the hell is shooting at whom and why?
* Meet Anakin and Obi Wan. Immediately wish you hadn't.
* Another action sequence, just as inexplicable. This time, though, Anakin and Obi Wan perform magical feats of athleticism, endurance and sheer wankery for your amusement.
* Anakin and Obi Wan win and exchange cliches. You are by now thankful that there are no heavy objects within reach to hurl at the TV.
* You watch in wonderment as Pantene boy Anakin actor fails to...act. You loudly begin to contemplate the physical acts that must have taken place during his audition.
* The pizza arrives. You are thankful for the distraction.
* Things happen. Things explode. Cliches are hurled with the deadly accuracy of shuriken.
* It's so bad that Natalie Portman actually comes over as a convincing actress. You sniff the pizza, wondering if all the ingredients were fresh.
* More fighting. You usually don't mind this, but it would be kinda nice if something wove it together. A plot would do the trick.
* Lots of people die. You're thinking about dessert by this stage, so it doesn't really kick you in the gut.
* Anakin gets stuffed into the Vader suit and suddenly becomes more menacing. You remember the last three Star Wars films, the ones you watched as a kid and loved. You wonder what happened.
* The movie ends and so does any respect you ever had for George Lucas.

There - think I could get a job as a reviewer? :)

The media is the enemy

2005-11-06T18:54:00.000+11:00

Back when the Northern Ireland conflict was still raging openly, terrorists would occasionally do something which worked against them politically. Afterward, their political wings, charged with public relations, would scramble to either downplay or apologise for the excess.

Muslim terrorists are Muslim - a sacred minority adored by liberals. Therefore, they do not need a PR capability. That is what the traitorous western press is for. To excuse their atrocities, to scapegoat their enemies, and apologise for Muslim cultural backwardness:

Newsweek:

"Years of racism and neglect explode in a week of riots across France's mostly Muslim immigrant ghettos." [Article sub-heading]

LA Times:

"But that incident now seems little more than a trigger for an explosion of anger and alienation that has accumulated for years in France's poor, predominantly Muslim neighborhoods." [Article excerpt]

Al-Reuters:

"The violence has been seen as the expression of pent-up anger by youths, many Muslims of North African and black African origin, at police treatment, racism, unemployment and their marginal place in French society." [Article excerpt]

CTV Canada:

"France is facing long-simmering anger in its suburbs, where many Africans, Arabs and their French-born children live on society's margins. Unemployment, poor housing, racial discrimination and crime are daily struggles for people living in these neighbourhoods."

Washington Post:

"Rage of French Youth Is a Fight for Recognition

Spreading Rampage in Country's Slums Is Rooted in Alienation and Abiding Government Neglect.

"It's not a political revolution or a Muslim revolution," said Rezzoug. "There's a lot of rage. Through this burning, they're saying, 'I exist, I'm here.' "" [Article heading + article sub-heading + article excerpt]

The Observer:

"The spread of riots from Clichy-sous-Bois to other housing estates of the Ile de France and several provincial towns has opened a window into the disaffection of France's poor and multi-ethnic areas. It only took a spark for a conflagration to rip through these deprived suburban estates.

Confrontations with the police and burning cars recall smaller urban riots over 25 years. But it is important not to confuse actions by youths from poor, largely immigrant neighbourhoods with ordinary delinquency. These riots show evidence of social protest." [Article excerpt]

The Guardian:

"Since then riots have swelled into a broader challenge against the French state and its security forces. The violence has exposed deep discontent in neighborhoods where African and Muslim immigrants and their French-born children are trapped by poverty, unemployment, racial discrimination, crime, poor education and housing."

I could go on, but I think it best to close by showing exactly how it is that these journalists are choosing to demonize anyone who isn't Muslim. Even those Muslim apologists who were their staunch allies during their campaign to prevent the Iraq war:

New York Times

The violence has isolated the country's tough-talking, anticrime interior minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, whom some people blame for having worsened the situation with his blunt statements about "cleaning out" the "thugs" from those neighborhoods.

What the media has uniformly ignored is that Mr Sarkozy made the remarks after a young boy was murdered, a father was beaten to death while his family looked on, and an elderly handicapped woman was covered in gasoline and set on fire. I find it difficult to believe that anyone could disagree with his conclusions.

I think that most of us (on the left & right of politics) believe that France and other Eurosocialist nations have gone further than any other to try to hurl acceptance, understanding, tolerance and money at its immigrant population.

In the past, I (foolishly) believed that as soon as these kinds of large-scale Muslim attacks started outside of the US, and inside nations not normally associated with "western oppression" the press would be forced to finally acknowledge that the problem lies with Muslim populations who do not see themselves as "French" (or American, etc) but as Muslims. As I have said time and again, their modus operandi is clearly established. Mass-immigrate to a chosen non-Muslim area. Cluster together and fiercely resist integration. Begin to politically agitate for limited forms of seperation within the national framework (seperate Sharia courts, for instance). If this agitation fails, move on to the stage of violent Jihad. To France's eternal shame, there are those within their government who are even now considering giving over some of France's sovereign territory to appease their insurrectionist citizens.

Liberal media doesn't want you to know about any of this. It wants you to focus your blame, your resentment, on the people who have not given the Muslims precisely what it is that they want. Their logic is that these Muslims would live peacefully, productively and harmonously, if only they got what they wanted.

I stupidly believed that these paragons of journalistic bias would have to acknowledge that Muslim aggression is at the heart of the worldwide conflict, and not socio-historical inequality or grievance.

But now I know they won't. As Jihadist groups start these attacks in Norway and continue their attacks in Sweden, the press will blame the "racist" Scandinavian governments (which are acknowledged the world over as the most pro-immigrant, lefty-huggy-touchy-feely). As groups burn schools, cars and people in Canada, the "oppressive" Canadian government will be smeared as intolerant and uncaring. And so it will continue.

There is no denying it any more. The media is the enemy.

I hope they are ready to reap what they've sown.

The shape of things to come

2005-11-06T18:47:00.000+11:00

Al-Reuters explains why

2005-11-06T17:25:00.000+11:00

Nobody understands the motivations of car and pensioner-burning Muslim rioters like al-Reuters:

The violence has been seen as the expression of pent-up anger by youths, many Muslims of North African and black African origin, at police treatment, racism, unemployment and their marginal place in French society.

Yes, this is France they are talking about, not the American south in the mid-60s. France, the country which has done more to bend over backwards for its minority population. France, who has financed the slums the Muslim immigrants have infested, doing nothing but take government hand outs, then rioting when their situation doesn't change.

If the response of the French government to this is to move even further to the left, we will witness the complete collapse of law and order in France within 12 months.

And that al-Reuters will blame on European racism too. Right up until the moment that the Muslim horde arrives outside their offices.

Moonbat king visits leftard heartland

2005-11-06T11:12:00.000+11:00

Charles "don't be so hard on those lovely Moslems" Windsor of the British royal family is allegedly making a state visit to the United States. The visit is supposed to be seen (I gather) as a diverse exposure to the American people.

But so far as I can tell, the "American people" Charles is interested in spending time with are those west/east coast dwellers who share his love of plant conversation and man-love:

Charles, Camilla Visit Calif. Organic Farm

By JILL LAWLESS

SAN FRANCISCO - Prince Charles and his wife, Camilla, took their royal tour of the United States to northern California on Saturday, examining local produce at a market and lunching with locals at an organic farm near San Francisco.

The prince and Duchess of Cornwall will spend more than three days in the region, as the trip shifts from the power centers of New York and Washington to more rural areas, and issues close to the prince's heart — organic agriculture and sustainable food production.

Following a stop at the farmer's market in the Marin County town of Point Reyes, the couple will visit Bolinas, a small coastal community about 30 miles north of San Francisco, where they planned to lunch at Star Route Farms run by organic pioneer Warren Weber.

They also planned to visit a Berkeley school organic garden sponsored by chef Alice Waters.

The prince is a firm supporter of environmental causes and runs an organic farm on his Highgrove estate in England. He also has a multimillion-dollar line of organic foods, Duchy Originals, whose profits go to charity.

"We're excited because it takes our message into the world," said Helge Hellberg, executive director of the farming association Marin Organic. "It's not just royalty or a celebrity coming, it's somebody who stands for what we are doing."

In a recent interview, the prince urged support for small-scale farmers, saying he feared agribusiness would end up "completely industrializing the landscape."

Who the fuck is he trying to fool? Marin County is supposed to be representative of the "rural areas" of the United States???

For those who don't know, Marin County is the wealthiest county in the wealthiest state in the entire United States. It is the hot-tub liberal capital of the Moonbat empire. They aren't farmers. They're uber-wealthy retirees and their layabout flower children who got tired of being carjacked in LA and SF. You can afford to buy some of their superhappyfun organic produce only if you cruise into town in a diamond-studded pick up.

Something tells me that his highness isn't going to be spending much time in the midwestern flyover states, chatting with the farmers there who vote for Bush, drive SUVs and actually constitute the agricultural backbone of the country.

Not when he can go to some really arousing gay theatre in San Francisco!

Charles meets the queens of San Francisco

John Harlow, San Francisco

THE Prince of Wales is readying himself to meet his mother, or at least a more flamboyant stage version of Queen Elizabeth II, when he and the Duchess of Cornwall attend the campest show in San Francisco tonight as their eight-day tour of America enters a more relaxed phase.

Beach Blanket Babylon, a spoof musical, has been parodying celebrities from Richard Nixon, the late president, to Paris Hilton since the show was first performed more than 30 years ago at the Club Fugazi in a gay district by Steve Silver, a homosexual activist.

Tonight’s performance will be tweaked for the royal visitors. “The Queen of England will be in there and there will be a few more special bits, but we are not allowed to talk about those. We are all very excited,” said Charles Zukow, a spokesman for the show.

The musical — whose trademark outrageous headgear may meet approval from the duchess — marks the end of the more formal half of the first American tour by the royal couple. The visit has been characterised by two meals with President George W Bush at the White House and a brief visit late on Friday to New Orleans to meet a few of the hundreds of thousands of victims of Hurricane Katrina.

Yes, he just had to go to New Orleans, didn't he? That alone reveals the political slant of this visit. New Orleans wasn't the worst hit by Katrina (by a long shot) nor was it the last to recieve federal assistance. Both of those accolades go to Mississippi; the citizens of which state not seeing the need to shoot at police and rescue workers, or loot the hell out of the local retail establishments.

Hail Charles, King of Moonbats, and cheers for his successful tour of the "real" United States, the majority of which was spent with his Moonbat subjects, with a cursory visit to their evil oppressor Bush (but only so that he might be lectured on being nicer to Islam).

The need to know

2005-11-06T00:25:00.000+11:00

We - private citizens - don't really need to know absolutely everything our government does in battling an enemy. We especially don't need to know what our intelligence services are up to because - and here's a bit of a lightning bolt for the idiot journalists out there - if WE find things out from CNN, so does Mohammed.

Does the CIA have interrogation rooms in Eastern Europe and around the world?

Europe Looking Into Report of C.I.A. Jails

By JUDY DEMPSEY and JAMES KANTER

BERLIN, Nov. 3 - The European Union said Thursday that it would "seek more information" on allegations that a member country and a would-be member might have been sites of secret American jails for suspected members of Al Qaeda. The European Commission, the organization's executive arm, stopped short of starting a formal investigation.

The Washington Post reported Wednesday that the C.I.A. had been holding its "most important Al Qaeda captives at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe." The report, attributed to American and foreign officials familiar with the arrangement, did not name the countries.

Human Rights Watch, however, said it had information indicating Romania, scheduled to join the union in 2007, and Poland, which joined last year, had sites for secret prisons.

Do they? Well, I damned well hope so - what the hell are my tax dollars going to if not an effective government with an effective internal and external intelligence wing.

We're at war, people. A very, very quiet, piecemeal international conflict. Those 'others' that are portrayed so sympathetically in the media as disenfranchised, victimised martyrs or 'freedom fighters'? They're the enemy.

They won't hesitate in killing you, torturing, raping or murdering any of your family or anyone you care about. They hate you. They want you to either acquiesce to their way of life or to die. It really is that simple.

One of the ways to avoid becoming an ex-civilisation is to fight back. One of the elements of fighting back is intelligence. One of the ways of gathering intelligence is capturing people who are collaborators with, organisers within or sympathisers of the enemy and extracting information from them. Sometimes people are stubborn and idealistic and don't want to tell you what you want to know if you just offer them a warm cup of cocoa, a cookie and a willing ear. You might have to be a little bit more persuasive.

I'd wager that a dank, concrete-bunker-like ex-Soviet prison really sets the mood for the kind of 'conversations' that need to take place to extract information. And if the CIA extracts the information necessary to prevent another 9/11, 7/7, Bali bombing or other attack? Bonuses all 'round.

The EU and the UN should get back to doing what they do best - marathon sessions of navel gazing and occasionally ruining other's lives. Leave the sophisticated adult politics to the sophisticated adults who have the guts to do what's needed to win.

France is burning

2005-11-06T00:02:00.000+11:00

The Paris riots just went national:

Rioting Spreads From Paris Across France
By JAMEY KEATEN

AUBERVILLIERS, France (AP) - Widespread riots across impoverished areas of France took a malevolent turn in a ninth night of violence, as youths torched an ambulance and stoned medical workers coming to the aid of a sick person. Authorities arrested more than 200 people, an unprecedented sweep since the beginning of the unrest.

Bands of youths also burned a nursery school, warehouses and more than 750 cars overnight as the violence that spread from the restive Paris suburbs to towns around France. The U.S. warned Americans against taking trains to the airport through the affected areas.

At the nursery school in Acheres, west of Paris, part of the roof was caved in, childrens' photos stuck to blackened walls, and melted plastic toys littered the floor.

The town had been previously untouched by the violence. Some residents demanded that the army be deployed, or that citizens rise up and form militias. At the school gate, the mayor tried to calm tempers.

``We are not going to start militias,'' Mayor Alain Outreman said. ``You would have to be everywhere.''

Fires and other incidents were reported in the northern city of Lille, in Toulouse, in the southwest, Rouen, in the west and elsewhere on the second night of unrest in areas beyond metropolitan Paris. An incendiary device was tossed at the wall of a synagogue in Pierrefitte, northwest of Paris, where electricity went out after a burning car damaged an electrical pole.

This is now a completely undeniable escalation. Those who would close their eyes out of fear of "overreaction" should hang their heads in shame.

Either France deploys their army, or the Republic is going to see an ocean of blood sweep across the Gallic countryside. It's that simple.

I'm tired of being right

2005-11-05T13:16:00.000+11:00

A while ago, I wrote a short piece on the modus operandi used by Muslims to effect a "gradual conquest" of a traditionally non-Muslim area. I also predicted that this would happen in France.

Guess what the Paris rioters are now demanding:

Some are even calling for the areas where Muslims form a majority of the population to be reorganized on the basis of the "millet" system of the Ottoman Empire: Each religious community (millet) would enjoy the right to organize its social, cultural and educational life in accordance with its religious beliefs.

In parts of France, a de facto millet system is already in place. In these areas, all women are obliged to wear the standardized Islamist "hijab" while most men grow their beards to the length prescribed by the sheiks.

The radicals have managed to chase away French shopkeepers selling alcohol and pork products, forced "places of sin," such as dancing halls, cinemas and theaters, to close down, and seized control of much of the local administration.

A reporter who spent last weekend in Clichy and its neighboring towns of Bondy, Aulnay-sous-Bois and Bobigny heard a single overarching message: The French authorities should keep out.

"All we demand is to be left alone," said Mouloud Dahmani, one of the local "emirs" engaged in negotiations to persuade the French to withdraw the police and allow a committee of sheiks, mostly from the Muslim Brotherhood, to negotiate an end to the hostilities.

President Jacques Chirac and Premier de Villepin are especially sore because they had believed that their opposition to the toppling of Saddam Hussein in 2003 would give France a heroic image in the Muslim community.

[...]

So what is the solution? One solution, offered by Gilles Kepel, an adviser to Chirac on Islamic affairs, is the creation of "a new Andalusia" in which Christians and Muslims would live side by side and cooperate to create a new cultural synthesis.

The problem with Kepel's vision, however, is that it does not address the important issue of political power. Who will rule this new Andalusia: Muslims or the largely secularist Frenchmen?

This could not be more blindingly obvious. If anyone continues to fail to see that the real aim of Muslims - "moderate" and "extremist" alike, is total Islamic world domination, then they deserve to be conquered.

Those poor unemployed Muslim immigrants

2005-11-05T13:09:00.000+11:00

Are expressing their "frustration" by setting disabled French women on fire:

Small, mobile groups of youths hit Paris' riot-shaken suburbs with waves of arson attacks, torching hundreds of cars, as unrest entered its second week Friday and spread to other towns in France.

A woman on crutches was doused in flammable liquid and set on fire earlier this week as she tried to get off a bus in a Paris suburb, a judicial official said Friday. She suffered severe burns.

In the eastern city of Dijon, teens apparently angered by a police crackdown on drug trafficking in their neighborhood set fire to five cars, said Paul Ronciere, the region's top government official.

Another 11 cars were burned at a housing project in Salon-de-Provence, near the southern city of Marseille, police said.

Overnight in the Paris region, at least 520 cars were set ablaze, up from previous nights, the Interior Ministry said. It said five police were slightly injured by thrown stones or bottles.

Keep it up, Muslims. I fucking beg you. A few more weeks of this and we'll no longer have any leftists complaining when we put your worthless asses in concentration camps.

Muslim rioting in Denmark

2005-11-04T10:11:00.000+11:00

I'm sure it's just an amazing coincidence:

For several nights in a row, there has been the worst riots in Århus for many years.

"This land belongs to us", declared the young rioters. Another arson attack took place sunday night.

Sunday evening the fire department needed police escorts to get in and extinguish an arsonist fire in Søndervangs Alle.

The words of the young muslims sound like an open declaration of war against Danish society. The police must stay away. This area belongs to immigrants.

Four youngsters sit at the wall in the Rosenhøj center, sunday afternoon, self decleared spokesmen, for those groups who three nights in a row has rioted, and put business on fire.

All around the parking lot, there are swarms of cars with youngster from the immigrant community, who are celebrating the worst riots in Århus in several years.

What's their excuse for rioting? Well, sadly, none of their young pals died while fleeing the police recently, so they can't point to that. But why bother with excuses? You only have to go to the trouble of remembering them so that they can be regurgitated flawless for all the journalistic flunkies who hang empathically on your every word.

Much better to just use buzzwords like "oppression", which they best respond to:

"We are tired of being oppressed. We are tired of the police raiding our parents. We are tired of the police stopping our cars, and raids us in public and damages our honour."

"We are tired of the police beating up our friends, like they did this afternoon", screams the young man with his face covered.

Naturally, the name of the pal is not forthcoming, nor are the circumstances surrounding the beating that almost certainly did not happen.

That's not the only reason they're rioting. Oh no, those damned Europeans have oppressed their beloved Prophet by drawing some cartoons in a local newspaper:

"We are angy to what has happened to our prophet. We are tired of the Jyllands Post (Danish paper who published cartoons of Mohammed). I know that it wasn't you, but we are not going to take this, what the Jyllands Post has done towards the prophet", he states aggressively, and the others nod in agreement.

How dare those infidels draw (what seem to be completely inoffensive) pictures of the Prophet? Don't they know their place yet?

The rioting will remind them. That was the plan, after all. This wasn't a spontaneous eruption of "frustration" you see. It was a carefully planned and executed series of insurrections:

Two of them are Turks, and it is the first time that Turks and Palestinians have joined forces, according to the spokesman.

"We have planned this for three weeks. That's why only two were arrested on Saturday. Police tried to block us in, but we now how to get out", he states and dissapears chewing on a piece of pizza that he has looted from Fun Pizza.

This will either end in the collapse of governments, or blood in the streets. A pity that some of it will belong to innocent Europeans.

NYT Wisdom

2005-11-04T09:48:00.000+11:00

Silly me, blaming the Paris riots on the hatred immigrant Muslims bear for a culture which flies directly in the face of all their deeply-held, dark age beliefs. Or on the total lack of interest that the average Muslim has in integrating into the multicultural fabric of the west.

But the New York Times has set me straight. All along, it was a lack of governmental care for their unique Islamic specialness, and the inconsiderate way police have of trying to enforce the law - but only end up "provoking" Muslim aggression:

CLICHY-SOUS-BOIS, France, Nov. 3 - Talk to people outside the Bilal mosque in this rundown suburb north of Paris and they will tell you what has gone wrong: why rioters for the past week have confronted police in overnight bursts of anger in the streets, torching cars, hurling rocks, and even firing bullets in the worst civil disobedience in France in more than a decade.

Beyond the poverty and despair of life in the shoddy immigrant communities ringing the shining French capital, local Muslims say, there is no one left with any sway over the rioting youths. Parents, the police and the government have all lost touch, they say.

Today, after rioters disregarded an appeal for calm by President Jacques Chirac, shooting at the police for the first time as the rioting spread for a seventh consecutive night, the government held emergency meetings throughout the day. But despite Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin's vow that "law and order will have the last word," the police were bracing for more violence as night fell.

In Clichy-sous-Bois on this afternoon, outside the entrance of the Bilal mosque - a converted warehouse where a tear-gas grenade landed on Sunday, stoking fury against the police - celebrations of the end of the monthlong Ramadan fast were overshadowed by the widening disturbances.

Opinions about the riots among people gathered at the mosque differed, but everyone from the deputy imam to local council workers and men leaving the midday prayer agreed that the trouble has been compounded by a vacuum of moral authority.

"If you want authority over these kids you need their respect - but all the normal channels of authority lost their respect a long time ago," said Ali Aouad, 42, who has lived in this northeastern town for two decades. "They feel neglected by the government, and the police just provoke them."

Even the government's minister of equal opportunity, Azouz Begag, who himself grew up in an immigrant household outside Lyon, carries no authority here, residents said.

"Where has he been? He is representative of nothing and nobody," said a young man of Algerian descent, who identified himself only as H2B. "He has done nothing for us and now he is trying to compensate by criticizing Sarkozy," the French interior minister, "but it's too late."

So all we need do is earn the rioter's "respect", and everything will be fine?

This is what happens when a government de-emphasises self-reliance and cultural integration.

They will riot when they don't get more handouts, the media will stand to one side and nod earnestly, and the government will either cave in to their demands, or fight and face these kinds of wet-lettuce-leaf journalistic onslaughts. "Nobody cares" "nobody's doing anything for us" "why won't someone please wipe my backside".

Leftist social engineers in Europe assured the native citizenry that massive third world immigration was necessary for the economy. But all it has done is lead to record levels of unemployment, which are then blamed on the "uncaring" government, which is already blighted with unwieldy and unsustainable social programs.

I'll say this once. The state of the immigrant's lives are their own fault. Had the government really been callous or indifferent, they never would have been permitted the immigrants to enter the country in the first place.

While it's true that they then should have been forced to integrate into society, Islam is unique in that it cannot seamlessly merge into a multicultural society and actively seeks to resist any efforts made to facilitate a union.

There is no answer to this situation and any remedies that might actually work will be totally unpalatable to the Eurocrats. They will watch their continent die, then attempt to escape the hell they have created through immigration to America, Canada or Australia.

If I have any say in it at all, they will not be afforded accomodation. Let them sleep in the bed they've made.

Funny what upcoming elections can do to a man

2005-11-04T09:29:00.000+11:00

Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi used to be one of the few rocks President Bush could depend upon within the EU. But facing elections in 2006, it seems that he is now starting to go from distinctly Italian, to distinctly Spanish.

He has renounced his earlier support for the Iraq War:

On the eve of talks with President Bush in Washington today, Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian Prime Minister, who has been one of Mr Bush’s staunchest allies over Iraq, claimed that he had opposed the war and had sought to persuade America not to invade.

[...]

Italy did not commit troops to the invasion but deployed 3,000 soldiers and paramilitary police to help with post-war reconstruction. Signor Berlusconi is expected to discuss a timetable for withdrawal of forces with Mr Bush. The Italian leader said he had “never been convinced that war was the best system to bring democracy to the country and get rid of a bloody dictatorship”.

Talk about meaningless rhetoric. Exactly what alternate "system" would have cast aside Iraq's million man army, overthrown the Baathist regime and kept the invading Jihadists at bay, I wonder?

From simple moonbattery, he gone on to outright dhimmitude, dining with the enemy whose backward "civilization" he once rightly condemned:

Rome, 3 Nov. (AKI) - The decision by Italy's prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, to invite ambassadors from Muslim countries to a dinner celebrating Eid al-Fitr, the end of Ramadan, has been welcomed by his guests. The dinner, hosted on Wednesday night at the elegant Villa Madama residence on the outskirts of Rome, is the first of its kind in Italy. Berlusconi who made international headlines in 2003 with comments, which he later said had been misinterpreted, about the superiority of Western civilisation over Islam, told the diplomats that democracy, inter-faith dialogue and integration are the way forward.

The "way forward" is to refrain from criticizing Muslims, for fear of losing their vote and provoking riots and death threats, it would seem.

See Silvio? There's no cozying up to them. They hate us and want us gone:

ROME (Reuters) - Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has said a suicide bomber was plotting to blow him up at a soccer match, and accused his political rivals of exposing Italy to terrorist attacks by questioning his word.

"I am the subject of a direct threat. A suicide bomber in a stadium aiming for me," Berlusconi told Italian newspaper Libero in an interview published on Thursday.

"But it is not a question of me. We're also talking about Italy. Aren't people worried about this?" he added in what the conservative daily called a furious and bitter outburst.

"We are talking about saving our country," he said.

You aren't ready to do what it takes to accomplish that, Prime Minister.

Intolerable kindness

2005-11-04T09:24:00.000+11:00

This is the kind of thing that is going to encourage our enemies, and convince them of our innate weakness:

Judge apologizes for Muslim holiday order

LONDON -- A British judge apologized Thursday to a suspected Islamic militant ordered to appear in court for an extradition hearing on one of the Muslim calendar's holiest days.

Haroon Rashid Aswat, 31, is accused of trying to set up a terrorist training camp in Oregon, and the U.S. government is seeking his extradition. He appeared in London's Bow Street Magistrate's Court on Thursday for the first day of the hearing.

"It is the most important day of my religion today - Eid," Aswat told Judge Timothy Workman, referring to the festival of Eid al-Fitr that ends a month of fasting during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.

"For me it is not a problem," he told the judge. "I can understand it is about technical difficulties. But for these people doing these bombings in this country, they are very simpleminded - they take it as an insult.

Workman apologized for the timing of the appearance, saying: "If I had known we would have picked a different day."

And I wish they had chosen a different judge. Apologising to a terrorist for seeking to try him on a religiously inconvienent day. How thoughtful of him.

Had it been a Christian terrorist, would the accused have recieved the same courtesy after being tried on Christmas?

The Paris Intifada

2005-11-04T08:51:00.000+11:00

Continues:

AULNAY-SOUS-BOIS, France (AP) - Rioting youths shot at police and firefighters Thursday after burning car dealerships and public buses and hurling rocks at commuter trains. France's government faced growing pressure to curb the violence, fuelled by anger over poor conditions in suburban Paris housing projects.

Rampaging for an eighth day, youths ignored an appeal for calm from French President Jacques Chirac, whose government worked feverishly to fend off a political crisis amid criticism that it has ignored problems in suburbs heavily populated by first-and second-generation North African and Muslim immigrants.

Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, who postponed a visit to Canada this week to deal with the crisis, called a string of emergency meetings with cabinet ministers throughout the day. He told the Senate the government "will not give in" to violence in the troubled suburbs.

"Order and justice will be the final word in our country," Villepin said. "The return to calm and the restoration of public order are the priority - our absolute priority."

So use the damned army, you pathetic man.

Their involvement is starting to look like a fait accompli, with news that the rioting has spread to more than 20 towns:

AULNAY-SOUS-BOIS, France Nov 3, 2005 — A week of riots in poor neighborhoods outside Paris gained dangerous new momentum Thursday, with youths shooting at police and firefighters and attacking trains and symbols of the French state.

Facing mounting criticism, Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin vowed to restore order as the violence that erupted Oct. 27 spread to at least 20 towns, highlighting the frustration simmering in housing projects that are home to many North African immigrants.

I'm sorry, Muslims riot because two young Muslim criminals electrocuted themselves while fleeing police, and that is "frustration" that should be "highlighted"?

Excuse me, but I don't believe I want to hear a single feelgood liberal social pretext used to try to justify more than a week of incredibly destructive rioting. These are lazy, crime-ridden, non-integrating Muslim scum, who have created the ghettoes they occupy, forcing the police to respect "no go" zones, where tribal law reigns.

These people are insurrectionists and traitors to their country. If France's government wants this stopped cold, it must treat them as such. Send in the army with orders to shoot to kill.