Archive for October, 2010

Look, listen, learn and act, Re: Listen to moderate Muslim voices, National Post, October 28, 2010

Thursday, October 28th, 2010

Every time anything even marginally critical of Islam appears in the media apologists, Muslim or otherwise, respond by saying ‘moderate voices must be heard’ or ‘misconceptions about Islam are widespread’ or ‘Islam is really a religion of peace and tolerance’ or other such platitudes.

These pronouncements are dead wrong. What we must look at is how and why Islam manifests itself the way it does and what we must listen to are the cries of it’s victims, those that are still alive that is. If we did we would realize that Islam is not a religion of peace and tolerance and that Muslims constantly commit heinous acts in it’s name everywhere on earth, North America included. We would realize that it is in fact not a religion at all and that it is a completely proscribed way of life which requires true believers to act in ways that are fundamentally at odds with free, democratic, secular, Judeo-Christian, Western societies. We would realize that Islam is expansionist and demands that non believers submit to it’s imperatives, with horrific consequences if they don’t. We would realize that the Koran is full of hatred and intolerance and misogyny, that Islam really hasn’t changed since it’s inception, that it’s very nature makes change virtually impossible and that the term ‘moderate Islam’ is complete hogwash.

Let there be no mistake. The vast majority of Muslims are every bit as peaceful and tolerant in their daily lives as you or I, but they are not true believers or practitioners even if they think they are. They couldn’t be because if they were every single one of them would be out to conquer us and bring us unders Islam’s sway. Moderate, peaceful, tolerant, integrated Muslims who are as American (or Canadian or British or French or whatever) as anyone else-absolutely. They are all around us. Moderate, peaceful, tolerant, integrated Islam-no such thing. Every day all over the world people are murdered, maimed, raped, attacked, vilified and humiliated under it’s aegis and according to it’s precepts and dictates. We have had 1400 years of this behaviour and the evidence is overwhelming and beyond dispute…moderate Islam simply does not exist and never has.

Unfortunately, it’s very difficult for ordinary citizens to gain an accurate picture of Islam because the mainstream media is unwilling or unable to show it’s true colours, out of ignorance, political correctness, fear of retaliation or any number of other such reasons. The media would do us all a huge service if it did however. Islam is a direct and serious threat to Western civilization in general and must be seen for what it is if we are to keep it from destroying our way of life and forcing us all to live as it requires us to. Including moderate Muslims.

With horrific consequences if we don’t.

What planet are these guys living on?, Re: Karzai confirms report of cash payments from Iran, BBC News Website, October 26, 2010

Wednesday, October 27th, 2010

Afghanistan’s President Hamid Karzai has stated that his office regularly receives bags of cash containing millions of dollars from the government of Iran and has been doing so for years. The money is given covertly, no records are kept and it doesn’t show up on a balance sheet anywhere. The Iranians are paying it to further their interests in Afghanistan, which are diametrically opposed to those of the United States and the West.

The Americans did not know of this arrangement until Karzai himself revealed it at a news conference the other day.

Iran’s immediate response was to categorically deny that any payments had ever taken place, calling claims that they had “ridiculous and insulting”. This of course effectively branded Karzai as a liar.

America’s immediate response was to express concern about the payments and Iran’s efforts to advance it’s agenda in Afghanistan. It urged Iran to “play a more positive role” in the country, saying “(Iranian officials) have a responsibility just like all their neighbours to try to have a positive influence on the formation of a government there, and to ensure that Afghanistan is not a country where terrorists can find a safe harbour, or where attacks can be planned on their soil.”

My immediate response upon hearing America’s reaction was “What planet are these guys living on?” Don’t they know that Iran sees the U.S. as it’s mortal enemy and that it has spent the 31 years since the Shah was overthrown doing everything it can to bring America to it’s knees? Don’t they realize that Iran’s goal in Afghanistan is to force the Americans and the West to leave and to establish it’s suzerainty there once they do? Don’t they know that there is no chance whatsoever of Iran acceding to their wishes and changing it’s behaviour and that expressions of concern and entreaties to act differently are completely pointless?

Obviously not. What planet are these guys living on indeed?

These aren’t the only questions which naturally arise.

Why did Karzai choose to reveal the payments in the first place? What was he trying to achieve? Was he trying to embarass the Americans? The Iranians? If so, why? Was it just a clumsy attempt to get the Americans to give him money under the table like the Iranians had? What was he giving them in return for the payments? What else is he hiding from the United States? If he’s willing to collude with Iran like this what else is he willing to do? Can he be trusted or depended on at all?

Why did the Iranians deny that they were making the payments, knowing that this contradicted Karzai? What exactly were they receiving in return for them? What else are they doing to curry favour with Karzai? To subvert the U.S. and the West? Where else do their tentacles reach? Are they doing things Karzai doesn’t know about? Is their military taking some sort of hidden role against America and NATO?

How could the Americans have not known about the payments? Did they in fact know about them and are refusing to admit it? Why would they do that? If they are hiding the fact that they knew, what else might they be hiding? If they really didn’t know, what does that tell us about their intelligence capabilities? Are they allowing political considerations to govern their conduct of the war, thereby placing American and NATO soldiers lives in danger? Are they willing to keep Karzai in power at all costs? Do they really think he will change his behaviour? That the Iranians will change theirs? How can we possibly bring the war to a successful conclusion if things like this go on, whether we know about them or not?

None of this inspires much confidence does it? All it really does is give us one more example of how intractable the problems in Afghanistan really are and one more indication of our folly and arrogance in thinking we can overcome history, religion and culture, force or coerce Afghanistan into the twenty-first century and protect ourselves at the same time.

The original question bears repeating. What planet are these guys living on?

Actually, there are three more related questions I can think of before closing. This is a scandal of the highest order and yet it has received little or no play in the mainstream media. Why not? Are the mainstream media conspiring to keep this story out of the public domain in order to avoid embarrassing President Obama on the eve of the mid-term elections? If that is the case, have any Democrats, perhaps even the President, had a role in this?

Just wondering.

One Question Among Many, Re: Is Ahmadinejad a Real Threat?, International Herald Tribune/New York Times, October 24, 2010

Monday, October 25th, 2010

One of the many questions related to foreign policy that American voters have to ask themselves heading into next week’s mid-term elections is ‘what will we do when Iran attacks us militarily’? To be even more explicit, voters should ask themselves ‘what will we do when Iran bombs one of our bases or attacks one of our ships or shoots down one of our planes or blows up a building full of our citizens’? Notice the use of the word when… it’s not a question of if something like that will happen on President Obama’s watch, it’s a question of when.

Lunatics and atavists though they are, Iran’s leaders have taken the measure of the man and concluded that they would be virtually immune from real retaliation no matter what they did. Since their hatred and disgust for America is palpable, it is after all the Great Satan, and since they have been emminently successful in manipulating Obama to their advantage since he took office, there is every reason to expect that they will up the ante, manufacture some pretext and attack something American somewhere on the planet, size and scope to be determined. In the last two years they have become more and more emboldened every day and an attack is nothing more than the logical next step for them.

So what will America’s response be? Remember, we’re not talking about Iran attacking one of our allies or setting up proxy armies and regimes in the Middle East or relentlessly pursuing nuclear weapons or funding anti-American activities throughout the world (including in the United States itself) or carrying out any number of other activities which directly threaten our national security, all of which are bad enough and all of which voters should be asking serious questions about as well…we’re talking about the direct shedding of American blood and treasure by Iran’s military. What then?

Over to you Mr. President.

It’s not just Germany, Re: Germany Confronts the Failure of Multiculturalism, FrontPage Magazine, October 22, 2010

Friday, October 22nd, 2010

Germany isn’t the only nation in Europe that is confronting the failure of multiculturalism. Many other European country’s are confronting it too, including France, Switzerland and the Netherlands to name but three. There are even rumblings in Britain of all places as well.

There are two common denominators in multiculturalism’s failure throughout the continent…the refusal of vast numbers of Muslim immigrants to integrate into their host country, to subscribe to their host country’s norms and values and live their lives according to it’s laws and precepts and the fact that virtually all of the said immigrants are followers of Islam who see it’s religious imperatives as paramount and insist that the Germans, the French, the British, the Spanish, the Italians, everyone, change their ways to meet their needs instead of the other way around.

When Europeans confront multiculturalism what they’re really doing is fighting for cultural survival, fighting to prevent their cultures from being overwhelmed and taken over, fighting to keep Europe from becoming an Islamic continent instead of a free, democratic, Western, Judeo-Christian one. Islam is expansionist and uncompromising and brooks no opposition to it’s demands. Europeans are recognizing that it is incompatible with the nature of their societies, that it is changing the fundamental nature of their societies, which is why there is a growing backlash against it’s efforts to become predominant and against the multiculturalism doctrine that has always aided and abetted it. Islam won’t permit Europeans to be European, which is why it’s being confronted along with it’s enabler, multiculturalism. Simple as that.

Let’s hope it’s not too late. Europe is hanging in the balance. An Islamic Europe? It’s really not as inconceivable as you might think.

Thanks to multiculturalism, neither is an Islamic Canada.

Tell it to the Palestinians and the Arab/Islamic world, Re: Just Knock It Off, Thomas Friedman, International Herald Tribune/New York Times, October 20, 2010

Wednesday, October 20th, 2010

If Thomas Friedman was really interested in peace talks starting up again and in those peace talks being successful he would implore President Obama to make it clear to the Palestinians and the rest of the Arab/Islamic world to “just knock it off”, not the Israelis. As things stand now, peace with Israel is not possible because of their attitudes and behavior. They can’t even bring themselves to recognize Israel’s existence, so how can they negotiate a real and lasting peace with her?

Friedman should know that the settlements are merely a ploy, a diversion, a red herring and are not an impediment to negotiations or a positive conclusion to any that might take place. The fact of the matter is that Israelis could agree to every single demand that is made upon them and Palestinians and the Arab/Islamic world would still not be satisfied. There wouldn’t be peace no matter what Israelis did because her adversaries don’t want it. What they really want is to remove Israel from the face of the earth, to wipe it off the map, to destroy it.

That is the root of the conflict in the Middle East and always has been and nothing will change until that does. It in turn will never change unless President Obama or one of his successors tells them in no uncertain terms that it has to and until it does the United States will not have anything to do with phony peace processes because they are nothing more than charades and a waste of time and energy.

Obama will almost assuredly not do anything as emminently sensible as that but it is precisely what Friedman should be pushing him towards. It is the Palestinians and the Arab/Islamic world that needs to “knock it off” because they simply cannot be taken seriously until they do.

Thomas, you can blame Islam, blame anti-semitism, blame the blindness, laziness and collusion of the media, blame the racist United Nations or the heretofore weak-kneed United States and it’s hypocritical and feckless President Barack Hussein Obama, blame whatever and whoever you want but you can’t blame settlements or Israelis or Prime Minister Netanyahu for the disintegration of the current peace talks. Not if you want to be seen as an honest, unbiased, knowledgeable observer that is.

The case for voting Republican, Re: United States mid-term elections, American Thinker, October 20, 2010

Wednesday, October 20th, 2010

In less than two weeks Americans will go to the polls and vote in arguably the most important mis-term elections in the nation’s history. Those who love their country and everything it stands for will vote Republican, no matter how they voted before or indeed whether they voted at all.

President Obama’s actions have been uniformly disastrous for the United States and the free world and the only thing at the present time that might prevent him from inflicting further catastrophies upon all of us is electing enough Republicans to the House of Representatives and Senate to make it much more difficult to carry out his destructive agenda, to curb his power. It is not enough to repudiate him in these elections through the loss of a few seats. If that happens Obama will just rationalize the losses, proffer lame excuses, denigrate those who voted against him and carry on remaking America according to his socialist philosophy and ideology of appeasement and moral relativism. No, repudiation is not enough. He must be curbed, stopped, and our only recourse, the only possibility we have of doing that now, is to elect as many Republicans as we can. Republican majorities in the House and Senate would be sufficient, but a critical mass might do the trick as well. Hold your nose if you have to but vote for the GOP. If I can do it so can anyone else.

There is no need to give a litany of his failures here. Suffice it to say that if President Obama has two more years of unfettered power our country will be unrecognizable and on it’s knees, the free world could very well be crippled and on the verge of extinction and American exceptionalism and preemminence will be nothing more than a dim memory. The stakes really are that high.

The man is also a proven liar and prevaricator. Not exactly what anyone needs in a President, is it?

And by the way, I am not a card carrying Republican or anything else. I am simply a thoughtful, freedom loving, patriotic American who is terribly worried about the future of my country and the free world with President Obama in office. With good reason.

Wilders isn’t the only one off the hook, Re: Wilders off the hook, Radio Netherlands Worldwide, October 16, 2010

Sunday, October 17th, 2010

Prosecutors in Holland have recommended that Geert Wilders be acquitted of all five charges against him, including group defamation and inciting hatred and discrimination of Muslims and non-Western ethnic minorities. Wilders has been outspoken in his criticism of Islam and the Islamization of the Netherlands. The prosecutors concluded that his pronouncements were directed towards Islam and Islamization, not against Muslims as such, and were therefore not illegal because they didn’t target a specific group or intrinsically create divisions between groups. Judges in the trial may still disagree with the prosecutors and convict him but this is thought to be exceedingly unlikely and his acquittal is seen as a virtual certainty.

The prosecutor’s recommendations are a victory for freedom loving people everywhere, not only in Holland. They reaffirm the principle that criticizing particular entities, Islam and Islamization in this case, is not the same as inciting hatred or discrimination against their adherents. Criticism may lead to hurt feelings but it doesn’t by definition lead to anything else in and of itself. People in the Netherlands are now legally free to to make their own pronouncements on Islam and the Islamization of their country, whether they are critical or not. That freedom would have been lost in Holland if Wilders was convicted and would have had enormous consequences for the rest of us as well. It would have been a legal precedent affirming the idiotic, self-serving notion that hatred or discrimination flows from criticism and would have been pointed to by Islamists constantly in their attacks on freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

Islamists throughout the Western world are trying to shut down debate or discussion about Islam or Islamization by equating those with criticism and in turn equating criticism with hatred and incitement against Muslims. Even the most innocuous statements or reservations have been met with accusations of racism or Islamophobia (or threats, intimidation and worse as well) and this has cast a pall over open and frank discussion of just how far Western countries should be willing to go to accommodate Islam, whether or not they should accommodate it in the first place and how to proceed or not proceed in specific instances. The Dutch decision should have resonance in the rest of Europe and the West and will make it much more likely that people with concerns about Islam or Islamization will express themselves. Nothing wrong with that in free, democratic, secular societies.

As for freedom of expression in Islamic societies…that, as they say, is another story.

Congratulations Geert. You did us all a tremendous service.

Always angry Arabs aroused yet again, Re: Israel angers Palestine with building plans in East Jerusalem, Vancouver Sun, October 16, 2010

Sunday, October 17th, 2010

What Palestinians and the rest of the Arab world are really angry about is Israel’s very existence. Everything else is merely a ploy, a diversion, a red herring, regardless of what they say. Israelis could agree to every single demand that is made upon them and Palestinians and other Arabs would still not be satisfied. There wouldn’t be peace no matter what Israelis did because their adversaries don’t want it. What they really want is to remove Israel from the face of the earth, to wipe it off the map, to destroy it. That is the root of the conflict in the Middle East and always has been and nothing will change until that does. Palestinians and other Arabs are angry because Israel exists, nothing more.

Blame Islam, blame anti-semitism, blame the blindness, laziness and collusion of the media, blame the racist United Nations or the weak-kneed United States and it’s hypocritical and feckless President Barack Hussein Obama, blame whatever and whoever you want but don’t blame settlements or Israelis for the conflict or the disintegration of the current peace talks.

No serious, honest, unbiased, knowledgeable observer of the Middle East would do that.

Bullies are so predictable, Re: Iranian leader aims to provoke Israel with border visit, Daily Telegraph, October 14, 2010

Thursday, October 14th, 2010

No one really knows the true purpose of President Ahmadinejad’s two day trip to Lebanon, notwithstanding the headline in the Telegraph. It could very well be that he wishes to provoke Israel, or provoke the United States, or demonstrate his power in order to coerce or frighten other Middle Eastern countries into lining up with Iran against the West, or shore up his support at home through what amounts to a carefully stage managed publicity stunt, or prime Hezbollah and the Lebanese people for a much anticipated and desired war against the Israelis, or increase his stature among the dictators and despots of the world, or use the visit to broadcast his odious, idiotic and atavistic ideas to the world. All of these possibilities have been speculated on, and more. I think the real reason is much simpler.

Ahmadinejad is a bully, and an overconfident one at that. He thinks of himself as ‘the cock of the walk’ and a person who has bested President Obama, the West and the Israelis in their efforts to rein him in and prevent Iran from carrying on with it’s murderous activities. He knows he is well on the way to developing and possessing nuclear weapons and thinks nothing and no one can stop him. His ego tells him he is untouchable. He has come to Lebanon to gloat and nothing more. He is there to rub America’s and Israel’s face in his achievements and their perceived inability to prevent them and to bask in his unbearable lightness of being, to coin a phrase. That is what bullies do when they think they are winning and all powerful as he does. They gloat.

This trip sends one very clear, unmistakable message. Ahmadinejad is going to precipitate a war in the Middle East very soon because he thinks he is stronger and more righteous than anyone else and cannot lose. That is also what bullies do…they make excuses and pick fights. He’ll start a war with Israel soon alright. That’s a big mistake on his part though because the Israelis are a lot tougher, ruthless and more capable than he is and will consign him to the dustbin of history where he belongs. Like all bullies he’ll lose in the end.

It’s a bigger mistake on our part for allowing him to get to this point however. It could all have been avoided if only we had the sense to stand up to him in the first place. That’s the only thing that bullies understand after all.

Decision a portent of things to come?, Re: Ruling offers blueprint for niqabs in court, Toronto Globe & Mail, October 14, 2010

Thursday, October 14th, 2010

This decision is absolutely disgraceful and is a direct threat to the civil liberties of all Canadians. What comes next, compromises on Canadian’s right to freedom of expression, to freedom of religion, to freedom of the press, to freedom of assembly, to their ability to think and act as independent human beings? Some things should be cast in stone in a country like Canada and one of them is the right of an accused person to face his or her accuser in open court. That is one of the fundamental building blocks of Canadian society, part of the foundation of Canada’s way of life, and simply should not be trifled with.

Canadians should protest vociferously against the decision and do everything they can to get it overturned. If it is not they will soon find that all of their other civil liberties are compromised too. After that they will find that they have all disappeared.