thinking man's guide to the world

Stop Giving Away My Money

2011-11-04T16:42:00.002Z

What's this? while Facebooking this ad popped up:
http://applyforcanadagrants.com/?13052042

Which is clearly one of those get rich things but it involved getting cash from the Canadian government for no reason, and in which the recipient boasts about never having to pay it back. As a taxpayer I'm fairly disgusted by this and by the reaction of those on the blog.

"Thanks to the advice from my friend, and the 2 forms I filled out, I'm doing great. I have more money than I ever need to provide for my family, and for those rainy days. After qualifying for my third grant this year, my husband and I celebrated in Vancouver! Below is a picture of us at Ruth Chris' Steak House in Vancouver."

Awesome! my hard earned cash is being used to fund steak dinners and Christmas presents for someone else's kids.

Voice of the Protests

2011-10-13T18:37:00.002+01:00

This is what a UBC Sociology PROFESSOR had to say about Occupy Vancouver:

“The people who have that much money, there’s a reason they have that much money and they’re not going to give it up just like that,”

What hope for our youth...

Liberals don't Really Like Multiculturalism.

2011-10-03T19:31:00.002+01:00

I usually take some satisfaction in seeing a liberal get tripped up by his own dogma, but less so when it's someone I know. However, it is an entertaining sight and one I took great glee in observing.

A rabidly liberal friend of mine in Vancouver sends her son to a French-immersion school. I took this as the usual liberal desire to expose children to any culture other than their own, their child's actual education be damned. Turns out I was wrong. The real reason, she admitted to me, is that the English schools are so overwhelmingly Chinese, the only way to avoid being a minority in one's own country (and language) is to send them to French schools!

"But I thought you liked multiculturalism?!" I teased.
"Yes", she replied, "but this is more like .... colonisation" !

And there you have it. Try to enjoy watching liberal chickens come home to roost, you'll be seeing more of it!

Rabble/Babble Denies Reality Again updated: banned from Babble!

2011-07-31T23:51:00.005+01:00

My trips across the Rubicon to Rabble/Babble have become much less frequent of late, but it's hard to resist a thread entitled "Oslo, extreme NeoConism, the role of media". The OP seems quite an independent-minded fellow who holds back from outright blaming of "NeoCons" for the Oslo shooting/bombing but many other commentators are not so charitable.

For those unfamiliar, Canadian site Babble is a microcosm of the extreme left and adopts a strict censorship code for opinions it finds unpleasant, on the grounds that the forum is a "safe space" where left wing folk should not have to defend their views against Nasty People such as yours truly.

One wrote the following:

The right wing ratchets up the rhetoric agaisnt abortion providers, and abortion providers start getting shot.

The right wing ratchets up the rhetoric against government, and the Murrah building in Oklahoma is bombed.

The right wing ratchets up the rhetoric-- to the point of putting "cross hairs" on a political oponent, and we have the Gifford's shooting.

The right wing ratchets up the rhetoric against socialists, and socialists are hunted and murdered.

I hadn't realise elements on the left were still blaming Sarah Palin for the Gifford shooting but it seems I was wrong. I replied in kind, and in obvious half-seriousness:

The left ratchets up the rhetoric against Capitalism: "anti-globalists" go on the rampage.

The Left ratchets up the rhetoric against Israel: Jews get attacked and, like Ilan Halimi, even killed.

The Left ratchets up the rhetoric on the environment: the Unabomber starts blowing stuff up.

The Left ratchets up the rhetoric against "Islamophobes": Kurt Westergaard gets attacked by an axe-wielding nutter.

Fun isn't it? Anyway, after getting threatened with a ban for it I thought better of presenting any actual counter-arguments, which is always a problem when you're getting attacked and insulted.

I thought it was only sporting to point out that, particularly in the US, unkind rhetoric is part and parcel of political discourse and, for better or for worse, it is not going to change anytime soon, particularly considering there is so little actual political violence in the US. I suggested that both sides might want to desist with the death threats and extreme talk and maybe politics would be a more civilised sphere of debate.

Not having any of that were the Babblers, for the most part.

Lard Tunderin Jeezus wrote:
No one is blaming Al Gore for the Unabomber because there is absolutely no connection between them. Ted Kaczynski never quoted Al Gore as Breivek has quoted so many leading neo-con radicals and bigots.

Actually, the connection is exactly the same.

Northern Shoveler wrote:

You may think both sides are equal but that is a lie. The right are oppressors and the left are trying to get food for their tables and decent houses.

... in spite of that fact that "right wing" ideas have put more food on more tables in more houses than ever.

A poster named Erik Redburn completely loses the plot:

For example, why is it that certain rightwingers continue to be employed as pundits on suppsedly mainstream stations, -even when they repeatedly call for the deaths of 'liberals, socialists, Muslims, athiests,Feminazis, etc', and incite the violent overthrow of the supposed 'nanny' state. While liberal-left voices are regularly ignored, muted or treated as dangerously radical in the MSM? (and news stories supporting their views regularly downplayd or suppressed)

I'd also like to know why you think it's valid to compare political violence on the left with the right? It seems to me that the vast majority of 'extra-judicial' assassinations and murders are committed by 'crazies' inspired by rightwing ideology, not left. Some not so far from supposedly mainstream views heard regularly on every MS station -ie, that Musims are untrustworthy and the Quran teaches violence, while Christians are only defending 'our values' and the Bible preaches peace, etc etc.

What, no liberal voices in the mainstream media?!
That aside, on what planet does the poster live while claiming the political assassinations are inspired by right wing ideology? All U.S. presidential assassinations (with the possible exception of Lincoln's, although the jury is out) were carried out by leftists. Sirhan Sirhan was a Palestinian nationalist, Sarah Jane Moore (who tried to kill Gerald Ford) was trying to start a revolution. Hinckley was just nuts.

And who has forgotten the Weathermen?

Erik returns to spread some more wisdom with the following:

Now, I don't entirely disagree that there are militant leftists and hotheads, who sometimes say misanthropic things in public and break windows for no good reason, but what I have noticed most strongly is how almost ALL neo-cons posting about this seem most concerned about distancing their own own anti-Islamic and pro-vigilante views with that cowardly child-killers open expression of it --FAR more than expressing any real regret or heartfelt sympathy for the victims.

Well, lad, they wouldn't have to distance themselves if others weren't accusing them of complicity would they? And if they didn't distance themselves, the accusations would just go away?!
I haven't read one person who was mentioned by Breivik not condemn his actions. It seems that, for some people, even their doing so is an admission of guilt.

Erik signs off with some final thoughts, in reply to me and my suggestion that we all try harder to get along and act civilly:

I'm glad to hear you neocons believe in civilized and rational debate too. Then I will repeat the points in which you keep bluntly ignoring. "We" are NOT "equally guilty".

.....

ETA: And any hostility you might meet on the left is not only reaction to the frequently violet rhetoric emplyed but the reactionary beliefs you neo-cons endlessly promote, regardless of consequences. What really makes me smell "nazi" (fascist) is how no matter HOW much you succeed in dragging the rest of us backwards you still feel YOU are the victims, until any shreds of liberalism or charity are seen as needing eradication. Thats not just the view of a tiny lunatic fringe on the left -and the anti-everyone but us right are no longer tiny at all. They/you are now very well funded and organized and represented everywhere power is established. And you sir are very much part of it all.

Ah, so now we're clear. Leftist hostility is only a reaction to right wing hostility! Makes perfect sense to me.

Lots of handwashing and denial going on there it seems.

It reminds me of a point I recently made on politics.ie , namely that it is very difficult to point out hatred without identifying the source of that hatred as a potential object of hate. "That person did some hate speech" can be viewed as hateful and vindictive in itself.

*update*

Thread is here.

Babbler tries to get some serious Orwellian newspeak going, wants to have the Oslo Killer dubbed a "neoconservative extremist" and is prepared to write to some seriously important liberals to get it done!

"I tried editing the Oslo Killer's wikipedia entry, but was blocked from using the term neoconservative extrmist because no recognized authority has evey used it. So I exchanged an email with Norm Finkelsteinasking him to write an article using this term. He is too busy, so I asked him to forward my request to someone who isn't busy. I also sent the same request to letter to Noam Chomsky's MIT email where someone might read it one day and probaly delete it."

*UPDATE*

Banned from Babble!

(again)

For the following statement:

I think you will find that all sides demonise the other in more or less equal measure, and you can't seriously be complaining about the term "feminazi" when every conservative has probably been called a Nazi at some point in her life! Anyone who calls for anyone to be killed, or seeks to dehumanise them by making up mad accusations simply doesn't have an argument, and has comprehensively failed in the area of civilised debate.

(emphasis the moderator's.) Apparently it contravenes Babble policy to point out that Conservatives get called Nazis all the time - as I was at least once on that thread.

I should emend the last sentence to:

"Anyone who uses a dubious excuse to ban someone from a political forum simply doesn't have an argument, and has comprehensively failed in the area of civilised debate."

Caroline Glick Replies

2011-07-29T17:37:00.002+01:00

Great essay from Caroline Glick:

Aside from Kaczynski, (whom he plagiarized without naming), certain parts of Breivik's manifesto read like a source guide to leading conservative writers and bloggers in the Western world. And this is unprecedented. Never before has a terrorist cited so many conservatives to justify his positions.

Breivik particularly noted writers who focus on critical examinations of multiculturalism and the dangers emanating from jihadists and the cause of global jihad. He also cited the work of earlier political philosophers and writers including John Stuart Mill, George Orwell, John Locke, Edmund Burke, Winston Churchill and Thomas Jefferson.

...

As much as statements by Sevje, (or Gore, Walt, Mearshimer, Scheuer or Chomsky), may anger their ideological adversaries, no self-respecting liberal democratic thinker would accuse their political philosophies of inspiring terrorism.

There is only one point at which political philosophy merges into terrorism. That point is when political thinkers call on their followers to carry out acts of terrorism in the name of their political philosophy and they make this call with the reasonable expectation that their followers will fulfill their wishes. Political thinkers who fit this description include the likes of Muslim Brotherhood "spiritual" leader Yousef Qaradawi, Osama Bin Laden, Hamas founder Sheikh Yassin, al Qaeda in Yemen leader Anwar Awlaki and other jihadist leaders.

No More Mister Nice Guy

2011-07-24T05:00:00.003+01:00

I've had it with lefties.

From time to time, I've thought, let's give 'em the benefit of the doubt, they're good folks but misguided.

It's been a long-held view of mine that while the Left vilifies the Right and questions our motives and morals, we have taken a different stance, accepting that those who support things like universal, free healthcare, a planned (or partly planned) economy, and multiculturalism could be reasoned with because they are immature, uneducated, or just losers.

It may be because I'm in the middle of an Ann Coulter book. It may be because a terrorist holding (some) similar views to mine has just shot up an island in Norway in a dispicable act of child-murder. It may be because attempting to dialogue with posters on a left -wing website is regularly met with insults from people who maintain their anonymity while not having the common courtesy to use my name correctly.

Or it may be none of the above.

But I've really had it with socialists, left-liberals and other losers who can't debate their way out of a paper bag without resorting to slander, insults and misrepresentation. And it's not just a few. Left-wingers regularly propose insane policies that lead to massive social upheaval, not to mention poverty, starvation and chaos for those who dare to implement them.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, inside every leftist is a dictator waiting to get out. This has always been my experience. Every socialist I've ever met believes that when the Revolution comes, they'll be given the task of redesigning society along their own personal lines. In the New Socialist Utopia, it seems, they'll be heavy on ideologues and light on Workers; not so many volunteers for the collective mines amongst them.

And they lie. The Guardian "newspaper" lies for a living. The Guardian described Jared Loughner's views as "Conservative". Taking a swipe at their opponents far more important to them than reporting the actual news, the word "facts" completely unknown to them. Instead they print vile lies day after day.

But anger is not the correct response. Anger just makes them happy, because they know they've managed to piss you off - and that makes a leftist's day. Humour is the only tonic. Taking the absolute piss out of them day after day is the only way to stay sane. The socialists, the multiculturalists, the social engineers, terrorism-enablers, liberals, purveyors of PC dogma, and their fellow travellers deserve to be derided within inches of their sanity, their idiotic ramblings ridiculed to hell and back. That is the new purpose of this blog and it is my sincere hope that positivity will win in the end.

Humour is, of course, an incredibly positive thing.

Justice for Rachel Peavoy

2011-07-08T04:18:00.003+01:00

This is a sensitive issue and one which has captured the attention of a lot of interested parties in Ireland where the death of Rachel Peavoy took place. The story is largely covered here.

Basically, a 30 year old woman died at home of hypothermia during what we Irish euphemistically call a "cold snap" in January 2010. The mother of two had also been taking medication for anxiety and there was some suggestion she had another mental illness as well.

Sad in and of itself, the issue is complicated by a simple fact, Ms.Peavoy lived in a council flat. What of it? you might say. Well, because she was technically living in government accommodation there is the suggestion that the council is responsible for her death, as there is a question over whether or not the heating was working at the time of her demise.

At the inquest, however (see link), it was claimed that the heating was fine and that the council was not negligent. Indymedia.ie is of course demanding "justice for Rachel Peavoy", which would seem to me to be a little pointless as she is no longer alive, and would no doubt consist of the appropriate measures being taken to apportion blame to individual council employees along with a fat cheque of taxpayer's money to, probably, her children.

The "World Socialist Web Site" has also taken up the cause alongside Indymedia.ie and other socialist organisations which I would normally associate with the so-called 'fight against capitalism'.

But my question would be, why are all these socialist organisations taking on a cause in which capitalism is in no way involved? A Capitalist such as myself would be at pains to point out that it is the State which has failed in this instance, and that greater government provision of housing is exactly what organs like indymedia.ie are constantly struggling for.

The brutal fact is, if you wait for the government to supply your heating, you will die of cold, and that's exactly what happened here. The culture of dependency created by government housing has been laid bare - and the socialists can't (or won't) see it.

Rachel Peavoy was failed by a system for sure. A socialist system that took away her independence and let her die at the hands of the kind of cold, uncaring bureaucracy that socialists drool over.

Socialists take note: This is the system you want. Your ideas and policies will lead to more dead Rachel Peavoys.

Ann Coulter on Single Moms. Again

2011-07-07T19:44:00.002+01:00

Ann Coulter is easy to disagree with, being one of those Social Conservatives that blames "liberals" for all the world's problems, but she is bl**dy funny and I did quite enjoy her last book "Guilty". In this article she revisits some of the subject matter therein. Enjoy:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=44680

"A 1990 study by the (liberal) Progressive Policy Institute showed that, after controlling for single motherhood, the difference in black and white crime rates disappeared."

"And yet, between 1979 and 2003, we went from about 600,000 babies being born out of wedlock, with about a quarter of them put up for adoption, to 1.5 million illegitimate births with fewer than 1 percent of them (14,000) given up for adoption. That's why Angelina Jolie and Madonna are constantly having to break up tribal wars to adopt Third World children."

I'm definitely on board with the idea that we need more kids put up for a adoption, particularly given the astonishingly high number of couples within my own social circle who are professional, responsible people who have trouble conceiving.

One (caucasian) friend of mine and her husband recently adopted a black child from some third world place - Detroit, I think - because white ones were in such short supply and were actually more expensive to adopt. The way it works is, you find some pregnant teenager, pay her medical expenses and have her checked regularly in case she smokes crack while pregnant, and then when baby is born, it's yours. Unfortunately this particular mother decided that this was too demanding and took some drugs, but the adoption went through anyway, followed by the kind offer to, if the adoptive parents so wished, "make another one" on demand.

They declined.

Canada Still Too Liberal, Says Cat.

2011-07-07T00:28:00.001+01:00

Harper's supposed goal of de-Trudeaupianising Canada is not going so well :

http://blazingcatfur.blogspot.com/2011/07/tim-hudak-has-lost-my-vote.html

6th Century Fashion Meets 21st Century Technology

2011-07-04T18:24:00.000+01:00

gotta love this

Fintan Lane is a Pussy, chapter two.

2011-07-01T06:12:00.004+01:00

By now all of you know that the Saoirse, the Irish Gaza war-enabler ship, was damaged mysteriously while in port in Turkey.

Immediately blame was cast on Israel - in fairness, it looks likely - but the war enablers wasted little time in calling a protest and - get this - an outside sit-in at the Israeli embassy (in less enlightened times we'd say there was something very "Irish" about an outside sit-in).

The IPSC wasted so little time calling a protest, that they didn't bother providing any evidence at all.

"Full details of the extent of the sabotage, including photos and video of the damage will be made available to the press later today."

What was in fact released were three poorly-angled photographs of what looks (to my untrained eye) as a ding caused by some flat-bladed cutting instrument, and a slight bend in the propeller shaft which, obviously, would do great damage to the boat's propellor in no time.

I'm completely throwing my hands up on this one and not offering any explanations, and being a bit of a fuddy-duddy, am going to wait a bit longer than the IPSC did before coming to their conclusion - in that, I'm actually going to wait for someone who knows what they're talking about to give us some real facts.

Most amusing is the first video here, which shows my favourite war-enabler, Dr.Fintan Lane, whinge about how the damage was actually "life-threatening" (can we assume that Dr.Lane's doctorate is not in maritime engineering?) and the crew "certain" to have "lost lives". He then trots out the old favourite about it having been an attack on a "humanitarian aid" ship, a lie so discredited it's amazing he can keep a straight face. Botox maybe? Watch the clip and you'll see what I mean.

Anyway. He is "outraged" that Israel considered the flotilla a provocation. Really? Where did they get that idea from? Is it because there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and even if there were, the New York Times published this on June 25th :

“Things are better than a year ago,” said Jamal El-Khoudary, chairman of the board of the Islamic University, who has led Gaza’s Popular Committee Against the Siege. “The siege on goods is now 60 to 70 percent over.”

The flotilla's stated ambition is to "break the siege", hardly what you'd call the language of peace. And while Alice Walker dreams about being gunned down by the IDF in the name of peace, Fintan Lane cries about having his life put in danger. By a bent propeller shaft.

What kind of peaceniks are these? Lane describes the alleged Israeli act of sabotage as "terrorism", but has he ever spoken out against Palestinian terrorism? The kind were people actually get blown up, not the kind where boat propellers (allegedly) have chunks knocked out of them.

So, I am not thrilled about the Irish involvement in this, and a lot of Irish people wonder why we Ulster folk don't want to be a part of their country. Well, it for things like this. In Dublin, on the 28th June, was a solidarity march with the people of Palestine. Video here. Angry crowds sing "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free". Free of Jews, that is. Because as everybody knows, the implication of a "free" Palestine "from the river to the sea", is one without a Jewish state called Israel parked on it.

But it gets better. The loons are also protesting - you'll love this - Riverdance. Why? Riverdance is heading to Israel!

"Riverdance: Not in our name! You do not represent us!"

cries Raymond Deane (from 2:20).

Well at least that part is true.

Gaza Flotilla Updates

2011-06-27T21:00:00.002+01:00

In other news, the Aid Activists may want to bring several thousand bars of soap and monogrammed towels to help finish off the two new luxury hotels that are opening in Gaza this month, as outlined in that pro-Imperialist zionazi rag the New York Times.

The Guardian has also printed author Alice Walker's deluded ramblings on her reasons for joining the flotilla. Harsh words? maybe, but she comes out with statements like,

"I see children, all children, as humanity's most precious resource,"

without any acknowledgement that Hamas doesn't, instead seeing children as the best explosive-delivery system short of an ICBM.

She notes that the ship she is sailing on is bringing "letters of solidarity and love" and yet is deluded enough to imagine that the Israeli Navy will try to murder her over it. She fantasises:
"But if they insist on attacking us, wounding us, even murdering us, as they did some of the activists in the last flotilla, Freedom Flotilla I, what is to be done?"

Where does the hatred arise from that lets Ms.Walker imagine that the Israelis are just itching to murder a 67 year old woman for delivering the mail?

BC Residents Head to Gaza, Think "It's Just Like Blacks in America"

2011-06-25T23:34:00.002+01:00

From Straight.com

The two female participants are interesting. Both admit they view the Gaza problem as essentially the same as discrimination against African Americans in the 1960s. One believes the Gazans fire rockets into Israel "to remind the world that people are living in Gaza in deplorable conditions".

Seriously. Nothing says "my house is too crappy" like launching explosives into your neighbours yard.

The United Church of Marxism

2011-06-23T19:57:00.004+01:00

So the news is that the United Church is boycotting Israel. Big deal. Today in the National Post we read that the inspired leadership of some Ontario churches have taken it upon themselves to target Indigo Books as part of their campaign:

Chapters Indigo owners [Heather] Reisman and [Gerald] Schwartz founded the HESEG foundation, which provides scholarships and other support to "lone soldiers" who have been in the Israeli military. [Lone soldiers are Jews who leave their home countries to join the Israeli army. They have no family in Israel, but often want to stay once their military service is done.]

The dastards!

Anyway, this is not the first ultra-lefty social-justicey type campaign the increasingly irrelevant protestant church has got itself tangled up in and it won't be the last.

I decided to investigate whether this was just a "Toronto thing" and checked out my local UC to see what they were up to and whether they were interested in God or Jesus or fuddy duddy stuff like that.

Sure enough, they run a film festival every year for 'social justice', that wonderfully illdefined concept whereby participants are praised - mostly by themselves - for their good intentions, whether or not they achieve any actual results. The same good intentions they fall back on in the event of overwhelming failure.

One of the films they showed was, predictably enough, Michael Moore's stunningly factual documentary "Capitalism: a Love Story", and also a film called "Poor No More" which warranted the kind of further research of which us skeptics are so fond. From the film's website:

Poor No More offers solutions to Canada's working poor. The film takes three Canadians to a world where people do not have to beg, where housing is affordable and university education is free. They ask themselves: if other countries can do this, why don't we?

Which world is this?!!

[Here's the trailer on YouTube.]

Apparently, it's Sweden and Ireland.

Wait... Ireland???

Didn't Ireland go bankrupt in 2008? Yup, it did. And I spend most of my life there and know from firsthand experience that life there is but a shadow of life in Canada. Living standards don't come close and public services are nowhere near as good as Canada's - and that's with higher rates of tax.

Sweden? Been there too. It is a great place to live, but it's sustained with the kind of taxation Jack Layton can only dream of (during a massage). Now that Sweden have copped that their taxes are not going to help Rolf down the road who is out of work, but are going to help Mohammed and his three Somali brides raise their nine children, they're backpedalling faster than, well, Jack Layton.

Sweden, like Norway, and to a lesser extent Finland and Denmark, survive in an economic bubble of the kind you could imagine if Canada suddenly made a law that doubled the price of everything, including wages. We could all pay WAY more tax because we could import the same amount of stuff from America and China, but the only tourism that would exist would be other Canadians from different provinces.

That's how Scandinavia works: they visit each other's countries for vacation, although you might see the odd German making his way around Akershus Festning. Public transport, eating out are horribly expensive, and a pint of beer costs around $10. I mean a half-litre, which is not quite a British pint. Which is 568ml for the similarly beer-loving.

Anyway, if we want to model Canada on Sweden we start with that. Combine that with what has been virtually a unicultural, classless society for a century. Bye bye multiculturalism. It helps to have been a world leader in engineering, design and manufacture for a while too, and staying out of some wars.

But here's the thing: there's tons of poverty in Sweden, they're importing it by the bucketload. Whole suburbs of Stockholm and Malmo are virtual third world swamps populated by people who, despite insane amounts of money spent on their "assimilation", retain much of their African and Middle Eastern cultures, and particularly the more unpleasant aspects of them.

Not to be dissuaded by such things as 'facts', however, Poor No More's makers have seen fit to portray Sweden as one of the places "where people do not have to beg, where housing is affordable and university education is free."

Yes, there are beggars in Sweden. And a lot of addicts, drunks, and other belligerents. What, did you think "social democracy" would make people into better people??

Here's a house for sale, randomly selected and well outside of Stockholm, priced at well over $400,000 Canadian. And a penthouse apartment? That's over $3million.

Universities? Well, if you're from the EU the fees seem to be subsidised by the government, but you still have to live, and good luck with that in Sweden. In Norway, which is richer than Sweden, the government offers student loans rather than grants to cover fees and living costs. With interest of course. Sociology grads, beware.

Long Absence

2011-06-22T21:36:00.003+01:00

My long absence from blogging has been brought on by the kind of despondence that other blogger friends of mine have been encountering from time to time.

I think it's a sort of burnout, arising from continual tiresome and frustrating arguments that never seem to go anywhere. Unless you have the fortune to be in the 'real' world of media, internet activism is really just making brilliant, insightful arguments into thin air, just to have someone called "bAzuKaJoe480" tell you you're a "facist" (sic).

So I have had to give up arguing with people of the left wing variety, mostly because they don't actually have any 1) arguments, 2) manners, 3) interest in hearing what anyone else has to say anyway. I will have to, as is always prudent at times such as these, turn to humour, and hope I can take the complete p*ss out of stupid people until the anger dissipates.

I recommend Dennis Miller.

It doesn't mean I'm quitting the blogging game, just that my frustration has seeped into my opinionated side and made me less inspired about writing down my own thoughts. I might just wait for a liberal to say something retarded and comment on it.

I don't think I'll be waiting long for that :)

Canadian Gaza Boat Sued!

2011-06-08T00:51:00.001+01:00

Blazing Cat Fur has all the details.

Ugandan Man Found Guilty of Murder by HIV

2011-05-19T22:01:00.003+01:00

This story appeared in the National Post today amongst other places. It is truly sickening. I was a little peeved at the NP too, as they managed to title their article "Ontario man who spread HIV to testify at hearing".

He infected seven women, of which two died.

Although the murder verdict is to be welcomed - it's the first of its kind - one has to wonder what his girlfriends were thinking. Were they not aware of the risk they were taking? Or were they simply trying so hard not to be "racist" that they forgot to ask if he was, as many Sub-Saharan Africans are, HIV positive?

Still, he is removed from the general populace now and is, at least in theory, no longer a threat to society.

The Cost of Immigration

2011-05-18T17:36:00.002+01:00

An interesting article appeared in the National Post.

The essence of the piece is that immigration is more costly than beneficial to Canada, and that certain policies need to be changed to redress this.

On Tuesday, this one was published. Saying much the same thing. According to the authors of a Fraser Institute report,

there are "popular propositions" about the benefits of immigration: Young immigrants pay taxes that support social services for Canada's aging population; immigrants fill the low-paying jobs that others do not seem to want; Canadians are ennobled by allowing people to share in the country's economic riches; immigration enriches the cultural life of Canadians, and future generations end up repaying their parents' debt by earning an average or above-average living in the long run.
Mr. Grubel and economic consultant Patrick Grady argue, however, that these benefits either do not hold up to close scrutiny or that they are simply not worth the economic cost.

Never a truer word, etc.

It's surprising how persistent some myths are. Yes, young immigrants help out, but they get older. And their parents and grandparents, already of the age to begin draining the system, often follow them.

They work low-paying jobs, but many Canadians are unemplyed, so it's not that nobody in Canada is available to do them.

It's a form of 'charity' to allow people to live in Canada? Yes, it is. But such generosity needs limits, or else it becomes a drain on people's goodwill, and creates resentments that should not be there.

Immigration enriches Canadian culture? Well, that's highly subjective. Sometimes it does, often it doesn't. I wonder how I am an 'enriching' Canada at times. By being an English-speaking pro-democracy, pro-freedom taxpaying citizen I guess. But culturally? not really.

The best part of the article is a quote from a Douglas Cannon, a "prominent BC based immigration lawyer" (ha! no conflict of interest there, then), who says:

"Immigration is, in the end, about people and their futures, their dreams, their hopes -- how can you put a dollar amount on that?" he said. "It's about continuing to make Canada a place of opportunity."

Well, he clearly puts a dollar amount on it - unless he works for free (hahahahahahahahahaha).

I'm all for Canada being a place for people to fulfill their dreams, unless of course those dreams include living off other people's hard-earned taxes, spreading medieval beliefs and practices to an unsuspecting populace, or committing crimes and violence against the very Canadians who have opened their arms to newcomers.

The smartest suggestion from the FI report is undoubtedly the recommendation that:

Immigrants may have their parents and grandparents join them as landed immigrants in Canada only after posting a bond to cover payments for health care and other social benefits.

Simple, yet genius.

Brian Lilley meets No One is Illegal

2011-05-18T14:53:00.002+01:00

From BCF

This rocks.

This has been doing the rounds!

As I commented at one site:

It's so important to have these interviews, both for people like Luan who need to have their insane ideas exposed to the real world to see the reactions from normal people, and also for normal people to see what kind of beliefs are 'trendy' at our higher institutions of learning.
She seemed far more interested in getting Brian to accept her definition of words than to actually argue her case. Says it all really - vacuous nonsense.

Denmark's Smart Immigration Rules

2011-05-09T15:12:00.002+01:00

h/t Lime Lite

Denmark becomes a model for European immigration law.

the country has cracked down on people using marriage as a means of gaining access to Denmark.
Laws now stipulate that for marriages involving a Dane and a non-EU or non-Nordic citizen both parties have to be aged over 24 and the Dane must be independent of government aid.

All this has led to the number of asylum seekers in Denmark falling by two-thirds in the last five years.

Johann Hari : "Flawed" US Policy Creates Terrorists

2011-05-07T18:10:00.003+01:00

Interesting article by Johann Hari in the Irish Times.

Hari is very much of the "Western policy creates jihadism" school of "thought" and isn't shy about saying so.

"The West reacted to 9/11 by giving Bin Laden precisely what he wanted. We tossed aside our best values. And each time we did it, the number of jihadis grew."

When your enemy wants to be martyred for his vile cause, it is only a pleasure to give him precisely what he wants. But nevermind.

He is circumspect about Bin Laden's death:

The operation wasn't perfect: I would much rather Bin Laden had been taken alive and put on trial. But it was a precise raid. It took real risks to minimise civilian deaths. Most people in the world can support an action such as this.

Which is an acceptable enough opinion - leaving aside the pious, left-wing platitude in bold.

Hari readily accepts the words of Bin Laden's son, who parrots the favourite (and false) left wing opinion that,

"my father was so happy. This is the kind of president he needs, one who will attack and spend money and break [his own] country".

Which is outright nonsense. I remember George W. Bush's election campaign - his platform was one of the most non-interventionist in living memory. Wikipedia quotes him as saying:

"If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road. And I'm going to prevent that."

And he would have done, were it not for 9/11. So, while Bin Laden "succeeded" in reversing this policy, it is Bush who is responsible for the ensuing aggression?

Who exactly was it who awakened the sleeping giant?

At this point I should add that I am in favour of the scalpel over the sledgehammer, but for pragmatic, not moral reasons. I would like each and every dictator on the planet trembling in his boots at the thought of a scud missile dropping on his head over breakfast, rather than having time to construct and elaborate system of human shields and underground bunkers.

Nonintervention with the explicit threat of quick and excruciatingly painful intervention would be a far more cost-effective strategy for the West, and strategic assassination is something everybody can get on board with.

So, Hari is partly right, even though he doesn't quite "get it":

"For the past decade, right-wingers have been chest-thumping about being tough on jihadism, while promoting policies that create far more jihadis."

No, Jo.
Jihadis create jihadis. These are people who commit murder over cartoons. Over events in countries they've never been to. They burn flags of countries they've never heard of. They are not experts on U.S. foreign policy.

"If you really hate jihadism," he continues (without adding whether or not he does) "then you need to search for the policies that actually undermine it."

Mines spring to mind. Then comes the money quote:

"The single most important thing we can do is to make a key structural change in our societies,"

Ahh. Yes, if only we weren't the way we are, the jihadists would leave us alone. After all, they've just defending themselves, right? So what is this key structural change?

"breaking our addiction to oil. Today, we need the petrol from the Middle East to keep the wheels of our civilisation turning and that sets up an inevitable conflict."

He is again partly right. But for the wrong reason. Yes our need for ME oil is bad, because it concentrates wealth in the sandier parts of the Islamic world, and let's the jihadist tail wag the Muslim dog.

Sorry, goat.

Why "inevitable conflict"? we relied on Japan for our cars and TVs for years with no conflict. Without recognising jihadism as the problem, Hari is doomed to see Western policy as the instigator of all Islamic ills. Indeed, he is left with the following conclusion:

"If we follow instead a path of precisely targeting the jihadis while being generous and open to the rest of the world, they will wither."

Is that a promise?

Bell Drops Sun News

2011-05-05T03:20:00.001+01:00

Ezra Levant on Bell dropping Sun TV.

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/bell%27s-bold-bias/931225743001

Canada's Conservative Majority. UPDATED

2011-05-03T18:14:00.005+01:00

As the reader can imagine, I am overjoyed at the return of the CPC to government with a majority of seats.

Other are less so, however. Exhibit A is my favourite bunch of mad Marxists, those folks at Rabble.ca

One article has the dazzlingly stupid headline:

"After the election: Time for Democratic Action"

The author (the "president", no less, of Rabble.ca) declares that,

"Canada has fallen into the hands of Harper majority government. It is hard to imagine a worse outcome for the 2011 election, over-shadowing the magnificent victory of the NDP in Quebec where 59 New Democrats were elected (out of a total of 75)."

Oh how terrible! People voted and got the government they wanted! Left wing contempt for ordinary voters still knows no bounds, clearly.

More scaremongering comes from another rabbler, whose article "Raise a Little Hell" tells us:

I am filled with fear by what a Conservative majority will mean for the issues I care about. The hopes of passing legislation on a tanker ban, on close containment fish farms, on trans* rights, and on climate change have been dashed. Instead we are faced with an uncertain future for national icons like the CBC, our public health-care system, and for the status of women.

It's always worth gloating at moments like these, but also sitting back and surveying the ignorance on display.

Judy Rebick says:

True an NDP opposition is a major improvement over a Liberal opposition but a majority government that barely listened to the Opposition when it was in the minority will ignore the Opposition in majority.

Yes, the party that bent over backwards to gain the support of the opposition, and got a stab in the back for its troubles, is now free to tell them to take a hike. And yet, in victory, Harper still found the resolve and the goodwill to offer the olive branch to his losing opponents - or at least their voters. Would the NDP have done the same?

Apparently,

"Jack Layton and much of his caucus are strong feminists."

In the light of revelations about Mr.Layton's choice of massage parlour, it may be true that he believes women should have a stronger hand in government.

And the Babblers (i.e. the various sociopathic loons who hang around on Rabble.ca's discussion forum)?

The only one I'm going to comment on is this one:

"and remember the cons only got 40% of 61 % of votes"

Which is, for a Leftie, unusually true, except that it can be argued, imho, that to not vote is always to vote with the majority. That 40% is a 79% - sorry, but if you don't vote, you cast yours in silence.

Here are some of their "thoughts":

"A culture of resistance is now what is needed."

"ashamed of my country."

"I'm so disgusted with my neighbours right now..."

"Serious subversion is called for. Sneaky and smart. Switchgrass roots."

"I'm ashamed of my province"

"armed demonstrations might be the way to go."

"Waiting til 2015 to vote the Tories out of office is a recipe for demoralization and defeat. We need to start mobilizing resolute opposition in the streets, in workplaces, on campuses -- not rely on the NDP in the House of Commons with their "leave it to us" stance.

To fight the Tories, we need a left that sees collective action in struggle as essential and doesn't reduce politics to elections."

*UPDATE*

Murray Dobbin's malicious rant borders on the libellous:

It remains to be seen whether or not Harper actually wants to stay around for another election to win it (and therefore not go too far in a first term), and solidify the dominance of his party as the new "natural governing party." Or whether, as his personality disorder would suggest, he will in a spirit of vengeance against the country he detests, dismantle as much of the post-war social contract he can in four years of virtually absolute power.

The Illusion of Innocence/ Shelby Steele

2011-05-01T00:55:00.002+01:00

Reading a book of essays at the moment and one of the finest is the following by Shelby Steele:

Modern liberalism thrives by using America’s past hypocrisies as leverage against the timeless principles of freedom today. It is a liberalism of “moral” leverage and muscle, not a discipline of principle. It bullies freedom with the idea of an impossible innocence. Yet it takes its fire from one idea above all others: that it is the answer to America’s characterological evil. But neither evil nor innocence is the whole American truth. The civil rights movement did not succeed because America finally became innocent; it succeeded because America finally became principled.

Christian Mock Gays At Shocking Easter Service!

2011-04-30T03:13:00.000+01:00

Horrific!

Four Myths About the Crusades

2011-04-28T17:57:00.001+01:00

Interesting stuff.

"The verdict seems unanimous. From presidential speeches to role-playing games, the crusades are depicted as a deplorably violent episode in which thuggish Westerners trundled off, unprovoked, to murder and pillage peace-loving, sophisticated Muslims, laying down patterns of outrageous oppression that would be repeated throughout subsequent history. In many corners of the Western world today, this view is too commonplace and apparently obvious even to be challenged.

But unanimity is not a guarantee of accuracy. What everyone “knows” about the crusades may not, in fact, be true. From the many popular notions about the crusades, let us pick four and see if they bear close examination."

Intelligent Muslim Singed by Blazing Cat

2011-04-27T05:13:00.001+01:00

You rock, BCF.

Muz Sez:

"We should support only those non-Muslim candidates who are willing to present and support a Private Members’ Bill making it a hate-crime to publicly associate Islam to terrorism, whether in written, spoken, printed, broadcast or electronic media."

Superfreaks on Climate Change

2011-04-27T01:10:00.003+01:00

I've never read The New Yorker before and after this review of Levitt & Dubner's sequel to the bestselling Freakonomics, I don't think I will again.

A chapter in Superfreakonomics deals with climate change, or "global warming" as it used to be called, and Elizabeth Kolbert is not impressed. She (correctly) summarises their position on climate change as follows:

"the anxiety is unwarranted. First, the global-warming threat has been exaggerated; there is uncertainty about how, exactly, the earth will respond to rising CO₂ levels, and uncertainty has “a nasty way of making us conjure up the very worst possibilities.” Second, solutions are bound to present themselves: “Technological fixes are often far simpler, and therefore cheaper, than the doomsayers could have imagined.”

But, she adds,

Neither Levitt, an economist, nor Dubner, a journalist, has any training in climate science—or, for that matter, in science of any kind.

Which is why their views on the subject are informed by scientists who do know what they're talking about, a fact not mentioned at all by Kolbert. In fact, all the ideas they endorse are presented by a company called Intellectual Ventures, started by Nathan Myhrvold. The company counts Bill Gates among its investor-inventors.

The reviewer criticised the authors for presenting their ideas as an easy fix for climate change, whereas, she argues, it's much better just to produce less carbon dioxide and Al Gore totally agrees. This is despite the authors making crystal clear (but seemingly not clear enough) that their ideas are a last ditch disaster-aversion measure.

Levitt and Dubner defend against their critics here, and Freakonomics, while not as interesting as the first book, is still worth reading.

Myhrvold weighs in here.

I went to a political debate. It was boring.

2011-04-24T07:28:00.005+01:00

Excruciating is a good word for it.

The local candidates, all nine of them, lined up to have a "debate" which was really just them reading off a set of pre-prepared answers to a series of pre-prepared questions one after another. Where was all the excitement and drama?

A political debate should involve conservative candidates shouting "with what money?!", with an incredulous expression on his/her face, every time some leftard opens his/her fat mouth to spew forth an "idea".

During this Canadian election campaign, the Liberals and the NDP have been making lots of nonspecific promises about how their going to fix things that aren't broken in an increasingly desperate attempt to dislodge Stephen Harper from power.

The Liberals are going to fix the deficit, "without raising your taxes",

"We will cancel unnecessary and unaffordable tax cuts for the largest corporations, reverse wasteful spending habits and focus on what really matters – giving every Canadian the tools to succeed in the years ahead."

Ah, so by raising our taxes, then. [hint for leftards: cancelling a tax cut = a tax raise. It isn't rocket science, you tools]

And forgive me for being an old crusty reactionary, but don't Canadians already have the tools, as it were, to succeed?

And what of immigration, something that Canadians actually care about?

"After five years of reductions in family class immigration under the Harper government, Liberals will restore balance by increasing family class visas."

Balance eh? These family class visas are the ones that certain scammers and schemers use to marry off mentally handicapped relatives to complete strangers to "get" their entire extended families to Canada, taking immigration policy out of the hands of Canadians and into the mitts of fraudsters and crooks. Nice.

Any net benefit to Canada derived from bringing in a productive immigrant is immediately undone by the collection of elderly relatives that tag along long enough to embed themselves in the generously-funded state healthcare system. Canada: healthcare and welfare provider to the world.

Oh, and after two years of residence, only 58% of immigrants aged 25-44 actually are in employment, which is a lot lower than the Canadian population at large.

Anyway, the New Democrats (NDP) have little more productive to offer. They want to:

end the restrictive immigration measures based on secretive, arbitrary decisions by cabinet ministers;

Which is more or less what I've just said. And here's something fun:

Reinstate federal funding for the settlement of new Canadians cut by Stephen Harper. Funding will assist with literacy, community integration and orientation, including bridging, mentorship, English and French as a second language programs and resource centres;

Well I've been here close on 18 months and nobody has ever tried to resettle me. I'd imagine the ancestors of 99% of Canadians didn't have any settlement funding or "community integration" programmes either. Immigrants embed themselves in communities made up of people of their own nationality. How about just "settling" fewer immigrants? Just a thought.

Anyhow, the highlight of the debate was where Susan Keeping, the NDP candidate, declared that they would tax "the corporations", because - get this - "the corporations" have tons of money and wouldn't notice it missing!

I think I should run for election next year just so I can abuse the vacuous folks that populate these things.

Liberals Making Sh*t Up. What's New?

2011-04-24T07:00:00.003+01:00

By BCF

Haroon Siddinky writes mean things about Harper. Libs and their fanboys getting desperate, making stuff up now.

I find it hard to believe he kept a straight face while writing this:

“We've got to take the politics out of multiculturalism. Minister Kenney has been segmenting the country into ‘ethnic' and ‘very ethnic.' It causes enormous resentment among Canadians. Newcomers most want to be treated as Canadian. A Canadian is a Canadian . . . But if we start micro-targeting communities and putting one community against another the way Minister Kenney's been doing, that's going to break up the multicultural society.”

Em. I think it's "multiculturalism" itself that causes fractures in society and pits people against one another, actually.

Multiculturalism means that "newcomers" want to be treated like Canadians without having to actually act like Canadians.

McTranny Latest

2011-04-24T06:58:00.001+01:00

A new twist to the McDonalds assault and battery story, from BCF.

Hierarchy of victimhood makes liberal heads explode!

"Anti-Cuts" Protests, UK Goes Mental.

2011-04-24T02:04:00.002+01:00

Very few things puzzle me more at the moment than the UK's "anti-cuts" movement.

On one level, I can see how it's just the usual bunch of disaffected yoof having a bash at things for the hell of it, egged on by hardcore anarchists, self-appointed revolutionaries and half-baked neo-Marxists and supported by the ever-growing ranks of the genuinely hard done-by.

But on another, there is a serious lack of reflection going on there. It proves the theory that if you give to someone on a regular basis for long enough, when you cut back, for whatever reason, it is regarded by the recipient as you "taking" from them. Which leads to the wider point of confusion; how can you be an anarchist when you are "protesting" for the government to do something for you.

I could maybe understand protesting against government action, or just against the government - although I wouldn't usually condone it in a liberal democracy. But what has happened to an entire generation of British people who think it their right to destroy things in the name of ... well.. getting stuff from the government?

And these are not pensioners and the disabled. These are young, able-bodied folk who have the energy to fight with police.

So what do the grownups think? Well, if you happen to be Labour "Leader" Ed Miliband, it's the government that's gone "too far and too fast".

They're such rebels! They support the Royal Mail!!

Reality Inversion at Rabble.ca

2011-04-21T20:51:00.002+01:00

The discussion forum at pro-NDP, Union-supporter "news" site rabble.ca is called Babble, and is fairly unique in having a policy barring most normal people from participating. According to their policy,

As part of rabble.ca, babble was created to ensure that readers and participants could explore a wide range of issues of interest and concern in interactive and dynamic ways.

babble is NOT intended as a place where the basic and fundamental values of human rights, feminism, anti-racism and labour rights are to be debated or refought. Anyone who joins babble who indicates intentions to challenge these rights and principles may be seen as disruptive to the nature of the forum.

In other words, down is up and up is down and if you don't agree, don't bother talking to us!

Well, probably the only way a leftist can actually win an argument is if he clears the room of anyone who might actually disagree with him, so their policy is understandable.

Meanwhile, for the rest of us, Rabble/Babble remains a source of great humour and is rife with examples of left-wing insanity. Keep up the good work!

BCHRC Awards 22.5k to Offended Lesbian

2011-04-21T15:31:00.002+01:00

The verdict is in in the Guy Earle comedy trial.

from BCF:

"Earle has been ordered to pay Pardy $15,000 for injury to dignity, feelings, and self respect. Zesty and Ismail have been ordered to pay Pardy $7,500 for injury to dignity, feelings, and self respect."

Mark Steyn weighs in.

Canada and Immigration

2011-04-19T15:45:00.002+01:00

Came across this blog post today via Mark Steyn's homepage. It provides an interesting set of opinions on immigration into Canada, as well as some frightening statistics:

"At 26 weeks after their arrival, 50% of all immigrants aged 25 to 44 were employed. This was 30 percentage points below the employment rate of about 80% among all individuals aged 25 to 44 in the Canadian population. ... At 52 weeks after arrival, the employment rate among prime working-age immigrants was 58%. This narrowed the gap to 23 percentage points. At 104 weeks, or two years after arrival, the employment rate among prime working-age immigrants was 63%, 18 percentage points below the national rate of 81%. ... Immigrants admitted as principal applicants in the skilled worker category had an even better record for employment. At 26 weeks after arrival, the gap in the employment rate between them and the Canadian population was 20 percentage points. By 52 weeks, this had narrowed to 12 points, and by two years, it was down to 8 points."

I want to digest it before writing more, largely because I have some contact at the moment with some cases of "family reunification" (not for myself) and want to sort out what I can print and what I can't.

OMG This Guy is a Professor!!

2011-04-19T05:41:00.002+01:00

Yes, this partisan hack is "an author, adjunct professor at the School of Communication, Simon Fraser University, and co-director of NewsWatch Canada."

Donald Gutstein take a bow. After all, you came up with gems like this:

"Sun News, the new conservative channel also known as Fox News North, goes live, as the final cog in the right-wing media machine is lowered into place."

Careful with that tinfoil hat, Eugene!

You, sir, are a douche of the highest order.

Sun TV Makes Waves

2011-04-19T04:37:00.003+01:00

courtesy BCF

One day in and Sun News has already made enemies.

Imam Steve Rockwell does not like Ezra Levant sharing some Mohammed Cartoons on the Sun TV's The Source, aired today on the launch of the new channel.

Who am I kidding? Sun TV has had enemies since it was announced six months ago. The same people who criticise Fox News without ever having seen it have given Sun the nickname Fox News North, even though Fox has no connection with the Canadian-owned station. But since when have facts ever influenced liberal opinion?

Loony Left site Rabble.ca has even launched a "Sun TV Watchdog" to monitor the comings and goings at Sun News. Good luck to them, but who watches the watchers? They might consider taking the mote out of their own eye first...

As an immigrant I am grateful to have a wider choice in Canadian news providers, particularly considering how many tax dollars goes into maintaining the pro-Liberal state television network, CBC.

Libertarian Reading of John Gray

2011-04-18T17:43:00.004+01:00

John Gray is a hard man to disagree with. One of Britain's top political philosophers, his creed is best defined as Scepticism and most of us would do well to share this position, particularly in relation to the utopian creeds most conservatives face today, particularly socialism and liberalism.

Scepticism is a fitting counterpoint to utopianisms of all kinds, largely because it takes into account human frailty and the realities of our nature in a way that utopians generally don't. Gray is scathing of ideas of "progress" as the inevitable tide of history, and argues that having healthy reservations towards change and particularly radical, untried change, is the true basis for conservatism.

Sadly (well, for me anyhow) Gray considers Libertarianism to be a utopian creed and I see where he is coming from. As a strand of enlightenment Liberalism, Libertarianism can be conceived of as either radical or progressive - or both - depending on your viewpoint.

He accuses libertarians of fetishising the market, and insists (rightly) that the market serves the people and not the other way around, and that the free market only has value to the extent that it distributes goods and services efficiently. A libertarian might want to interject that the market is merely the economic expression of human freedom, but for Gray, human freedom is a meaningless concept without the institutions that support and maintain the choices that make freedom possible.

Gray argues that freedom is not possible without these institutions on the grounds that the market does not and has never existed without, say, the rule of law and parliamentary democracy. It is hard to see, however, how Libertarianism disagrees with this. Although he strongly criticises neoliberals for exporting free market ideals to countries and continents where these institutions do not exist, and considers such exports irresponsible and disastrous. With this I have no argument, the IMF in particular has done great damage through this kind of intervention, but it is possible such transnational bodies are learning from their mistakes.

His root problem with Liberalism (and neoliberals) seems to be that he considers it a utopian, legalistic creed based on the idea that man and society can be perfected through legislation, an accusation I am not certain is accurate. Certainly, liberalism in the left-wing sense can be seen as such, with its endless march towards 'equality' and progress, but I am not entirely convinced that right-libertarianism has that fault.

As I see it, Libertarianism is premised on the idea that given maximum room to choose, an individual will ultimately do what is best both for himself and for society, and this includes taking part in voluntary collective activity such as Church, politics and bowling leagues. I am not convinced that Libertarianism is a utopian project, although I can see how it might become one. The desire to spread free market ideas without consideration for local variations in customs and practices, for example, ignores the individuals roots in a particular culture and historical and social setting.

This, I think, is Gray's criticism, and it is a fair one. His criticism of the market, it should be added at this point, does not come from a socialist or collectivist point of view, but from a conservative one, whereby Gray is concerned with the traditional structure of communities and how they are affected by, among other things, neoliberalism, and particularly that brought by Thatcher in the 80s which he considers most un-Conservative. Gray shares many commentators' concerns with "unrestrained markets" and the resulting societal trauma as people find themselves vulnerable to the ebbs and flows of what he calls "unstable" market forces.

Whether or not free market Capitalism is inherently unstable is a discussion for another time, but Gray is convinced that modern finance capitalism, or American-style capitalism, does not serve people well outside of the American context, and that many aspects of human existence should not be subjected to the whims of the market.

What I think is the real bone of contention here, is that Gray believes a (Conservative) government has the duty to intervene on behalf of communities to "nurture" the institutions that make the free market possible, whereas Libertarians, he argues, argue that such things are better left alone. Both are correct, again depending on your point of view.

Because most Libertarians tend to be strong on federalism, they would argue that the federal government should be restricted to certain core activities such as defence and the central courts system while local or regional government would be much more free to be responsive to local needs and belief systems. Thus, under a Libertarian government in the US, for example, State and city legislatures would have responsibility for welfare, health, and local planning so that places like Texas could govern themselves unhindered by places like California.

Because Libertarians are comfortable with most choices if they are made voluntarily and not at public expense, there is scope for more collectivist-minded communities to thrive and prosper under their own rules, and most importantly, at their own expense. In other words, socialists can also thrive within a libertarian framework which would, in fact, enable the creation of collective communities if their members so wanted. Freedom means the freedom to organise yourselves any way you want to, on a local or regional level, or not at all. There is the danger that a complete national disjointedness could emerge, but these regions are still united under a common flag, constitution and, ultimately, government.

Britain, unlike America, has certain "national" institutions that may require "nurturing" from time to time, and it may be that US -style federalism does not transmit well across the Atlantic. Fair enough. But Libertarianism is far from being a utopian religion like liberalism or socialism, encouraging as it does, individuals and communities to make the best choices for themselves where it matters.

Lies, Lies and Leftie Lies

2011-04-18T16:33:00.002+01:00

What's new? you might ask.

Well, a bunch of leftards have got together to produce this wonderfully unhilarious club call People For Corporate Tax Cuts to "protest", well, letting companies keep their own money.

These genuises honestly think people will accept a characterisation of a tax cut as a "cost" to society.

Or maybe it says more about their sense of entitlement - to other people's money, of course.

Hitler the Socialist

2011-04-16T22:07:00.001+01:00

Well not really, but it can be fun debating with people whose little brains are infused with the idea that Hitler was somehow the polar opposite of Stalin.

Anyway, here are a couple of good articles dug out of the interweb that suggest the Nazis' economic platform was similar to the ideas of modern lefties. Enjoy.

One

Two

Three

Journalists, Your Intellectual and Moral Superiors

2011-04-16T20:15:00.003+01:00

This one from BCF/Halls of Macadamia is priceless.

In a classic piece of journalistic piety, we read the Toronto Sun headline:

Somalian shot dead by Ontario man

What racism is this? you might ask.

We soon learn, however, that

"Abdikadir (Abdi) Abdow, 24, was earlier convicted of first-degree murder for the April 26, 2009, slaying of Mohamed (Malik) Khalif, 20, at the city's Hermitage Park."

Yes, those racist Ontariooneranians.

Useful Idiot Becomes Even More Useful: Italian Kidnapped in Gaza

2011-04-15T00:15:00.003+01:00

Italian Communist held for ransom in Gaza by non-Hamas terrorist group. From Vlad.

Edit:

He's not useful anymore: Italian found dead in house.

Canadian Leaders Debate Victory for Harper

2011-04-13T03:08:00.002+01:00

I sat through two hours of the Canadian four-way debate this evening and was surprised at the outcome - Stephen Harper kept his cool when others lost theirs and came across as the only man able to lead Canada after May 2nd.

Layton (NDP) come off worse, his shrill buffoonery easily rebuffed by Harper, while Ignatieff did not manage to present himself as the wise and experienced politician his party believes him to be. He almost immediately forgot the name of a member of the public who asked a question to the panel (it was Len) and declared his party to be in favour of "health prevention".

Harper's cool, calm and collected demeanour should have earned him a majority tonight, and I spoke to one lifelong Liberal today who will certainly be voting for him.

The times they are a-changing.

Sudden Jihad Syndrome in Brazil

2011-04-08T02:06:00.003+01:00

h/t Closet Conservative.

horrible news from Brazil, of all places. 11 people killed, mostly children, in a shooting by a former student who - get this - "In recent months ... appeared to have got closer to Islam".

Well, you don't get much closer to Islam than murderous shooting sprees.

But don't worry, say Brazilian police, there's "no concrete evidence that the attack had either a religious or a political motive."

move along, nothing to see here!

Reflections on Kiddie Indoctrinations in Canada

2011-04-07T17:08:00.002+01:00

From the story a few days ago, about pro-Liberal indoctrination of children at teachkidsnews.com

While getting upset about the way in which Left and Right were presented in the article, it was tempting to overlook a further element in the presentation.

The most telling part of the entire article is, on reflection, the following:

And of course the party in the middle, the Liberals, believe there should be a balance between supporting individuals and supporting businesses.

Words like "middle". "Balance". All things that we want to be, right? To paraphrase BCF's comment, "porridge too hot, porridge too cold, porridge juuuuust right."

Teaching the left-right spectrum to kids would be bad enough, but too many adult blindly accept this meaningless paradigm as instructive, when it plainly isn't.

Presenting political opinion as some sort of balance between two "extremes" - nominally Communism and Fascism - both biases people towards the supposed "middle" and at the same time neglects the deep similarities that exist at both "ends". Libertarians have maintained this for years and have come up with the political "quadrant" thingy as an alternative.

They rightly argue that two forms of collectivism are hardly opposites, and ask where then does individualism come in. Right in the middle? How much sense does that make?

When faced with any two extremes, human beings naturally gravitate towards the middle. That is why, in the well known piece of pop psychology, when asked to pick a random number between 1 and 10, 90% of respondents choose 3 or 7. Defining the "middle" therefore, becomes a key element in any kind of indoctrination.

Teaching children that one political party represents the middle - i.e. the most fair and balanced set of opinions - has the effect of biasing them towards that party. And, of course, the authors know this very well indeed.

Dennis Miller on Koran Pyrotechnics

2011-04-07T15:56:00.002+01:00

Miller weighs in.

I think one of the biggest problems is that Muslims seem to think that if one American burns a Koran or "insults" the wacky Proph Mohammed then the US government should be taking him down. After all, that's what would happen in their Islamic paradise, right?

They'll have to get their beardy heads round the fact that an individual can do something in the West that the government can't stop. And if you are a Westerner who thinks the state should intervene - congratulations, you're a fascist.

The Media, Terry Jones and the decline of the West.

2011-04-07T14:29:00.003+01:00

A great and welcome article by David Adams in the Irish Times discusses the media's large scale rush to blame pastor Terry Jones for the violence carried out by Islamists in the wake of his koran-burning antics, and their reluctance to condemn other horrific acts of violence carried out in the name of the "Religion of Peace".

The media was not responsible either, but it has been guilty of abandoning all sense of perspective, and is running the risk of sacrificing much more. Despite being wholly unrepresentative, Jones was treated as though he was giving crude expression to an overwhelming western sentiment.
His proposed action, though in itself stood to injure no one, was presented as if it were a heinous crime (sections of the media are now demanding that he “repent”). In stark contrast, Islamic intolerance is relatively commonplace, and its victims are many and far-flung. But it is either ignored or semi-excused by references to Iraq and Afghanistan.
The persecution of Christianity and other religions and the murderous bullying of critics in the West is all part of an attempt by extremists to subjugate and dominate, and to replace western cultures and values with their own. Our mainstream media has reacted by adopting the ludicrous hyper-sensitivities of the absolutists while turning a blind eye to their vicious intolerance.

This is an important point. Elements within the media play directly into the hands of the extremists. Are they just 'neutral observers'? No, of course, they are not.

The Left, and their allies in the media, are rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic, to use a well-worn phrase. Everywhere, Western Civilisation is in decline and these folk seem determined to help it on its way.

Hyperbole? Is there anyone who thinks Western Civilisation is on the ascendant? Sure, our societies are getting fairer and more just, but our influence is world affairs is lessening. A greater proportion of the world's population live according to Islam now that ever before, and that Islam is becoming more and more intolerant as the effects of Saudi money take hold. In fact, "their" ideas and values are seeping into the West far faster than "ours" are, and what progress has been made there is being reversed.

Communist China heads for major power status and is now more economically significant than Japan. "Third World" values take hold in the west and are proving nearly impossible to eradicate, largely thanks to multiculturalism and it's pathetic inability to tell right from wrong. Western taxpayers subsidise Middle Eastern family "values" and lifestyles that are unsustainable without government assistance.

Western birthrates pale in comparison to Asian and African numbers and there is no evidence, despite claims to the contrary, that immigrants from those places typically adapt to Western levels of reproduction on arrival in Europe, Australia and America.

The future seems bleak, and it's hard to predict anything other than a scenario whereby Conservatives and Nationalists battle to protect Western values against the encroachment of tyrannical, misogynistic, illiberal and primitive worldviews, while liberals and (some) Socialists worry about 'diversity' and engineering a society that will be occupying a smaller and smaller political, economic and geographical space as time progresses.

Meanwhile, we'll be busily arresting folks for burning korans while large parts of Europe are on fire.

Muslims and David Duke: Together At Last!

2011-04-06T00:08:00.002+01:00

h/t BCF

Ain't multiculturalism grand!

Duh Guardian on Free Speech.

2011-04-05T23:40:00.002+01:00

There is no mushiness to mushy for the inhabitants of the world of Duh Guardian, and this from Michael Tomasky is no exception. It's one of those "I see what you're saying, but ... still no." pieces that are worth noticing from time to time while we sort out our own views.

The author notes:

It's worth remembering here that there really is not quite any such thing as pure free speech in the United States, general perceptions to the contrary. A citizen cannot directly incite violence without expecting some consequences, for one. Then there's defamation of character.

As though those cases are 'exceptions' to the doctrine of Free Speech when in fact they are not. They are rather claims that occur within speech and it is the violence done thereby that is punished by laws against incitement to violence, and against slander. If that sounds like splitting hairs, consider it this way. In both cases a case must be made against the speaker and harm done proven. It is not the speech that is on trial but the harm to the third party that must be assessed, and with, it must be noted, considerable wiggle-room for interpretation.

Is it still incitement to violence if no actual violence was committed? Have you been slandered if no reasonable person could believe the claims?

The law regarding Free Speech is, therefore: say what you like as long as you are prepared to face the consequences of potentially offending another person's Rights.

He adds:

I'm well aware that as a journalist I should be an absolutist, and as an American I fully subscribe to the notion of the robust marketplace of ideas and all that. But I think these are difficult questions. It seems pretty obvious that Jones is trying to incite...if not violence, then at least rage, and that there's not one redeeming social quality to the act.

I disagree. Firstly, I don't think Jones was trying to incite violence anymore than he was trying to prove that the violence is inherent in intolerant strands of Islam. How reasonable is it to murder people over the burning of a book, however sacred? Is human life not holier? We should be able to apply our judgment to the question without being forced to accept an answer that is contrary to all that we believe in.

Secondly, is speech only free when there is a "social quality" to that speech? This Orwellian terminology might wash with Guardian readers but not with most Conservatives. Jones burned the Koran because he wanted to, not because there was some value to society in doing so (even if he believed there might be). And, like it or not, he has the freedom to do so.

Pro-Liberal Indoctrination of Canadian Kids

2011-04-05T16:22:00.002+01:00

This fresh from BCF.

"Teaching Kids the News" sounds innocuous enough.

The segment on the 2011 Elections (see link above) teaches children how the different parties think, but lo and behold, we learn that

People on the “right” believe they can help the country best by strengthening its businesses. People on the left believe in helping individuals and families first. And people in the centre believe in a bit of both.

[...]And of course the party in the middle, the Liberals, believe there should be a balance between supporting individuals and supporting businesses.

Eh? leftwingers support the individual? As a commentor at BCF says, the left supports individuals as much as the borg does.

And since when do the Liberal Party define the "middle"? The centre of Canadian politics has shifted firmly to the Right in recent years.

Bill Maher Being Funny For a Change

2011-04-05T04:47:00.003+01:00

He is!
Here is Maher hosting an Islamic Burqa fashion show.

He gets away with this one because he's a liberal and therefore can't be a racist!

Check out this video from the Daily Rasp.

Tunisian "Refugees" Show Their Gratitude to Italians

2011-04-05T04:39:00.002+01:00

Amid shouts of "Allahu Akbar", teenage Tunisians destroy a building on the Italian island of Lampedusa where a local charity has been taking care of them. Their complaint? They're still on the island, and the ungrateful f*cks think they have some right to be given better accommodation elsewhere. With their cries of "Allah is great" they surrender their right to set food on European soil - ship them straight back to their Islamic paradise forthwith.

The Limits of Libertarianism. And John Gray.

2011-04-03T22:53:00.003+01:00

I am currently reading a collection of English philosopher John Gray's writings.

Gray is what you'd call a "Conservative" writer better described as a sceptic. His underlying theme is scepticism towards progress, and the bearers of that utopian fantasy: "Progressives". Gray wastes little time confronting socialists and other collectivists, instead focussing his energy on trends within Conservatism, both in America and Britain, and particularly neoliberalism and neoconservatism.

He is quite dismissive of Libertarians, but his criticisms are interesting and valid, and certainly difficult to argue with. Gray considers neoliberalism a utopian project like Marxism and liberalism, and suggests a more sceptical approach, and a greater regard for tradition and the institutions that currently exist in the West. For Gray, the Conservative approach involves nurturing those institutions, the Church, marriage, the legal system that many libertarians consider to belong to the 'private' sphere and in this sense his writings are a good illustration of how Conservatives differ from right-wing liberals even though they may have much in common.

In one of his earlier essays, he warns against the dangers of the Right simply taking over the bloated state inherited from the Left, and in this respect has much in common with American Conservatives such as Jonah Goldberg.

The Individualism of Libertarians is limited, he argues, because it does not sufficiently take into account the "unchosen" aspects of the individual - the traditions, the historical, cultural and geographic location of the individual within the wider society. The unchosenness does not diminish our individuality, he argues, but places us in a framework within which freedom can be allowed to flourish.

Freedom is not a abstract concept, but our choices are made possible by things that exist around us such as where we live and what we do. Gray uses the free market as an illustrative example. Many Libertarians fetishise the Market, for two reasons I think. Firstly, an awareness of economics can lead us to think in economic terms and portray man as homo economicus. Which is only one way of looking at ourselves, as most Liberals will admit. Secondly, for us the market is an expression of human freedom, a gauge of it and a measure of how we are able to make choices. But the Market, Gray insists, does not exist in a vacuum, and historically does not and cannot exist without the necessary institutions to support it.

Most Libertarians will agree with this, but may differ when we suggest that the most important institutions for upholding the freedom of the market are a disinterested State, a neutral legal system, and a constitutional arrangement that protects both the individual and his property. Gray argues that this minimalist state is inadequate by itself, and that the free market was also built on a particular kind of culture that values hard work and saving, a strong Civil Society and a healthy sense of community.

Gray argues that the Thatcher years in Britain achieved much for the economy, but little for society, and that Libertarians and neoliberals neglect this at our peril. The result, says Gray, was the collapse of bourgeois Britain, the very segment of society that had the most to gain from the neoliberal experiment. Gray sees neoliberalism as the application of science to human societies in the model of Marxism and progressivism, originating in Enlightenment Humanism, which he considers quasi-religious in outlook.

The future of Conservatism, says Gray, depends largely on its ability to reject neoliberalism and begin to offer something more solid to a risk-averse populace that a highly risky environment that comes with unconstrained markets. There is certainly much truth in what he writes, and it would do Libertarians no harm at all to take on board many of his criticisms.

Jihad Reaches Hindus - in Australia.

2011-04-03T06:26:00.002+01:00

Now this video at GOV makes me really angry.

It's not just the violent jihad, and the targeting of an Indian community that was present in Australia long before vicious Muslims set up shop, but the complete refusal to actually blame anyone specific for the shooting and ongoing persecution of a minority.

As is revealed here, the jihad is busy at work, but watching the news report one is left with the impression that the culprits are Mick Dundee and his mate Donk, rather than Johnny Jihad and Mohammed al-Akbar. Seriously. "Racial violence" is PC-speak for "whitey did it", and in situations where the narrative doesn't quite run like that -because Islamic supremacists are busy trying to run the local kuffars out of town- it's a safe bet to leave the watcher with the impression that some local ne'er-do-wells were behind the attack.

Sickening.

Fascist Protests Self

2011-04-03T06:02:00.003+01:00

In a remarkable piece of left wing self-hatred, a stray Imperial Snowtrooper attends a protest against him/herself.

Thanks to Dag at No Dhimmitude for the link.

Ignorant Afghan Savages Murder Innocents

2011-04-02T19:00:00.002+01:00

But, don't worry, they were just "protestors", says The Guardian.

The Guardian deserved some credit in that they don't blame pastor Terry Jones as immediately as America's ABC News is prepared to. Their headline?

"U.N. Staffers Killed in Afghanistan Over Terry Jones Koran Burning, Police Say"

Nice. No questioning of the logic whereby Afghans "protest" the actions of a free individual in another country.

Jones is unrepentant - of course he is. Why on earth would anybody attribute any blame to him? Oh, wait, we have lots of liberals who - faced with Islamic savages wielding decapitation knives - will always look for a white/American/Zionist (delete as appropriate) face to stick the blame to for it.

How sad and pathetic we are. Best not offend those savages now!

Norway and the Jews- Alan Dershowitz

2011-04-02T18:42:00.002+01:00

This appeared in the National Post this week, which is where I read it, but have found an online copy here.

By Alan M. Dershowitz

I recently completed a tour of Norwegian universities, where I spoke about international law as applied to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But the tour nearly never happened.

Its sponsor, a Norwegian pro-Israel group, offered to have me lecture without any charge to the three major universities. Norwegian universities generally jump at any opportunity to invite lecturers from elsewhere. When my Harvard colleague Stephen Walt, co-author of "The Israel Lobby," came to Norway, he was immediately invited to present a lecture at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Trondheim. Likewise with Ilan Pappe, a demonizer of Israel who teaches at Oxford.

My hosts expected, therefore, that their offer to have me present a different academic perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be eagerly accepted. I have written half a dozen books on the subject presenting a centrist view in support of the two-state solution. But the universities refused.

You can read the full story at the above link, but the most important part of the article is the statement by Trond Adresen, signatory to the boycott Israel petition:

"There is something immensely self-satisfied and self-centered at the tribal mentality that is so prevalent among Jews. . . . [They] as a whole, are characterized by this mentality. . . . It is no less legitimate to say such a thing about Jews in 2008-2009 than it was to make the same point about the Germans around 1938."

As Dershowitz remarks, such talk, directed not at Israelis or Zionists but at Jews, is apparently acceptable to Norway's elite.

Free Trade Makes Wealth!

2011-03-29T19:00:00.002+01:00

'Course it does.

You want that beer more than you want the $5, and the bar owner wants $5 more than he wants the beer - you're both happy!

What stops wealth from being created is high costs imposed on that trade. The government says the beer must cost $8. The government taxes the beer @ 60%. The government places restrictions on where, how and at what time that beer must be sold. Very soon both parties are unhappy and at some point one party gives up what has become a painful endeavour and gets a government job.

That is Capitalism 101. Simples!

It's Mostly Anti-Racists Keeping Racism Alive

2011-03-27T21:31:00.003+01:00

Great things come from Kathy Shaidle,

"In October last year, Prospect magazine published a set of articles by black and Asian writers under the banner ‘Rethinking Race’. The authors, who wrote about the negative effects of anti-racist polices, asserted that race is no longer the significant disadvantage it is often portrayed as. Importantly, they raised the question of how difficult it is to discuss race in an open and honest way."

Ok we already know this but it's good to read it at Spiked!

Levant on Japan

2011-03-27T18:28:00.001+01:00

Good article from Ezra Levant:

Saturday was so-called Earth Hour, a publicity stunt created by the World Wildlife Fund where enthusiasts were supposed to stop using electricity for an hour. Only a rich, luxuriant society would fetishize poverty and want. Japan is still rebuilding; there are still parts of that country where electricity is not back on. They are in a permanent state of Earth Hour deprivation — not as some fashion statement but because of a tragedy. How is that state of despair a morally commendable situation?
It was human development, industry, capitalism, electricity — and in Japan’s case, safe nuclear power — that has made the difference between their more modest death toll and the 230,000 who died in Indonesia’s earthquake and tsunami in 2004, or the 220,000 who died last year in Haiti. Haiti’s earthquake was less than 1% as powerful; it was their lack of industrial development that made it so deadly.
Is that really the state of affairs we want to be worshipped on Earth Day? For centuries, guilty, rich, white liberals have professed their admiration for the “noble savage” — an unspoiled man, typically in a pre-industrial civilization, not yet spoiled by our modern ways or troubles.
It’s a fantasy, it’s condescending, it’s political psychotherapy for the idle rich who feel guilty about how easy their own lives are, and who are clearly looking for some spiritual meaning they themselves lack. But in a world where there are enough natural threats to man’s happiness and longevity, fetishizing primitive economies is a suicidal fetish.
Japan will rise again — over the objections of those who would sentence it to a nuclear-free, industry-free, permanent Earth Day.

White Bad, NonWhite Good.

2011-03-27T17:20:00.004+01:00

Have a laugh at this. And then stop.

The highlight may be the woman of colour saying that "something's wrong" when there isn't anyone else like her around.

Don't worry - the federal government is busy prosecuting the offending county. All will be well soon.

edit:
Citizens of Gary, Indiana take note!

table: cities with highest African-American populations.

City Percent
Gary, Ind. 84.0%
Detroit, Mich. 81.6
Birmingham, Ala. 73.5
Jackson, Miss. 70.6
New Orleans, La. 67.3%
Baltimore, Md. 64.3
Atlanta, Ga. 61.4
Memphis, Tenn. 61.4
Washington, DC 60.0%
Richmond, Va. 57.2

Steyn on Libya and Other Musings.

2011-03-26T18:05:00.003Z

From the OC Register:

"Libya, in that sense, is a classic post-nationalist, post-modern military intervention: As in Kosovo, we're do-gooders in a land with no good guys. But, unlike Kosovo, not only is there no strategic national interest in what we're doing, the intended result is likely to be explicitly at odds with U.S. interests. A quarter-century back, Gadhafi was blowing American airliners out of the sky and murdering British policewomen: That was the time to drop a bomb on him. But we didn't. Everyone from the Government of Scotland (releasing the "terminally ill" Lockerbie bomber, now miraculously restored to health) to Mariah Carey and Beyonce (with their million-dollar-a-gig Gadhafi party nights) did deals with the Colonel."

Personally, I have little to offer by way of opinion on Libya. I supported the Iraq war so it would be inconsistent of me to fail to support this intervention, although I remain wary of who or what exactly will take the place of the nasty Gadhafi. All we can hope for is enough turmoil and disorganisation to keep terrorism at bay for a few more years.

The other way of looking at it is that anything is better than a dictator such as Moomoo. Anything except, oh let's say, a Muslim-brotherhood dominated pseudo-democracy itching to install another ayatollah in the apostate Libyan nation. The problem with dictators is that often they're "our" guys, making it difficult to justify getting rid of them and opening up a can of who-knows-what. On the other hand, we in the post-Cold War order aren't supposed to think like that anymore, and are broadly in favour of democracy even though we can't control how they'll turn out.

So I would conclude that the best thing for Libya is to face a bit of Western shock-and-awe with little or no nation-building thrown in. After all, what has a decade in Afghanistan achieved, other than courts who can execute people for becoming Christians? As Jonah Goldberg says, there's little point in liberating anyone if we can't attempt to moderate their less, ah, extreme urges.

Norway's National TV Station Shows pro-Gaza Documentary

2011-03-24T20:08:00.002Z

From NRK's website.

Norway's government owned station shows 14 year old Palestinian girl saying how she wants to be a lawyer "so she can ask the Jews for justice".

A 12 year old boy wants to be a doctor so he can "help those who have been hurt by the Jews".

The documentary is called "Gaza's tears" and shows footage from Israel's attack on terrorists in Gaza in 2008-9.

It mostly shows a lot of sad children looking out into space, and the Israeli military milling around. One woman describing some dead Palestinians as "martyrs" [28:01]. Her young son hopes God (or rather Allah) "punishes" Israel, and Egypt and all the countries that support Israel.

Some of the images are certainly disturbing, but no attempt is made to show the other side of the story, or to show dead or injured Israelis or hear their stories. I mean, suffering is suffering and inherently bad - but devoid of context, quite a meaningless documentary.

Canadian Losers Force Election.

2011-03-22T23:50:00.002Z

It's inevitable, says BCF, with a great illustration of the Knights Who Say No.

For outsiders, Canada's minority Conservative government, despite lefty scaremongering, has done a fantastic job over the last few years after displacing the rotten-to-the-core huge-government Liberals. They have even annoyed some supporters by not being "Conservative enough"- such is their respect for public opinion and desire to maintain a stable government. PM Stephen Harper is probably the best political leader around in the Western world today, and Minster Jason Kenney has been the voice of reason more often than not.

But now they're trying to get their budget passed by Parliament, and the other parties are not biting, which will force an election. Just when the Tories are increasing their support daily and could conceivably end up with a majority this time around. Ignatieff, leader of the illiberal Liberal Party, is the epitome of the left-Liberal that we on the Right love to hate - a smug, intellectual, condescending, entitled and arrogant elitist who believes more government is better no matter the cost, and for whom elections are just a way for the common folk to ratify his party's right to rule.

It's time to bury the Liberals. For good.

Brits use Sharia Law to Save Tax!

2011-03-22T12:36:00.001Z

Well it's about time!

thanks to Scaramouche.

"House buyers in the United Kingdom are reportedly using Sharia law to pose as Muslims to dodge stamp duty.
According to the Daily Express, a scheme, brought in by Labour in 2005, allows followers of Islam to buy property without paying the tax."

Nothing like equality before the law, is there?

It's time for non-Muslims to take our equality back.

Islam 4 the UK

2011-03-21T21:49:00.005Z

To the tune of this.

And inspired by this at Closet Conservative.

Sing it loud!

I am an anti-Christ
I am an Islamist
I know what I want
and I know how to get it
I wanna destroy your way of life
'Cos I wanna be, theocracy.
No dogs, buddy!

Sharia for the UK
it's coming sometime, maybe
We change the law one bit at a time
you won't even notice when England is gone
'Cos I wanna be, patriarchy
It's in the city!

How many ways to get what you want
I use the best, I use the threats
I use the Media
I use taqqiya
Cause I wanna be, "diversity"
It's the only way to be!

Is this the sharia
or is this the taqqiya
or is this Saudi Arabia,
It used to be the UK
now just another country
another Islamic territory!

I wanna be an Islamist.

And I wanna be an Islamist.

More United Nations Bullshit International Solidarity Days

2011-03-20T01:30:00.003Z

Did you know that 21st March is the UN's

"International Day for the Elimination
of Racial Discrimination"?

Big letters aren't they?

In just as big letters you're about to discover that 2011 is the UN's

"International Year for People of African Descent"

Yep, the whole year. And why?

"In proclaiming this International Year, the international community is recognising that people of African descent represent a distinct group whose human rights must be promoted and protected."

Aha. And

"Even Afro-descendants who are not directly descended from slaves face the racism and racial discrimination that still persist today, generations after the slave trade ended."

T'riffic. Like Barack Obama you mean?

In honour of African Descent year, wouldn't be great if we, the international - heh - community, got most of Africa to apply the concept of human rights on its own continent? Instead of on, like, other continents where those ideas have taken shape long ago and continue to be applied?

Just kidding! we all know where this is heading. As usual...

The White Terror Grips Calgary

2011-03-19T17:25:00.002Z

... says the Globe and Mail.

Says Scaramouche:

"Good thing we have those "human rights" bodies [...] to save us poor, weak Canucki Jews from the Nazi "threat," eh?"

According to a link provided at the G&M "sensationalist fearmongering alarmist" article*, here, the numbers of the neo-Nazi movement are in the region of - wait for it - a hundred!

Yes, that's right, all the way to triple figures!

What's interesting too is that the G&M has this to say:

"Nor is there a natural foothold for white supremacists in an increasingly diverse Calgary, where nearly one-quarter of the population, including the mayor, are visible minorities."

So.. if I'm reading correctly, there would be more Nazis in a area with no minorities. Really, guys? really??

Care to provide any evidence to back that up? Like by telling us how many Nazis there are in horrendously undiverse Newfoundland? How many are there in thoroughly diverse Toronto?

In a country where "persecution" and "marginalisation" -oh, and "disenfranchisement"- are considered perfectly acceptable excuses/explanations for the worst kinds of Islamist bigotry and even terrorism, the same defence is not employed for these misguided loons?

Have y'ever though that maybe the increase in "multiculturalism" combined with the sort of human-rightsy arrogance displayed in the media might be just a teensy bit responsible for encouraging these fools?

Nah, didn't think so.

*ok nobody has actually called it that yet - but just you wait!!

Apartheid in Canada now, Says Stupid Foreigner

2011-03-14T12:16:00.002Z

with a big thanks to Kathy at FiveFeetOfFury:

"From its very foundations, Canada has been based on the theft of indigenous land and the genocide and displacement of indigenous peoples. In crucial ways, the Canadian state’s treatment of indigenous peoples, historically and currently, can be described as an apartheid system. .. As non-natives, we have a role within our communities to further the process of decolonizing Canada."

Writes one "Israeli Apartheid Week" organiser named Chandni Desai. One can assume from this that Ms.Desai regrets the move to Canada made by either herself or her parents, and is busily packing her bags so as not to inconvenience the natives any further.

Or is consistency just far too much to expect from the Left?

As for myself, quite enjoying my immigration to Canada, thankyou very much. Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out, loser!

UN tells Ireland's Catholic Schools to "Stop Discriminating"

2011-03-11T19:26:00.003Z

what what?

Having initially read the report as "the EU", it seems as though the

"UN's Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination says Ireland must accelerate efforts to establish these schools and to amend legislation that inhibits students from enrolling in schools because of their faith or belief. "

According to RTE News, the UN thinks it's "racist" for Catholic schools to choose Catholic pupils over non-Catholic ones. While reading this nonsense my first questions was whether or not Muslim schools, which are far more exclusive and discriminatory than Catholic ones, will be subject to the same criticism. I sincerely doubt this. The move is clearly yet another anti-Western drive by the UN to force changes that will be largely ignored by the wider world, where, of course, the real inequalities lie. The proof of this is in New Zealand's reaction to criticisms of "racial inequalities" there.

The key word in the above quote is "inhibits". Currently, non-Catholics go to Catholic schools. My sister went to one. There is little or no problem in this regard. And how is this "racial discrimination"!!!! Surely a Catholic West African is being given priority over a Protestant Irish kid??
As a non-Catholic, I have no problem with Catholic schools doing what they like. Although, if the same restrictions are placed on Muslim schools, I might be happy. But who really believes this will happen?

Scumbag Jihadist Refuses Fine, Accepts Welfare.

2011-03-09T18:50:00.002Z

thanks to: Closet Conservative.

As if it weren't already a soft sentence - a fifty quid fine for desecrating a poppy on armistice day, which is hate speech, not political protest - the jihadist scum has refused to pay it, adding plenty of supremacist insult to injury in the process.

read here.

The reason the fine was so low is because this valuable and constructive citizen accepts 792 pounds in ~~jizya~~ welfare every month.

Interfaith Saps Get Together to Say: Today I am a Muslim Too!

2011-03-08T16:32:00.001Z

Mark Steyn's take on the event is here.

A Rally at Times Square and a Time for a Muslim Moral Reckoning

The occupant of the White House's middle name is Hussein, every school curriculum lists a whitewashed history of Islam that ignores the genocides and atrocities, and there are now more positive depictions of Muslims on TV, than there are of Christians and Jews combined. But Muslims in America still aren't happy.

From all the wailing and boohooing, you might think that mosques were being shelled, the way Muslims are attacking monasteries in Egypt. Or that Muslim politicians were being gunned down in the street the way that Christian politicians are in Pakistan. You might at least think that Muslims are treated like second-class citizens, the way non-Muslims are treated in every Muslim country in the world. But no that's not the case.

So what has Muslim burqas wadded up in a bunch this time? Representative Peter King wants to hold hearings to investigate whether some Muslim groups are urging their communities not to cooperate with government authorities in fighting terrorism. King is not inviting experts on terrorism like Steve Emerson, or experts on Islam like Andrew Bostom or Robert Spencer. He isn't even inviting ex-Muslims like Ayaan Hirsi Ali or Wafa Sultan. Instead the witness list is limited to Muslims and law enforcement officials. Despite all the hysteria and Islamophobia-mongering, Islam isn't on trial here.

One of those witnesses is congressman Keith Ellison, a former associate of the violently racist Nation of Islam, who has defended and promoted anti-semitism in the past. Since then Ellison has been transformed into the chief spokesman for tolerance as America's first Muslim congressman. That tolerance however ends at the borders of Islam. And does not extend beyond it.

read on.

What's Missing from this "tragic" Story?

2011-03-04T05:35:00.002Z

I'm having one of those twilight zone moments, one where I'm the only person who can see the farking elephant sitting in the middle of the crowded room.

read this story.

Now, 'tis a heartwarming yet tragic Irish tale of a young(ish) man who toppled to his death from a clifftop, and ah sure wasn't he a father of two and everything.

And what's worse - his deportation order was signed the very day he took his own life! Well, the cruelty of the asylum system is surely to blame, in that case. Those dastards at the Civil Service denying him his very right.

But hold the damn phone.

Did we all just skip over the part where his GIRLFRIEND WAS FOUND MURDERED at their home, with their two-year-old child still in the house?

On what planet is the suicide of a murderer who just strangled the mother of one of his children in any way "tragic"?

But as long as the perpetrator is a poor, West African "victim" of the callous system, who cares if he (allegedly) murders a woman?

In (dis) honour of Israeli Apartheid Week, part 2

2011-03-03T02:42:00.002Z

Fresh from the Cat's paws to your brain:

"Islamic States Apartheid Week"!

In (dis)honour of "Israeli Apartheid Week"

2011-03-02T04:26:00.003Z

A great selection of posters marking Israel's distinct lack of Apartheid, courtesy of Scaramouche!

From ElderofZiyon

My favourite:

Muslim Brotherhood - Good Mates with Gaddafi

2011-03-01T18:51:00.002Z

Here's an interesting article courtesy of BCF:

The Muslim Brotherhood and Gaddafi were partners not too long ago

In encouraging Libyan soldiers to kill leader Muammar Gaddafi (Point de Bascule), Muslim Brotherhood (MB) patriarch Youssef Qaradawi has got himself in a bind. It was his MB that had collaborated extensively with the man whom they condemn as a tyrant today. Qaradawi’s call to assassinate Gaddafi has been translated into English by MEMRI.

read on.

Saudi Student Held for Plotting Terror Attack

2011-02-24T23:42:00.002Z

Private citizen's profiling saves the day!

According to CNBC, Khalid Aldawsari was arrested while trying to buy a chemical he needed to build a bomb, having already purchased materials from eBay and Amazon.com.

There's no doubt that the sharpness of the shipping company employee saved lives.

In the end, it wasn’t a TSA agent, a Homeland Security operative or an FBI agent who first spotted alleged terror plotter Khalid Ali-M Aldawsari.
It was the employees of a private shipping company.
Khalid Aldawsari
According to the government, somebody at the shipping company called local police after becoming suspicious about a chemical package that Aldawsari was set to receive.
Meanwhile, officials at the chemical company that sent the material called the FBI with their suspicions about Aldawsari—and later worked with an FBI agent who posed undercover as a company employee in dealings with the suspect.
Aldawsari, 20, was arrested Wednesday in Texas and charged with attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction. The Department of Justice said Thursday that Aldawsari had purchased chemicals and equipment necessary to make an improvised explosive device and had researched potential targets to strike, including the home address of former President George W. Bush.

Read the rest.

The New Middle East

2011-02-23T17:23:00.002Z

Reading Steyn's latest, "the Post-Western Middle East" I am reminded of the two kinds of freedom that most people seem to conflate: Individual freedom and collective freedom.

The former is the essential Liberal, Western view, where my freedom is constrained by government when it prevents me from doing what I want to do. The reason this is the prevalent view of freedom in Western democracies is because the matter of sovereignty is largely settled, and our major conflict is that between personal freedom and the "right" of the State to pilfer our money.

The second is the type of freedom that we no longer have to worry about; the freedom of the collective to do what it collectively wants. When Mel Gibson as William Wallace yells "freedom" riding into battle, he has no Lockean concept of individual liberty in mind but a desire that the Scots should not be subject to the English.

As we witness upheavals in the Middle East and North Africa, we would do well to remember that Democracy only really works alongside the first concept, and not so well with the second. After all, if freedom means the freedom for the Egyptian people, say, to do what they want, it is very likely that individual freedom will gain no ground at all, in fact it may even be reduced. Just ask the 91% of women who have been genitally mutilated.

If collective freedom is more important the individual freedom, then it really doesn't matter who is in charge, whether it be an elected parliament or yet another Arab strongman.

There is little doubt that in the Arab world, more "freedom" equals more Islam.

Canada: The Right to Self Defence?

2011-01-24T20:10:00.001Z

Great article from the National Post:

Canadian officialdom is conducting an all-out assault against self-defence. Quite simply, few politicians, Crown prosecutors, judges, law professors and police commanders believe ordinary Canadians have any business using force to defend themselves, their loved ones, homes, farms or businesses.

The latest example of the campaign against self-defence comes from southern Ontario. In August, retired crane operator Ian Thomson, who lives near Port Colborne, awoke early in the morning to find masked men attempting to burn his house down with him in it. When he fired at them with a licensed handgun he had stored in a safe, he was charged.

How out-of-touch are police and prosecutors when you are not even allowed to defend yourself and your property from thugs attempting to incinerate you? Their attitude seems to be that it is better to die waiting for police to respond than to take matters into your own hands.

About six years ago, Thomson moved to a rural property near Port Colborne to find peace and quiet. Almost immediately, he had a run-in with his neighbour over the neighbour’s unwillingness to keep his chickens in his own yard. Ever since, tension between the two has escalated.

Then early one Sunday morning last August, three masked men showed up outside Thomson’s home and started lobbing Molotov cocktails at the house while Thomson was inside. A former firearms instructor, Thomson took a revolver from his gun safe, loaded it, then went outside and fired two or three shots in the direction of the arsonists.

Thomson has surveillance cameras around his property. When he gave tapes from them to police to aid their search for the firebombers, police charged him with pointing a firearm and careless storage of firearms. Officers also turned up at his home and confiscated his collection of seven firearms and seized his firearms licence.

Police are so opposed to citizens defending themselves that even if criminals show up at your rural home, far from a police station, and try to burn it to the ground with you inside, you are considered the criminal if you shoot at them. Even if you clearly and obvious believe your life and home to be in imminent danger, officials will not support your attempts to stop your attackers.

There is also the case of David Chen, the Toronto green grocer who was acquitted last year of assault and unlawful confinement for detaining a career criminal he caught shoplifting from his store. Crown prosecutors had so convinced themselves that Chen’s defensive actions posed a greater threat to public order that they offered a lighter sentence to Anthony Bennett, the shoplifter, in return for his testimony against Chen.

On Friday, Prime Minister Stephen Harper met with Chen and promised him a new citizen’s-arrest bill would be introduced into Parliament within three to four weeks — shortly after MPs return to work on Jan. 31. The bill is supposed to make it easier for ordinary citizen’s to arrest and detain suspects without falling afoul of the law and having to defend their actions in costly court battles.

Then there is Joseph Singleton, the Taber, Alta. oilfield consultant who returned home to his acreage last May to find his home ransacked and a thief fleeing. When the burglar started ramming his car, Singleton took a hatchet and, with the flat side, hit the thief twice on the side of the face. Without questioning Singleton – based solely on the say-so of the burglar – police last October charged Singleton with assault with a weapon and assault causing bodily harm.

If officials aren’t out to end the right to self-defence, why would they side with the criminals against law-abiding citizens?

Thomson’s case has caused some to call for the entrenchment of the “Castle Doctrine” in Canadian law. Several American states already have such statutes that recognize a person’s home as his or her castle and give homeowners the right to use deadly force to protect their homes, family and property.

Frankly, there’s no need to copy the Americans. Canadians already have the right to use force – even deadly force – to protect themselves, we need simply to return to our legal roots.

When Canada became independent at Confederation in 1867, Canadians retained the rights they had at the time as British subjects. These included three “absolute rights”: the right to personal liberty, the right to private property and the right to self-defence, up to and including the right to kill an attacker or burglar.

William Blackstone, Britain’s famous constitutional expert, argued the right to self-defence included the right to kill even an agent of the king found on one’s property after dark, uninvited. He also traced the right to armed self-defence back to the time of King Canute (995–1035) when subjects could be fined for failing to keep weapons for their own protection.

Even in Upper Canada for much of the 19^th Century it was the law that all adult males be armed, at their own expense. In part, this was so a militia could be formed quickly for defence of the colony and in part so individuals were prepared to defend themselves and their property.

These rights have not been extinguished just because Canada has become modernized and urbanized, or because our officials would rather pretend they don’t exist and never have.

To be sure, our right to self-defence is not a licence to kill. The force ordinary citizens may use in self-defence must be proportionate to the threat they face. You cannot shoot someone for poking a finger in your chest or cutting you off in traffic. But the real possibility that attackers might burn you up inside your own home – as they allegedly intended to do to Ian Thomson – would seem to justify shooting at them with a handgun, even if you end up killing them.

The right to self-defence conflicts with the belief modern lovers of big government have that only the military and police should be allowed to use force, so self-defence has to be treated as a crime.

In truth, it is an individual right that existed before government and, so, cannot be extinguished by government.

Islamophobia

2011-01-23T04:54:00.001Z

Nick Cohen gets it right:

If you want a working definition of Islamophobia that rises above the special pleading of religious reactionaries my suggestion would be: “Islamophobia is a prejudice that dominates western political and media elites and the confused and faintly sinister mind of the Chairwoman of the British Conservative Party. It holds that Muslim women want to be oppressed, that Muslim gays want to be murdered, that Muslims want to have their rights to speak and vote denied, and that Muslim dominated countries want to be ruled by sleazy, life-denying and vicious dictators.

h/t The Propagandist

TheMuslim.ca Publishes HIZB UT-TAHRIR Terrorist Screed - Islamist Rag Published By Toronto Elementary School Chair

2011-01-18T16:38:00.002Z

I've been recovering from surgery of late and haven't managed to summon the energy to post anything, even though quite a bit of interesting stuff has been happening.

Here's a link from BCF.

TheMuslim.ca Publishes a HIZB UT-TAHRIR Terrorist Screed calling for Islamist Rule in Tunisia.

Interesting Way to look at WikiLeaks

2011-01-08T13:32:00.003Z

From American Thinker comes an article on the New Warfare, Stuxnet and WikiLeaks. Here's just the section on WikiLeaks, but the whole thing is worth reading too.

UPDATE: Here's another view on the subject, also from American Thinker.

It is no exaggeration to state that Julian Assange is engaged in warfare. He is at war -- not simply with the U.S., although the U.S. is his current bête noire, but with the human race as a whole. He is a would-be Alexander, intent on bending the world to his will, with little concern who gets hurt while he's doing it. He sees himself as a mythic figure, above and beyond the run of normal humanity, a man with a historical mission. (This is no rarity, unfortunately -- see Obama, Barack.) His followers see him as an Apollo bringing forth a new age.

Yet the world isn't bending, and the new age remains unborn. Despite all the excitement, Assange's impact has been minimal. Until incarcerated, he simply dropped one info-bomb after another, then ran off and hid, perhaps loitering to paw a woman or two in the process. It's an unedifying spectacle, nothing Alexandrine or Napoleonic about it.

It has been an axiom of the left since the days of the New Masses and the Daily Worker that if "the people" knew what was "really going on," what decisions were being made and crimes committed "in their name," they'd simply rise up in their wrath to smash the pillars of the temple and smite the evildoers. This is the impulse behind the Pentagon Papers, all those flicks that end with the main character pausing meaningfully before entering the Times building, and, for that matter, the entire Plame saga, now appearing in a multiplex near you. That is the role that Assange is playing in real time and on the world stage. And yet... far from ushering a new non-Matrix reality, he's cowering in a British hoosegow waiting for the Swedish cops to get the spelling right on his rape warrant, his site is being locked out from every host and service on the net, from Amazon to PayPal to XXX Real Live Bondage XXX for all I know, while the world awaits his next info-bomb not with dread or exultation, but with much the same sense of titillation as greets the antics of Britney or Jon Gosselin. What went wrong?

The information is trivial. There are no blockbusters or nation-breakers in the material yet released. No secret fleets of black helicopters. Karl Rove is not scheming to sell humanity to the aliens. The CIA is not transplanting children's brains into chimpanzees in the Langley basement. What we have learned instead is that the Saudis are terrified at the prospect of a nuclear Iran, that the U.S. is cutting quiet anti-terror deals with countries such as Yemen, and that Hamid Karzai is as corrupt as he is charismatic. In other words, nothing at all new to anyone paying attention to media reports. The big disclosure is how little of this stuff needed to be secret in the first place.

There have been loud gasps in some circles at the "news" that Hillary instructed her diplomats to seek out intelligence. This is asinine. Diplomats have been low-key intelligence agents as long as they've existed. For centuries they were often the only intelligence force many states possessed. The practice was not invented by Hillary, or Condi, or even Talleyrand, for that matter. It's part of the job description. All this "revelation" does is provide Dick Morris with ammunition to continue his never-ending feud with Hillary.

The only item that surprised me was news of China's impatience with North Korea, which I never thought they'd admit to anybody, but there it is. Since one of the drivers of the recent crisis has been the conviction that China would back up North Korea to the last ditch, it appears that our would-be Australian Samson has succeeded only in defusing a current tension point. Good going -- how does a Nobel sound?

The damage is minimal. There has been a lot of concern expressed over damage to the U.S. as a whole, to American diplomacy, and to the international community. I don't see it. The Saudis are not going to sever relations or cease sharing intelligence, not with a pack of crazy Shi'ites intent on building A-bombs right across the Gulf. The Yemenis are not going to toss the infidels out and allow al-Qaeda to march into Sana'a next week. What damage does exist can be easily repaired since it's in the interests of all concerned to do so.

Examine the chain of events. The gruff, hard-bitten Bradley Manning stole a lot of secret e-mails and sent them to WikiLeaks. The e-mails originated in large part from the Defense Department, run by Robert Gates, and the State Department, run by Hillary Clinton. The Justice Department, run by Eric Holder, couldn't figure out what to do about it. All these people work for Barack Obama. That's a pretty impressive lineup. All that we're missing is Van Jones, and he'll probably pop up.

If anybody sees a sign of the reliable, dutiful United States in that picture, the U.S. that serves as global sheriff and last resort of desperate nations and peoples worldwide, kindly point it out to me. All I see is the weird, twisted caricature that Obama and company have been trying to foist on us lo these past two years. It is that fantasy leftist U.S. that will take the major hit -- as long as the center-right doesn't line up to support O and his menagerie in a fit of false patriotism. This is not an American screw-up -- it is the ultimate Democratic foreign policy fiasco. It has all the symptoms: an unbalanced clown in a position of trust, loosened security standards, aloofness and ignorance at the highest levels, and pure ineptitude elsewhere. We have seen it a thousand times under LBJ, Carter, and Clinton, and here it is again. I'm certain that most foreign leaders would agree, whatever they may say for public consumption. What is going through their minds now is this: this is what happens when they put a Democrat in charge over there.

Yes, there has been ancillary damage to the United States. But the catastrophic damage is limited to the Democratic brand -- the ultimate proof, written in letters a mile high, that if Luxembourg were to attack the U.S. with a Democrat in office, we'd all be subjects of the Grand Duke two weeks later, without, furthermore, anybody being able to figure out how it happened.

For this point of view, it's clear that Julian has been calling in artillery rounds on his own position.

Assange's followers are flakes. These are not Red Guards or Khmer Rouge; these are the potential victims of Red Guards and Khmer Rouge -- foolish, childish, spoiled, miseducated (and possibly ineducable), the dregs of millennial society. They exist in a dream reality, feeding on myths that any normal individual would reject half-heard: that the world is run by means of conspiracy. That capitalism is evil. That Marxism is about sharing. That 9/11 was an inside job. That Michael Moore and Joseph C. Wilson IV are heroic figures. And most of all, that a brave new world lies just around the corner if we only do the right thing.

These people -- the lumpen-intellectuals -- have been bereft in recent months. Their last messiah let them down badly. It has been two years since 2008, and we're still in the bad old world, with Gitmo open, George W. Bush unarrested, and the oceans purportedly still rising. But now they have a new messiah, one whose prophecies remain tantalizingly vague and thus all the more enticing.

What we have here is a religious war, with the left's true believers against everybody else. Fortunately, their method of fighting amounts to sending out e-mails deriding Bristol Palin. In this view, Assange is the latest of those peculiar historical figures who appear when a system is collapsing, vocally assuring its triumph while practically guaranteeing its extinction -- Savonarola in 15^th-century Florence, Tenskwatawa and Sitting Bull among the 19^th-century Indian tribes, Gorbachev in the last days of the USSR. This new crusade will end just as badly as they all do.

(Anyone seeking evidence of terminal flakiness will find it in this Q&A. One of the questioners unburdens himself of the major puzzle that's been gnawing at him: what about UFOs? Julian A. assures him that the data's on the way. The truth is out there!)

Assange is not too bright. Assange has an obsessive's grasp of IT, and that's about it. The balance of his ideas are on a level with those of his followers -- the same as those of a somewhat thick college sophomore who gets most of his information from the tube.

Consider his strategy. Rather than analyze the e-mails on hand, collate them, sort them, select the one ones with the greatest potential for controversy, and release them where they would have the most impact, he simply throws everything out at once. Why? Because he doesn't know any better. Think of what could have been done with the same information by someone with a more sophisticated grasp of politics -- someone who would have contacted interested parties, who obtained financing or protection by guaranteeing certain messages would -- or would not -- be released. Who would use what he had to pry or bluff further information. Consider what chaos could have been created if this material had been data-mined on behalf of the al-Qaeda or another enemy force. Consider what a Metternich, a Lenin, or a Goebbels would have accomplished with such material.

In light of the possibilities, the actual results are unimpressive. Whatever damage Assange has achieved can in no way match the apocalyptic ruin he was seeking to trigger. He must be far more bewildered and frustrated that he's letting on: it's not like the movies. What happened?

The question remains as to why Assange has been allowed to continue. Part of the answer undoubtedly lies in incompetence -- it's a real puzzle as to exactly what would have to happen to make Eric Holder do the smart thing. But a deeper explanation may lie at the exact opposite pole -- in the omnicompetence of the Intelligence Community that remains untouched by Obama's influence.

It has been known that Assange possessed this material for nearly a year. It was understood that there was no means of getting it back or preventing its release. So what was the alternative? If you've got a lemon, you make lemonade.

Any number of methods exist for manipulating Assange and his organization -- send WikiLeaks fake files, locate their archives and insert new files, manipulate e-mails and other messages, and others that even my nasty imagination would miss without specialized training. As for the purpose -- that's not difficult to envision. A message implying that certain jihadi leaders are on the payroll. That a critical North Korean officer is a Western agent. That certain things that Osama, the mullahs, or Dear Leader wanted done were not done, or were botched in the doing. (In the late 1930s, German intelligence eliminated Soviet Marshal Tukachevsky, the actual formulator of the blitzkrieg strategy, and his entire general staff by exactly this means. Even if the victim suspects the info is false, he still has to take some action. Needless to say, the ultra-paranoid Stalin didn't require much prompting.)

It is likely that Assange is being used, possibly by several parties. They know his every move, what he's doing, whom he's in contact with. (While he was fleeing Sweden at the end of last summer, two laptops in his luggage vanished, along with all data media. See "not too bright" above.) His organization has been penetrated, with all new leaked material traced and accounted for. It's fairly certain that everyone involved has been tracked down by this time, with none of them capable making a move unobserved. Assange is now a puppet, acting out against his will the role of Goethe's Mephistopheles, "Who wills forever evil, and does forever good." (Keep in mind that this holds true even is he is forced to address the charges in Sweden. The rape charges are ancillary matters, unrelated to WikiLeaks -- in fact, little more than a distraction.)

But eventually, Assange's usefulness will end. Then he will vanish -- not by means of a hit squad, but far more subtly and elegantly. A batch of documents from Russia, the mob, or Hamas will appear on the WikiLeaks site, and in short order, Julian and everyone who ever worked for him will be seen in their regular haunts no longer. A wise intelligence service will have film footage of Julian being jammed into a car by figures easily identifiable as to country of origin.

My sympathy will be well-controlled. People have died -- and more will die -- because of this man's actions. It is apparent in the manner in which he abuses women that Assange is a psychopath. Such figures grow worse as they grow more deluded. Under the circumstances, the sooner the better.

Quelle Surprise: Fraud in the Canadian Immigration Industry

2011-01-07T00:55:00.001Z

h/t Rose @ BlazingCatFur

Quebec immigration consultant arrested in fraud ring

Getty Creative Images

The RCMP have broken up a group allegedly making fake citizenship documents.

Comments

Stewart Bell, National Post · Thursday, Jan. 6, 2011

TORONTO — The RCMP has arrested a Quebec immigration consultant accused of providing Canadian citizenship documents to hundreds of people in the Middle East so they could collect benefits and tax refunds from Ottawa.

Ahmad El-Akhal, 62, was arrested Thursday morning following a 2-1/2-year investigation by the RCMP’s Immigration and Passport and Commercial Crimes sections. His wife was also arrested as well as a suspected accomplice in Mississauga.

The alleged fraud ring is accused of securing immigrant status and citizenship for more than 300 residents of Lebanon and other Middle East countries and then helping them bilk the Canadian government of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

“Once they received documents this guy would fill out the tax returns and documents to get benefits back in the names of these people,” said RCMP Sgt. Marc LaPorte. “They were getting tax refunds, Goods and Services Tax rebates, child credit tax benefits, so the whole gamut.”

Mr. El-Akhal, who lives in L’ile-Bizard, Que., has been charged with 58 counts including forgery and fraud. His wife Tahani Mohamad Hassan El-Akhal, 53, was charged with possession of proceeds obtained by crime in the amount of $155,000.

Also charged was Mississauga resident Hassan Ali Saif, 44, who faces three charges under the Citizenship Act. “He was the leasor of some of the residences. And also he forged lease agreements and created mail addresses for these people. He actually collected the mail and gathered the information and sent it back to Montreal,” Sgt. LaPorte said.

All three are to appear in court in Brampton on Friday.

The alleged crimes go back as far as 1999. The investigation began in 2008 after Citizenship and Immigration Canada noticed that 320 permanent residence applicants had given the same 29 home addresses in Canada.

The RCMP traced 260 of the applications and found they were all linked to Mr. El-Akhal. None of those who secured citizenship and government benefits through Mr. El-Akhal actually lived in Canada.

“Basically, this individual passed himself off as an immigration consultant and assisted these people in obtaining permanent resident status and submitted the applications for them,” said Sgt. LaPorte, the RCMP spokesman for Ontario.

The Canada Revenue Agency was also involved.

“The RCMP alleges that several hundred foreign nationals not residing in Canada used fraudulent means to obtain Canadian Citizenship and Canadian travel documents,” the RCMP said in a statement Thursday afternoon.

“In addition, it is alleged that false Income Tax returns were filed for individuals, allowing them to receive improperly benefits and tax refunds from the Canada Revenue Agency of approximately $500,000.”

National Post

K.Myers on Muslim Immigration.. and Silent Feminists

2011-01-06T13:56:00.001Z

From the Irish Independent:

YOU really can take your pick from the interconnected headlines of the past fortnight: the church-massacres of Christians in Egypt and Iraq by al-Qa'ida, and the murder of the governor of the Punjab, followed by a petition of support for his killer from 500 "moderate" Islamic scholars in Pakistan.
Closer to home there were the terrorist conspiracies in Denmark, Sweden and Britain, and the revelation that while the Christian population in Britain fell by two million in four years, the Muslim population there increased by 74pc to 2.9 million since 2001 (yes, the very year when Islamophobia supposedly became endemic).
But surely the most pathetic headline of all was the one announcing the Greek government's decision to build a 128-mile wall to keep out "illegal immigrants".

Brave New World: Evan Mark Films

2011-01-03T13:04:00.003Z

Here's a set of short movies from Jihadwatch contributor and film producer Evan Mark. They're quite uplifting in their own way and graphically illustrate the need for real opposition for the global jihad.

Evan Mark Films homepage is here.

Jihadwatch.org is here.

The first film is not about Islamism, but is on the subject of Child slavery, it is both moving and disturbing:

The next, the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan:

And, finally, the new world of Islamofascism and global jihad:

Obama Must Convert to Islam, Says Somali Warlord

2010-12-28T08:29:00.001Z

From IOL

Mogadishu, Somalia - A leader of Somalia's Islamist insurgency has threatened to attack America.

Fuad Mohamed “Shongole” Qalaf said in Monday's radio message that US President Barack Obama must convert to Islam or Somalia's al-Shabab militia would seek to launch attacks in the United States.

Al-Shabab has not yet launched an attack outside Africa but Western intelligence has long been worried because the group targeted young Somali-Americans for recruitment. About 20 have travelled to Somalia for training.

The militia launched coordinated suicide attacks in Uganda in July that killed 76 people. It has also announced its allegiance to al-Qaeda and is believed to be harbouring a mastermind of the twin 2008 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that killed 224 people. - Sapa-AP

Obama Signs UNDRIP

2010-12-27T17:18:00.002Z

UNDRIP is real. It's the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and Obama has just signed it.

I wonder will the provisions of UNDRIP apply to "native" Britons and Europeans who struggle to maintain their rights against increasing foreign occupation? This could be one of those declarations that turns on the activists to bite them on the ass, and it's my sincere hope that it will.

From the Washington Times:
H/T Scaramouche!

At the Dec. 16 White House Tribal Nations Conference, President Obama announced that the United States is recognizing the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, also known as UNDRIP. The declaration was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly on Sept. 13, 2007, with just four negative votes, coming from Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States. Australia and New Zealand later reversed course, and Canada endorsed the declaration in November. America was the lone holdout of the four, until now.
UNDRIP was promulgated by the U.N. Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, whose vice chairman, Tonya Gonnella Frichner, an Onondaga activist, said she was looking forward to "working with the United States as well as other countries toward full implementation of the Declaration with no reservations" (pun clearly not intended). She complained, "We have been uprooted from our lands, deprived of our natural resources and our cultures denigrated" and also said the declaration "points the way forward" to rectifying the situation. Despite caving by four holdouts, 11 countries, including Russia, abstained, and 34 countries - mainly from Africa but including Israel - skipped the original vote.
The bulk of UNDRIP contains harmless reaffirmations of equality and the kinds of rights that indigenous peoples, who are not defined in the document, already enjoy under the U.S. Constitution. Many of the concerns addressed deal with the right to speak traditional languages, wear traditional dress, practice traditional religions and the like, all of which people already are free to do in this country, whoever they are. The risky part, however, is that every assertion of a right is coupled with a statement that governments shall "take effective measures" to implement that right, which in practice means programs, payouts, regulations, oversight and all the attendant evils of bloated bureaucracy. It's perfectly acceptable for people to try to preserve their disappearing cultures, but it's unacceptable for taxpayers to have to foot the bill.
Some of UNDRIP's articles are so vague that they promise virtually unlimited government largesse, such as Article 21: "States shall take effective measures and, where appropriate, special measures to ensure continuing improvement of [indigenous peoples'] economic and social conditions." Those concerned that UNDRIP is a devious means to justify some form of reparations to American Indians for the sins Mr. Obama has declared the United States guilty of need look no further than Article 11. This proposition explicitly states that the government "shall provide redress through effective mechanisms, which may include restitution, developed in conjunction with indigenous peoples, with respect to their cultural, intellectual, religious and spiritual property taken without their free, prior and informed consent or in violation of their laws, traditions and customs."
Articles 26 through 28 are even more alarming. They deal in detail with the issue of the "lands, territories and resources which [indigenous peoples] have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired." UNDRIP compels governments to "establish and implement, in conjunction with [the] indigenous peoples concerned, a fair, independent, impartial, open and transparent process" for addressing historic land claims and asserts the "right to redress" for "confiscated, taken, occupied, used or damaged" lands. Compensation is to take the form of "lands, territories and resources equal in quality, size and legal status or of monetary compensation or other appropriate redress."
It would be easy to dismiss UNDRIP recognition as the type of symbolic gesture the embattled president has to make to placate his left-wing base. The declaration is not yet legally binding, but it lays the groundwork for the next stage in the process of codifying its mandates as international rights in an international convention or covenant. And even though UNDRIP is not binding, it plays to Mr. Obama's personal sentiments and post-colonial worldview, and his administration is certain to formulate policies that treat the declaration's mandates as compulsory even if they aren't. UNDRIP is the ultimate "evil white man" guilt trip. For those who would wipe clean the past 400 years of "European colonization of North America," this is the next best thing.

Milton Friedman on Libertarianism

2010-12-27T01:54:00.001Z

From 1999. Well worth watching if you like this sort of thing :)

Feminism Explained

2010-12-27T01:23:00.002Z

This is very good.

related: Ezra Levant on feminist hypocrisy:

"But Polanski makes movies, and he’s an impeccable liberal. So feminists rush to his rescue, too. Whoopi Goldberg told America “it wasn’t ‘rape-rape’. It was something else.” Got it? A 13-year-old girl who is drugged and repeatedly raped isn’t really raped if it’s a great artist doing the raping.

A philandering president who preys on secretaries and interns isn’t a bully or a sexual harasser, if he’s a liberal."

Book Review: Caliphate by Tom Kratman

2010-12-25T23:06:00.005Z

**spoiler alert**

I found this in the science-fiction section of my local bookstore - on recommendation from Mark Steyn, who mentions it in his latest book Lights Out - although this really does not do justice to some of the near-prophetic thinking demonstrated by the author.

I'm not going to discuss the plot, which is excellent in itself, but some aspects of the book that some readers may find interesting. There are no spoilers, per se, but a discussion of the side-plots involve revealing their outcomes - although those outcomes will come as no surprise to anyone.

Set in the 22nd Century, Caliphate is set in a very changed world, one where Europe is now an Islamic Caliphate, and America has morphed into a reluctant Empire, forced to give up many of the liberties which makes it what it is today.

Europe is a crumbling remnant of what it once was. Our descendants, those who remain, are faced with a struggle to pay jizyah to their Moslem rulers, with their only other choice to convert to the ruling faith to save themselves from slavery. Daughters are stolen and sold into prostitution, sons taken as janissaries, homosexuals are publicly hanged, and freedom is a distant memory. Fortunately, the weaknesses of Islam remain, the lack of initiative, enterprise, inventiveness, and creativity have rendered Moslem Europe a weak power, balanced by a reverted-to-type traditionalist China, a Tsarist Russia, a resurgent South Africa and other nations dependent on, or allied to, the American Empire.

Interestingly, as in Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, Britain lies within the American sphere - as do Australia and Japan.

Within this new world, the adventure takes place, and the plot is interwoven with a series of flashbacks to the years c.2002-2022, when the great-grandmother of one of the central characters lives, in modern day Germany. The connection exists by way of a diary that survives the turmoil of the 21st century, and paints a portrait of Gabi, an all too-recogniseable stereotype of the modern European America-hating liberal.

Gabi is an artist and activist who never wastes an opportunity to take part in Anti-Bush marches and denounce the Great Satan. She meets an Egyptian immigrant named Mahmoud, who turns out to be one of the more likeable characters in the story. Mahmoud is aware that he fled Egypt to escape Islam, and sees Germany as a more liberal, open society within which to live and work. Gabi fails to convince him that Germany is an evil, racist place, and is horrified when Mahmoud expresses a desire to become Christian and even move to the United States.

Mahmoud tells Gabi how Moslems see Europe and Westerners, and even takes her in disguise to a mosque, where democracy and the West are denounced in hateful terms from the pulpit. After overcoming the initial shock, Gabi is still convinced that Islamic intolerance comes from European intolerance and racism, and maintains her blinkered left-wing worldview. Mahmoud is no fool, he knows that one day Islamic intolerance will bring vengeange upon Moslem immigrants - indeed he is beaten one day by neo-Nazis - and so makes his plans to escape to America. A pregnant Gabi refuses to follow him to a country with no statutory holidays, a poor welfare system, and a "fascist" government.

[Following this point in the narrative, disaster unfolds in the United States, leading to the death of Mahmoud and a chain -reaction of other events.]

As Conservative Europeans flee the continent, replaced by more Moslems and liberal Westerners, taxes become intolerable to pay for the welfare system, and concessions to Islam increase to the extent that Moslem communities now have their own police and courts. So, in the 2020s, when Gabi's daughter is abducted and gang-raped by a group of Moslem "youths", they are set free by Moslem judges who, in true Islamic fashion, believe that rape is always the unveiled woman's fault. This, and only this, is the final straw for Gabi, who takes her daughter to Switzerland to apply for a visa to the now-imperial America.

The reaction of the American consular officer is worth typing out in full here. He pulls Gabi's file, showing photographs of her on marches and demonstrations over the past two decades.

"I'm sorry to have to say it this way but ...you're diseased, you see .. politically diseased. You're in the process of losing your own homeland. You brought it on yourselves and it's become irreversible now. So ask yourself: why should we accept into our country people with a history of destroying the country they live in?"

He explains to a shocked Gabi,

"Europe abandoned its future for a short period of comfort in the present and you .. you personally.. encouraged this. [...] Europe let in millions of inassimilable, and therefore inherently hostile, foreigners to do the work which the children you did not have could not do. And thus you have no future .. you sold it .. only a past. Why should we let you take away our future? What do we owe you that we should risk that?"

The official refuses even her daughter, on the grounds that she "probably carries the same political disease". And here in two paragraphs lies a poetic form of justice. When those same liberals who created their "multicultural paradise" in Europe realise that it has become a dystopian nightmare, why should those who resisted such nonsense take them in?

After all, they will never blame themselves; they will still blame conservatives, and nationalists, and all those who warned them of such things, and, if they are allowed to, they will flee to more sensible parts of the world to try to recreate their utopian dreams there. The only response it to force them to live in the mess they created.

But the novel is not without hope. In fact, it illustrates how the most horrific future itself has an inbuilt self-destruct mechanism. It reminds us too that history has never moved in a straight line, despite what "progressives" might think.

A world without liberals may be a wonderful place, after all :)

Quote of the Day: Martin Luther

2010-12-25T00:24:00.001Z

To all my good friends, a Merry Christmas and a peaceful and prosperous new year. I found this quote recently, and thought it worth sharing. It comes from Martin Luther in the year 1528.

The last sentence should give us all some pause for thought.

Certain persons have been begging me for the past five years to write about war against the Turks, and encourage our people and stir them up to it, and now that the Turk is actually approaching, my friends are compelling me to do this duty, especially since there are some stupid preachers among us Germans (as I am sorry to hear) who are making the people believe that we ought not and must not fight against the Turks. Some are even so crazy as to say that it is not proper for Christians to bear the temporal sword or to be rulers; also because our German people are such a wild and uncivilized folk that there are some who want the Turk to come and rule.

Progressives Preventing from Acting Progressively. WTF?

2010-12-22T19:46:00.002Z

thanks to BCF for this brilliant expose of so-called "Progressive" academia.

How can the most leftist institution in Canada be accused of curtailing the efforts of progressives to fight against “structural racism”? This is exactly the point: the preponderance of progressives in the faculties of arts across Canada is the very ground sustaining and encouraging these outlandish claims. In case we need to be reminded again, “studies in both nations [Canada and the United states] confirm that the humanities and social sciences are dominated by scholars with left-wing opinions and values” (as Christine Overall, cross-appointed with the department of philosophy and women's studies at Queen’s, had acknowledged in an article, “Lefty Profs,” published two years ago in University Affairs).

And:

This influence of progressives over our universities may explain why few of the specialists cite any solid evidence to substantiate their claims. Working within an audience of true believers, they have grown accustomed to soft-ball questions and easy endorsements. Pretty much all the "evidence" cited is anecdotal, based on "feelings", and in no way the foundation for making a "systemic racism" allegation.

In other words, there's nobody to blame for all this horrendous "structural racism" but themselves!

As BCF says, let the show trials begin!

Shoe Boycott in Montreal

2010-12-19T19:40:00.001Z

courtesy, BCF

Muslim Attempts To Turn Montreal Into Nazi Shithole

Amir Khadir must be missing whatever cesspit of a nation he came from.

Oh cripes he's a Jew Baiting 9/11 Troofer from Iran.

Support Le Marcheur Shoe Store in Montreal

Muslim Britain - blast from the past

2010-12-19T06:51:00.003Z

This article dates from January 2008 but I thought it worth posting anyway, because it ties in with a few conversations I've had lately and demonstrates that allies are to be found within British Islam in the fight against Islamism and Islamofascism.

It strikes me that Bishop Nazir-Ali would make a far better Archbishop of Canterbury than the useless and cowardly Rowan Williams.

*****

On a related note, this is new from Salim Mansur, another opponent of Islamism:

"This struggle between political Islam and the West will stay with us well into the next decade and, perhaps, beyond. It will end only when Islamists are effectively defeated and political Islam expunged similar to the defeat of German Nazis and Japanese militarists."

*****

Muslim Britain is becoming one big no-go area

A bishop caused uproar last week by exposing ghettos of Islamist extremism. But Muslims everywhere are cutting themselves off from society in other, equally dangerous ways

Shiraz Maher

Perhaps it had to be someone like Michael Nazir-Ali, the first Asian bishop in the Church of England, who would break with convention and finally point out the elephant in the room.

His comments last week about the growing stranglehold of Muslim extremists in some communities revived debate about the future of multiculturalism and provoked a flurry of condemnation. Members of all three political parties immediately clamoured to dismiss him. “I don’t recognise the description that he’s talked about – no-go areas and people feeling intimidated,” said Hazel Blears, the communities secretary.

A quick call to her Labour colleague John Reid, the former home secretary, would almost certainly have helped her to identify at least one of those places. Just over a year ago Reid was heckled by the Muslim extremist Abu Izzadeen in Leytonstone, east London, during a speech on extremism, appropriately. “How dare you come to a Muslim area,” Izzadeen screamed.

That picture is mirrored outside London. One of our country’s biggest and most deprived Muslim areas is Small Heath, in Birmingham, where Dr Tahir Abbas, director of the Centre for the Study of Ethnicity and Culture, was raised. With a dominant Asian monoculture, low social achievement and high unemployment, Small Heath is precisely the kind of insular and disengaged urban ghetto Nazir-Ali was talking about.

Reflecting on his experiences there, Abbas is critical of his peers who don’t stray beyond their area. “They haven’t seen rural Devon, a stately home or Windsor Castle,” he says. That refusal to engage with anything beyond the community is suffocating young Muslims by divorcing them almost entirely from Britain’s cultural heritage and mainstream life.

And their feelings of separation have been further reinforced by the advent of digital broadcasting, which has swelled the number of foreign language television stations in Britain, creating digital ghettos. Islamist movements such as Hizb ut-Tahrir (of which I was once a senior member) have been quick to spot the opportunities this affords them. In 2004 the group launched a campaign aimed at undermining President Pervez Mush-arraf by broadcasting adverts on Asian satellite channels, calling on the Pakistani community in Britain to “stop Busharraf”.

Manzoor Moghal, chairman of the Leicester-based Muslim Forum, is unequivocal about the dangers such Islamification poses. “We have a cultural and social apartheid which fun-damentalists thrive off,” he says.

The point was underscored last summer when Kafeel Ahmed, whom I once knew, was arrested after a Jeep laden with explosives crashed into Glasgow airport. I think Ahmed was first radicalised in Cambridge, where I saw his views become increasingly intolerant, even though the city has a negligible Muslim population. After being exposed to the Islamist culture of separation and confrontation there, he didn’t need to be living in an actual ghetto. He was already sectioning himself off, by giving up his nonMuslim friends and eventually socialising only with those who shared his world-view.

It raises a compelling point that Labour, the Tories and the Liberal Democrats have largely tried to ignore: while the moral ambiguity of multiculturalism means Britain no longer knows what it stands for, our enemies are not just growing ever surer of themselves but are also winning the debate.

For almost three decades now, the witless promotion of cultural relativ-ism under successive governments means that our national identity can simply be reduced to the theme of a courtroom sketch from Monty Python’s Flying Circus – anything goes. Measuring the extent to which this ambiguity has affected perceptions within Britain’s already insular Muslim communities, Abbas told me he surveyed schoolchildren in Small Heath by asking them how many Muslims they thought lived in Britain.

“We had answers around 30m to 50m,” he says, with more than a hint of despondency in his voice (the true figure is 1.6m).

Moghal blames the mosques for this, saying: “They promote a conscious rejection of western values.” He has a point. In many places the prevailing attitude is that sporting a flowing Arab robe symbolises your religiosity while your piety is linked to the length of your beard.

Muslim groups have already reacted with predictable intemperance to the bishop’s comments. “Mr Nazir-Ali is promoting hatred towards Muslims and should resign,” said Mohammed Shafiq of the Ramadhan Foundation, while Ajmal Masroor of the Islamic Society of Britain said the church should “take serious action”.

Their anger vindicates him entirely and in many respects demonstrates that Nazir-Ali’s observations not only are valid, but don’t go far enough. The Glasgow bombings proved that the kinds of no-go area extremists are creating don’t always have to be physical locations.

Muslim attitudes are now so hyper-sensitive that anyone who dares to criticise Islam or Muslims has to think twice – and then some more – before doing so. Publishing a simple cartoon is enough to provoke a serious diplomatic crisis, the ransacking of embassies, mass global protest and at least several deaths.

But it’s not just nonMuslims for whom extremists reserve their hatred. After I wrote about the way British Islamists celebrated Benazir Bhutto’s assassination last month, a number of threats quickly appeared on the internet. “If I meet him I’m going to paste him in his face,” wrote Abu Junayd from Slough on a chat forum. Another commentator said I should “suffer severe punishments in this life and the hereafter”.

Their attitude springs from the Takfiri mind-set, which, in its most extreme forms, underwrites Al-Qaeda’s philosophy by suggesting that anyone who disagrees with Islamism (the extreme, politicised form of Islam) is a legitimate target for attack.

As if to emphasise the point, a statement released on a known Al-Qaeda forum last week specifically called for attacks on moderate Muslims in Britain. Citing the opinions of Muham-mad Ibn Alb al-Wahhab, whose followers are known as Wahhabis, it branded moderates as “aides of the crusaders”.

Seven years after the Cantle report first revealed the extent to which Britain’s different communities are living apart together, it’s still impossible to engage politicians seriously about the future of multiculturalism.

After being heckled by Izzadeen in Leytonstone for “daring” to visit a Muslim area, the home secretary told him: “There is no part of this country that any of us is excluded from.” The knee-jerk reaction to the bishop’s comments suggests we’re still a long way from realising that vision.

You Can Say That Again, IPSC!

2010-12-18T00:07:00.002Z

More fun from Indymedia.ie

IPSC Dublin branch Organising Meeting - Thursday 6th Jan 2011 - Central Hotel

dublin | anti-war | event notice Monday December 13, 2010 19:10 by Conall - IPSC

Would you like to come along to the next Dublin branch meeting of the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign?

The next meeting is on Thursday 06/01/2011 at 7.30pm. Held upstairs in the Central Hotel, Exchequer St. Dublin http://www.centralhoteldublin.com/contact.php

Come along to discuss and plan upcoming activities. We have stalls at festivals and city centres, organise demos and speaking tours, film evenings, lobby politicians etc. All ages and nationalities are welcome. You don’t have to know a lot about Middle Eastern politics to get involved.

Please call the office 01 6770253 or Ronan on 086 4082535, or email info@ ipsc.ie for more details.

********

Got that?
Just in case you missed it:

"You don’t have to know a lot about Middle Eastern politics to get involved."

Well, thats the truest thing the IPSC have ever uttered....

Another "Human Rights Advocate" Takes a Swing at Freedom of Speech

2010-12-17T16:58:00.002Z

Utter hypocrite, even claiming the mantle of Human Rights Activist while blaming Salman Rushdie for "insulting Muslims".

courtest, Scaramouche.

"When Salman Rushdie insulted over one billion Muslims by writing Satanic Verses, every Western government came to his rescue after Khomeini issued his fatwa calling upon Muslims to assassinate him. I do not remember seeing a list of "ten things you don't know about Salman Rushdie". To this day he is portrayed as the darling of free speech. Another example is that of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a former member of the House of Representative in the Netherlands. Her screenplay entitled Submission, which the majority of Muslims considered offensive to their religion, led to various death threats. Again this was considered by all Western countries as an attack on freedom of speech (not to mention the various free speech awards she has received). Again we did not see any press coverage about "the ten things you don't know about Ms. Ali". This is despite the fact that she was found to have obtained political asylum by lying to authorities. When this fact became public she was forced to resign from her post. A few months later she immigrated to the U.S. where she was immediately welcomed and hired as a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think-tank."

Attempted Israel Boycott at Tesco

2010-12-17T00:49:00.003Z

Moronic Muslimas Pull anti-Israel Stunt at Tesco. The dialogue with the English lady near the end is interesting. She tells them to p*ss off back to their own country and they call her a "racist". She responds by telling them they're racist against Jewish people - classic!

related: Red Cross bans Christmas, and other tales.

Terrorists Attack Stockholm

2010-12-11T22:21:00.003Z

BBC News reports on the Stockholm bomb that killed one and injured two today.

NO doubt Europe's liberal elite will be falling over themselves to explain how the terrorists are feeling "alienated" and oppressed, not to mention that old classic, "desperate".

Which is why they chose to attack the militaristic, imperialist, oppressive nation of Sweden?

RTE Frontline with Marc Coleman and Richard Boy Parrot

2010-11-30T06:54:00.006Z

This evening's RTE Frontline programme -which I've never watched before in my life - featured one of the founders of Ireland's new National Forum, Marc Coleman, and I thought I'd give it a watch to see what the man is like in person. Having read through the economic programme of the hastily- and recently- renamed right-wing think-tank (it was originally the National Alliance. Oops), I had equally hastily dismissed it as opportunistic populism but was quite prepared to give Coleman a hearing.

The main reason being that he is just so right in so many areas, and his no-nonsense, pro-Capitalist stance appeals to proper Liberals such as myself. Coleman has also been busily reaching out to left-wing groups, something I myself have a tendency to do, and has been similarly rebuffed, but nonetheless feels that his ideas and economic plan are the best for the country, including for the most vulnerable. I happen to agree, in fact, and Ireland as a whole is pretty vulnerable right now, given the recent presence of the IMF and their delightfully "helpful" plan to bail Ireland out with high-interest loans, on the condition we use a large chunk of our own savings to do it.

Anyway, I was impressed with Marc. His contempt for the mainstream political parties accurately reflects the anger of the public in general towards their inept political class, and his solutions are fiscally conservative and sensible, and most importantly, Capitalist. While bailing out the useless loan-retailers we call banks is the main occupation of the governing party, Fianna Fail, true Capitalists are calling for debt-equity swaps and other fancy ways of telling the creditors they may not get their investments back.

Criticisms of the National Forum? Just one really, but a very important one. They're not really very libertarian, in spite of the rhetoric. There's lots of nationalistic mumblings about a "new republic" and our language and culture being preserved and whatnot, enough to make the whole thing sound, well, like populism. Populism* is, of course, popular, but that's not reason enough to engage in it. You can't realistically be on everyone's side, as Coleman and his organisation seem to want to be. The section entitled "Our Vision" presents a point-by-point series of statements on the perceived shortcomings of the country, with a set of solutions that present anything but "Politics based on clear values rather than just catch-all consensus".

Where our country currently stands:

People feel abandoned by government, politics and churches

Our sovereignty and national pride damaged

Taxpayers bailing out failed banks and an inefficient state

A political consensus that backs an unaffordable Croke Park deal

An electoral and political system unfit for purpose

Contrary to the myth, a high tax economy

The nuclear Family discriminated against in our tax and welfare code

Consumers & taxpayers sold out to vested interests by consensus cop-out politics

The clear failure of partition, north & south – especially in Donegal

A criminal justice system overdue for reform

Our native culture drowning in mediocrity. Our Gaeltacht heartland dying

A ¼ million citizen unemployed. Immigration concentrated on too few sectors

Having said all that, they present some very good ideas which may at some point form the basis of a new political party, and one that I will look very closely at becoming a part of. Time will tell....

*You can't consistently believe in the Free Market and think that we need a strong welfare system as well, which is what a populist might claim to do. We need some good old Protestant simul justus et peccator, whereby we honestly tell people we don't like the welfare system but we won't take it down, that we believe in private healthcare but the public system can stay for the time being. It's pragmatic, and it's not perfect, and it's honest. It accepts the reality that too many people are dependent on the system for us to destroy it overnight. And while we have taxes, we might as well spend them on something that helps people rather than white elephant projects and Big Government Ideas.

In short, Ireland is going to have a mix of right and left for a while to come, there's no point pretending it's anything but. I'm not saying the National Forum does this, but it can be dangerous to stray into territory when you pretend that the differences between left and right don't exist - and the history of the twentieth century taught us that you can't claim to be both.

Leftists Get Behind Islamic Banking

2010-11-27T06:49:00.002Z

What's most disturbing (to me) about this is that it's being held at my old University. Others will no doubt be amused by the attempt to introduce Sharia banking as an ethical alternative to the failed banking system that has bankrupted Ireland, but the Islamists haven't yet met a crisis they couldn't exploit.

FOSIS is, incidentally, the Muslim Students' society and their website is here. FOSIS' alleged links to the Muslim Brotherhood and support for Hamas is revealed here at Harry's Place, which includes a video of the conference's keynote speaker, Dr Haitham al Haddad, vocalising his support for Hamas.

*******

Islamic finance & banking: A solution to Irelands financial fiasco!

In light of the major decisions taken by the Irish government which has largely divided our nation over with many critics have come out including former Irish Taoiseach John Bruton et al (some of those articles are included below) and even in other countries like France where Eric Cantona has set up an international bank protest which is to take place on the 7th December 2010 and has attracted a lot of attention

Islamic finance & banking: A solution to Irelands financial fiasco!

The cost to the Irish government of the bank rescues, NAMA and a large public sector borrowing requirement to fund current and capital spending has led by late 2010 to a per capita external debt of over $535,000. This represents some 1,305% of Ireland's annual GDP, making it the most indebted country in the world! The next most indebted country was the United Kingdom which owed 428.8% of its GDP.

There is an interesting event on next week on friday at 6pm in Trinity College Dublin which the MSA (Muslim Student Association), the Department of theology & religions & one of its lecturer [Alongside FOSIS Ireland] is hosting about Islamic finance & banking with an academic speaker who studied at the world renowned university SOAS.

It is hoped that this event will add to the academic debate on the current economic and financial crisis that is haunting the world and hopefully share some food for thought on the options of Islamic banking & finance which has been argued by academics and intellectuals alike to be historically more long term stable and just then the current status quo of banking.

Islamic finance & banking: A solution to Irelands financial fiasco!

Time & Date: 6pm, Friday 26th November 2010

Venue: Robert Emmett Theatre, Arts Block, Trinity College Dublin

Speaker: Dr./Shaykh Haitham al-Haddad
(UK & Saudia Arabia)
Contributor to the outstanding book ''Islamic Banking and Finance: What It Is and What It Could Be''
(Availiable on Amazon)

Shaykh/Dr. Haitham al-Haddad is one of the mainstream UK based scholars, a senior advisor on the Islamic Sharia Council, UK and currently holds the position of chair and operations advisor for the Muslim Research and Development Foundation (MRDF). He has studied under the tutelage of world-renown scholars such as Shaikh Ibn Baz, Shaikh Ibn Jibreen and Shaikh Ibn Aqeel. Shaykh Haitham holds a BSc Honours in Law and Sharia from Omdurman University in Khartoum, Sudan. He also holds a Bsc in Computer Science from King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals (Saudi Arabia) and a PhD in Islamic Law at SOAS, London. Shaykh Haitham is qualified to deliver religious verdicts with specialisation in Islamic Jurisprudence (Fiqh), Islamic law and Islamic finance.

For further information please contact ireland.communications@fosis.org.uk or call 0851637474 & media queries on ireland.media@fosis.org.uk
[Note: media interviews with speaker availiable]

thinking man's guide to the world

Stop Giving Away My Money

Voice of the Protests

Liberals don't Really Like Multiculturalism.

Rabble/Babble Denies Reality Again *updated: banned from Babble!*

Caroline Glick Replies

No More Mister Nice Guy

Justice for Rachel Peavoy

Ann Coulter on Single Moms. Again

Canada Still Too Liberal, Says Cat.

6th Century Fashion Meets 21st Century Technology

Fintan Lane is a Pussy, chapter two.

Gaza Flotilla Updates

BC Residents Head to Gaza, Think "It's Just Like Blacks in America"

The United Church of Marxism

Long Absence

Canadian Gaza Boat Sued!

Ugandan Man Found Guilty of Murder by HIV

The Cost of Immigration

Brian Lilley meets No One is Illegal

Denmark's Smart Immigration Rules

Johann Hari : "Flawed" US Policy Creates Terrorists

Bell Drops Sun News

Canada's Conservative Majority. UPDATED

The Illusion of Innocence/ Shelby Steele

Christian Mock Gays At Shocking Easter Service!

Four Myths About the Crusades

Intelligent Muslim Singed by Blazing Cat

Superfreaks on Climate Change

I went to a political debate. It was boring.

Liberals Making Sh*t Up. What's New?

McTranny Latest

"Anti-Cuts" Protests, UK Goes Mental.

Reality Inversion at Rabble.ca

BCHRC Awards 22.5k to Offended Lesbian

Canada and Immigration

OMG This Guy is a Professor!!

Sun TV Makes Waves

Libertarian Reading of John Gray

Lies, Lies and Leftie Lies

Hitler the Socialist

Journalists, Your Intellectual and Moral Superiors

Somalian shot dead by Ontario man

Useful Idiot Becomes Even More Useful: Italian Kidnapped in Gaza

Canadian Leaders Debate Victory for Harper

Sudden Jihad Syndrome in Brazil

Reflections on Kiddie Indoctrinations in Canada

Dennis Miller on Koran Pyrotechnics

The Media, Terry Jones and the decline of the West.

Muslims and David Duke: Together At Last!

Duh Guardian on Free Speech.

Pro-Liberal Indoctrination of Canadian Kids

Bill Maher Being Funny For a Change

Tunisian "Refugees" Show Their Gratitude to Italians

The Limits of Libertarianism. And John Gray.

Jihad Reaches Hindus - in Australia.

Fascist Protests Self

Ignorant Afghan Savages Murder Innocents

Norway and the Jews- Alan Dershowitz

Free Trade Makes Wealth!

It's Mostly Anti-Racists Keeping Racism Alive

Levant on Japan

White Bad, NonWhite Good.

Steyn on Libya and Other Musings.

Norway's National TV Station Shows pro-Gaza Documentary

Canadian Losers Force Election.

Brits use Sharia Law to Save Tax!

Islam 4 the UK

More United Nations Bullshit International Solidarity Days

"International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination"?

"International Year for People of African Descent"

The White Terror Grips Calgary

Apartheid in Canada now, Says Stupid Foreigner

UN tells Ireland's Catholic Schools to "Stop Discriminating"

Scumbag Jihadist Refuses Fine, Accepts Welfare.

Interfaith Saps Get Together to Say: Today I am a Muslim Too!

A Rally at Times Square and a Time for a Muslim Moral Reckoning

What's Missing from this "tragic" Story?

In (dis) honour of Israeli Apartheid Week, part 2

In (dis)honour of "Israeli Apartheid Week"

Rabble/Babble Denies Reality Again updated: banned from Babble!

"International Day for the Elimination
of Racial Discrimination"?