Emotional Issues - Ok, let's move on

Ok, those were the "big three", IMHO.   Best to deal with the distractions first and move on, I think.

There really have to be more serious issues to contend with in the upcoming US Presidential election.

Emotional Issues - GLBT RIghts/Marriage

A hot topic - a least south of the border - to be sure.

"It used to be the love that dare not speak its name.  Now it's the love that won't shut up!" - Mark Steyn (attributed)

Me?  Couldn't care less.  Knock yourselves out.  Really.  "Judge not", and all that.

Gotta draw the line somewhere, though - right?  For me, that'd be the annual "Gay Pride" parade.  That's where the local politicians - most of whom couldn't care less either - get bullied into attending and showing their "support" for the GLBT community in the name of that PC tenet "inclusiveness".

Tell you what - when someone holds a Gay Pride parade that doesn't include a) "Gays Against Israeli Aparthied", and b) some jerk flapping his John Thomas around, I might be inclined to take the movement a little more seriously.

Until then, I really have more things to worry about.

Emotional Issues - Capital Punishment

This is going to be a short post.

In a civilized society, the state should not put people to death.  That doesn't mean I'm not in favour of putting (mass, first-degree) murderers into a Paul Bernardo-sized box for the rest of their lives, 'cause I am.

Emotional Issues - Abortion

I'm very much in favour of a woman's right to choose, and I don't have an issue with late-term abortions if the mother's health/well being is at risk. I do, however, have a problem with abortion as a form of birth control.

That having been said, this is where it gets prickly on the health care debate.

Under univeresal health care - financed by everyone, might I add - the use of abortion as birth control can upset even pro-choicers.  It's one thing to terminate a pregnancy brought on by rape or incest and it's another thing to have an abortion because either party was too damned lazy/stupid/uncaring enough to use birth control - especially with the slew of STDs out there.  Why not add paying for treating someone who was too lazy/stupid/uncaring to not contract an STD in the first place?

Should the Government be financing birth control through its health care program?  Throw in the religious angle of the prohibition of artificial birth control and you'll get all the Roman Catholics pissed off at you because now *they're* helping to fund something that violates one of their hierarchy's tenets.

This is all further to my earlier post about splitting the base down the middle.  Just because you happen to be on one side of the issue or the other, it doesn't mean you have to walk lock-step with everyone else on your particular "wing".  Throw in enough emotional issues and people will prioriotize what's really important to them and end up voting (nose plugged with fingers) for the other guy.

That's not how you get elected.

More about health care later.

Emotional Issues

I've been called out more than a few times over the past couple of weeks with respect to my views on the upcoming Presidential election in the States.  My responses are going to be too long for FaceBook, so I'll detail them here between now and November 6th.

I'm going to start with what my good friend Michael Marzolini calls "emotional issues".  Michael is the chairman of Pollara, a market research and public opinion company in Toronto.  For years, he was the polling company of record for the Liberal Party of Canada.

At any rate, he categorized moral issues such as abortion and capital punishment as "emotional". 

These issues, he said, divided the elctorate right down the middle and it was political suicide to dwell on them.  I have no reason to believe he was wrong in this assessment.  If your party is polling at around the 40% mark in Canada, you're on your way to a majority government.  If you go in and piss off your share of electorate by harping on an emotional issue - even one that people *want* to hear about - you're going to see your share drop.  Best to have an innocuous blanket statement sitting in the back of the party's policy book and deflect any mention of the issue when asked.

From wikipdeia:

In an August 19, 2012 interview aired on St. Louis television station KTVI-TV, [Missouri Rep. Todd] Akin was asked his views on whether women who became pregnant due to rape should have the option of abortion. He replied:

Well you know, people always want to try to make that as one of those things, well how do you, how do you slice this particularly tough sort of ethical question. First of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something. I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.
 

He was immediately - and correctly - villified for his ignorance.

Wiki also says "Medical experts say there is no evidence to support the assertion that women are less likely to get pregnant from rape compared with consensual sex" .

Right.

I'm not going to get into the abortion issue in the post - that'll be later on.  What I am going to do, though, is give a little perspective on this man because I've met people like him in the past who have said the same thing.  And say what you will about Rush Limbaugh - I think he had the right take on Rep. Akin, and it's worth sharing:

"There are people who hang around only like-minded people, and there are people who hang around and expose themselves to people that disagree with them on things. I think Akin may be one of these people who hangs around with people who only think the way he does about things.

"If you strip this down, what Akin was trying to say was something very simple. ' I don't think abortion should even happen in rape'. That's what he was trying to say. Let's just strip away all the other stuff. There are a group of pro-lifers who profoundly believe that, and they talk to each other, and they try to come up with ways of persuading other people to agree with them on this. Because their view is, it's not the baby's fault. Why are we gonna kill the baby? Why should there be an exception? The baby is the essence of innocence in every act of conception. The baby is entirely innocent, is what they believe, and so an exception to them weakens the entire argument.

"So they sit around amongst themselves -- I'm not being critical of 'em; don't misunderstand my choice of words or tone, and they try to think of ways to persuade other people who agree with them. So Akin goes on TV with Charles Jaco, which is mistake number one, but he goes on with Charles Jaco on local St. Louis TV. And this whole business of a woman's body shuts down in rape, there's no evidence for that. But this is the kind of thing that people who do nothing but talk amongst themselves will conjure up, a belief system like that, and they'll grab on to anything they can to support what their empirical belief is because their ultimate aim is to save life.

"Their ultimate aim is to protect the baby no matter what circumstance the conception occurs in. And I think that's just who the guy is, but he doesn't know how to explain it. He has no clue how to make his case for it. And so he hangs around people who are like-minded and they've devised this belief. He's not the first guy to say this. I've had people tell me that a woman's body shuts down in rape. There's no evidence for this. I mean it's absolutely absurd. This leads to the second problem. This is absurd. That belief that a woman's body shuts down and the whole notion of "legitimate"/"illegitimate" rape, that's the thing that bothers me about it."

Ok, a bit long winded, but the gist of it was that Akin wasn't properly informed.

Somehow I get the feeling this is going to be a recurring theme between now and election day.

 

Good God, it's been a long time.  More than five years.

I started this blog in June of 2006 when the "broad strata" of 17 wanna-be terrorists were arrested in Toronto.  Looking over my posts after that, it's certainly interesting to see how all that played out.

I joined FaceBook in October of 2007 and my writings on this blog just withered.  I think it was easier to get the one liners out and read by my friends than it was to direct them here.  Honestly, I can't recall exactly why - it's just how it ended up.

A lot has happened in the last five years, hasn't it?  A Fabian Socialist was elected to the Presidency in the US, and Stephen Harper finally got his majority government.  I'm happy to report that we haven't sunk completely into the abyss on either count, but things are certainly teetering in the States.  I'm not sure they, this continent, this hemisphere, or the world will be able to take another four years of Obama.  The media doesn't seem to be quite as "on board" this time as they were back in '08.  Shades of "Trudeaumania" - another Fabianist that almost sunk a country.

Bob Rae, the leader of Ontario's first (and only, thank God) NDP government ran into the same problems as Trudeau and Obama.  All very smart and highly intelligent people who ended up dragging the populace down to a level of indescribable mediocrity in the name of equality and equity.  And before you jump all over me on that last one, go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron for a summary of Vonnegut's great short story.  Hell, read the story itself if you haven't done so.  You'll see what I mean.

Rae and Obama in particular spent and have spent their time falling all over themselves catering to labour unions, (minority) special interest groups, and indeed to the media that put them there.  Obama has rejected what made the US great in favour of expanding government control of most facets of American life.  He is surely under the impression that those he considers not as smart as he simply cannot be relied upon to fulfil *his* version of the American Dream (whatever that is).

More about him another time.  In the meantime, take a minute and look at my post from July 15 of 2007.  Not much has changed, has it?

Have you seen HBO's "The Newsroom"?

Here's the screed from the first episode: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7lKNjtvfpc

...and the root of it, as stated by newsman Will McAvoy (Jeff Daniels) is that we're no longer informed.  And he's right.  We're presented, typically, with two sides of an issue.  On one side is the left, ala MSNBC, The New York Times, NPR, and so on, and the right, FOX, Sun-TV, Rush, and a whack of small-town dailies.  It's our nature, as people, to gravitate to where we're comfortable - where there's a group like us - and once we're there, we usually stay.  We listen to what should have been rational discourse degenerate into shouting matches with people who happen to have different opinions than ourselves and we're content in the knowledge that we're not alone and maybe these other people really *are* assholes after all.

How difficult must it be to permanently reside on one side or the other?  We think it because Hunter wrote, and Garcia sang, "sometimes we live no particular way but our own".  And it marginalizes us.  We are the majority.  We have to be.  Surely it isn't possible that that many people on the left and that many people on the right have no room for - no time for - people with views that are contrary to theirs.  It's not how it should be. We've sacrificed being informed for ten-second sound bites and snarkly little quips that put opposing points of view down. Sometimes so far down that they're never heard from again.

Make no mistake about it.  There are plenty of people on both the left and the right whose mission is to silence the other side.  The left does it with political correctness and the right does it with God and Patriotism.  And it sucks.

So over the next while, and certainly leading up to the US election in Novemeber, I'll be tossing out my own ideas.  Maybe you'll agree with me, maybe you'll find them offensive, and maybe it'll just end up being food for thought.

One way or another, it's going to be fun.

Polarization

\Po'lar*i*az"tion\, n. [Cf. F. polarisation][1913 Webster] 1. The act of polarizing; the state of being polarized, or of having polarity.

Selections from Moby Thesaurus II by Grady Ward:

Polarization: anteposition, confrontation, disparity, division, hostility, mutual repulsion.

(Thanks to the Hypertext Webster Gateway at http://www.bennetyee.org/)

- - -

I think the Thesaurus' words were more what I was thinking of. Angles of reflection of light aren't really what this post is all about.

Rather, it has to do with the (mostly) childish attitudes that come from the various camps when it comes to the issues of the day. It can range from "Nuke 'em 'til they glow" to "Can't we all just get along?" to what it means to have single-tiered health care in Canada to what exactly is going on with our environment.

Children with asthma are now commonplace. It wasn't like that when I was a kid. We seem to bump into people with life-threatening nut allergies on a more regular basis. It wasn't like that when I was a kid either. So tell me, are we just getting better at diagnosing these ailments, or is there really an increase? If there is, have we brought it upon ourselves?

Quite frankly, I don't know.

The reason I don't know is because you can't get a bloody straight answer out of anyone.

Environmentalists would have us believe that the cause is and has been our presence on this fragile planet. Anti-environmentalists (is there a better word?) would counter that we have more trees today than in any time in history.

Good God - are trees toxic after all?

Nobody seems willing to come forward and say things like "it's not such a good idea to dump raw sewage in the river, but on the other hand, spraying for bugs ain't such a bad idea".

And that's what's missing. Middle-ground.

I'm not talking about feel-good crap like "carbon credits" either (quite easily the biggest scam since $60/bbl oil).

No, I'm talking about the rational discourse that is and will be required in order to solve any of the environmental problems we might have. This discourse does not involve one side or the other jumping up and down screeching "I told you so!" each time another (possibly pseudo-) scientific report hits the stands.

2005 was one of the worst Atlantic hurricane seasons on record. Lives lost - billions in repairs. But uh-oh, here comes 2006. The "experts" get trotted out claiming *this* season will be the worst ever. Um, nope. It was one of the lightest. Looks like '07 is going to be closer to '06 than '05 too. No worries. Let's stage a putzch at the weather service. Can't have contradictory ideas, can we?

But why is it different? Why is it we can experience such a dramatic lessening of the environmental conditions that cause hurricanes from one year to the next? Why that quickly? Isn't weather supposed to be long-term? What happened?

Well, the truth is - are you ready for it? - the truth is WE DON'T KNOW.

There. I said it. An admission of meteorological ignorance from a lay person. About as rare as hen's teeth, if you ask me, but an admission anyway. Funny part, it wasn't that hard to say (type).

We live in a world where weather pontification rules. It's either "yer fer us, or you're agin us".

And it's crap.

Anybody and his dog can use one-sided trumped-up statistics to support his claim, and they do. And they're trotted out on the evening news for their 60 seconds of fame and, assuming they can get in a word edgewise with the politically-motivated show host, a five-second sound bite.

This problem isn't about sound bites. It's about a) Is there really a problem?, b) If so, how big is it?, and c) If it's threatening us, what do we do about it?

I'm going to admit ignorance again, and say I don't have the answers to "a", "b", or "c". I do, however, know what the answer *isn't*:

• Threatening/censuring those that don't believe in man-made global climate change, including those at the scientific and academic levels
• Planting trees to "offset" smog-belching machines instead of making those machines more fuel-efficient
• Partisan support of flawed "treaties" that punish developed nations and enrich third-world dictatorships or regimes
• Pretending there's nothing to talk about

Polarization: opposite ends. Just what you need for rational discourse.

Ask me "weather" I'm dreaming. (Or having a nightmare, for those that might have seen the holographic Al Gore).

Back again

Wow, it's been a long time between posts, hasn't it? I offer no other excuse than I've been astonishingly busy - too busy to sift through the unadulterated crap that presents itself as "news" in the MSM, and too busy to offer a daily comment on the latest obscenity foisted by the "Religion of Perpetual Outrage" upon the rest of humanity.

All that not withstanding, I'll try to get my $0.02 posted here without letting another six months slip by.

Today, whilst perusing one of my favourite sites (http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/), I came across the following gem. It was a response - now known there as "Nekama's Troll Hammer" - to an absolutely off-the-wall comment on the legitimacy of Palestinians throwing rocks.

I'm not sure who "Nekama" is or was, but this is right up there with the fabulous "what to say to an idiotic moonbat" essays you can find on http://www.ejectejecteject.com/ . So rather than provide a link to it, here's "Nekama's Troll Hammer" in its entirety:

Congratulations. You are the first to receive the memo:

MEMO

This is an automated reply from the Bullshit Detector at Little Green Footballs.

Your recent post contained troll-like characteristics which resembles the type of message sent by spoiled ISM members on summer holiday, college students who have recently inhaled Noam Chomsky’s foul rantings, Adam Shapiro wannabes, Nazi sympathizers, or genuine Koranimals.

In order to prevent another thread being hijacked, and to send your message to the appropriate department for response (FOAD, GAZE, Go Away Gordon, or The Bus To Rachel Corrie’s Tomb Is Leaving - Be Sure You’re Under It), kindly reply to the following questions:

1. Are you aware that the Disputed Territories never belonged to the “Palestinians” and only came into Israeli possession as a result of the 1967 six day war in which Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon all massed forces at Israel’s border in order to “push the Jews into the sea”. The Arabs lost and Israel took control of the land. Do you agree that if the Koranimals don’t want to lose territory to Israel, then they shouldn’t start wars? Do you agree that there is justice that Israel, who as far back as 1948 has always sought peace with her far larger neighbors, should live in prosperity - making the desert bloom - while the residents of 19 adjacent Arab countries who are blessed with far more land as well as oil wealth live in their own feces?

2. Did you know that the “Palestinians” could have had their own country as far back as 1948 had they accepted the UN sponsored partition plan which gave Israel AND the Palestinians a countries of their own on land which Jews had lived on for thousands of years before Mohammed ever had a wet dream about virgins? The Arabs rejected the UN offer and went to war with the infant Israeli nation. The Arabs lost and have been whining about it ever since. Do you agree this is like a murderer who kills his parents and asks for special treatment since he is now an orphan?

3. Can you tell us ANY Arab country which offers Jews the right to be citizens, vote, own property, businesses, be a part of the government or have ANY of the rights which Israeli Arabs enjoy? Any Arab country which gives those rights to Christians? How about to other Arabs? Wouldn’t you just LOVE to be a citizen of Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Iran, or Syria?

4. Since as many Jews (approximately 850,000) were kicked out of Arab countries as were Arabs who left present day Israel (despite being literally begged to stay), why should Arabs be permitted to return to Israel if Jews aren’t allowed to set foot in Arab countries? Can you explain why Arabs can worship freely in Israel but Jews would certainly be hung from street lamps after having their intestines devoured by an Arab mob if they so much as entered an Arab country?

5. Israel resettled and absorbed all of the Jews from Arab countries who wished to become Israelis. Why haven’t any Arab countries offered to resettle Arabs who were displaced from Israel, leaving them to rot for 60 years in squalid refugee camps? And why are those refugee camps still there? Could it be that the billions of dollars that the UNWRA has sent there goes to terrorist groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, El Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, or Hezbollah? How did Yassir Arafat achieve his $300 million in wealth? Why aren’t these funds distributed for humanitarian use?

6. Did you know that the Arabs in the disputed territories (conquered by Israel in the 1967 war which was started by Arabs) and who are not Israelis already have two countries right now? And that they are called Egypt and Jordan?

7. If your complaint is about the security fence which Israel is finally building in the Disputed Territories, are you aware that it is built solely to keep the “brave” Arab terrorists out so that they can no longer self detonate on busses, in dining halls or pizzerias and kill Jewish grandmothers and schoolchildren? Why are the Arabs so brave when they target unarmed civilians but even when they outnumber their opponents they get their sandy asses kicked all the way to Mecca when they are faced with Jewish soldiers? Why do Arab soldiers make the French look like super heroes?

8. Please explain why you are so concerned about Arabs, who possess 99% of the land in this region and are in control of the world’s greatest natural resource, which literally flows out of the ground? Can’t their brother muslims offer some of the surplus land and nature’s riches to the “Palestinians”? Or is it true that Arabs are willing to die right down to the last “Palestinian”?

9. Why do you not exhibit the same level of concern for say, people in Saudi Arabia who are beheaded, subject to amputation, stoning, honor killing etc.? What about women who are denied any semblance of basic civil rights, including the right not to be treated as property for the entertainment and abuse of her father, brothers, or husbands? What about the Muslims in Sudan and Egypt who are still enslaved, or the women there whose genitalia are barbarically cut off? How about the oppression of Shiites by Sunnis, the gassing of the Kurds by Iraq, or the massacre of “Palestinians” by Jordan (Black September)? Why doesn’t this concern you?

10. Did you ever stop to wonder how much better off everyone in the region would be if Arabs stopped trying to kill Jews and destroy Israel? What would happen if the Israelis gave up their weapons and disarmed? Would they live to see the next day? But what would happen if the Arabs completely disarmed? You know the answer: They would all be AT PEACE! And if there is no war to rile them up, the Arabs would be forced to look at their own repressive, pre-medieval societies. Why would they want to do that when there are Jews to kill?

11. Have you heard “People who define themselves primarily by what they hate, rather than who they love, are doomed to failure and misery”? Can you see the parallels to the Arabs, who are blessed with land and oil, but still gladly train their children to kill themselves in order to kill Jews? Have you heard Golda Meir’s words to the effect of “There will be peace when the Arabs love their children more than they hate ours”? Why do the Arabs hate so much?

Please state your answers to the questions listed above. If you need assistance or require additional study, then please refer to the following links:

History of the Middle East Conflict:
[Link: www.infoclick.org...]

Thousands of women killed for honor:
[Link: news.nationalgeographic.com...]

Muslims lament Israel’s existence:
[Link: www.iht.com...]

Disputed Territories – Forgotten Facts
[Link: www.mfa.gov.il...]

The size of Israel compared to neighboring countries in the region
[Link: www.iris.org.il...]

Jews expelled from Arab Countries
[Link: www.jpost.com...]

One Million Jews flee Arab countries – why no right of return for them?
[Link: www.forgottenexodus.com...]

Middle East Facts
[Link: yashiko.middleeastfacts.com...]

Middle East Truth
[Link: www.mideasttruth.com...]

Larry Miller on Hypocrisy
[Link: weeklystandard.com...]

Please respond to the items listed above. Based on your answers a thoughtful reply or instruction to FOAD will be provided.

Thank you for writing to Little Green Footballs.

Signed,

Troll Early Warning Detection Team

"This is not ideology. It's a mental illness."

Bravo to the Finger Waver.

DUBLIN, Ireland (CNN) -- At a recent debate over the battle for Islamic ideals in England, a British-born Muslim stood before the crowd and said Prophet Mohammed's message to nonbelievers is: "I come to slaughter all of you."

"We are the Muslims," said Omar Brooks, an extremist also known as Abu Izzadeen. "We drink the blood of the enemy, and we can face them anywhere. That is Islam and that is jihad."

Anjem Choudary, the public face of Islamist extremism in Britain, added that Muslims have no choice but to take the fight to the West.

"What are Muslims supposed to do when they are being killed in the streets in Afghanistan and Baghdad and Palestine? Do they not have the same rights to defend themselves? In war, people die. People don't make love; they kill each other," he said.

But in the same debate, held on the prestigious grounds of Dublin's Trinity College in October, many people in the crowd objected.

"These people, ladies and gentleman, have a good look at them. They actually believe if you kill women and children, you will go to heaven," said one young Muslim who waved his finger at the radicals.

"This is not ideology. It's a mental illness."

Freakonomics

It seems as though I never have time to read books any more.

I've made time, though, and have been reading "Freakonomics" by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner. The book was a birthday present from my son, and has been a very entertaining read.

In it, the authors take on such wide-ranging topics as why the US crime rate fell so dramatically in the 90s, and why most drug dealers live with their moms.

In the chapter "Where Have All the Criminals Gone", the authors cite criminologists James Q. Wilson and George Kelling, and their "Broken Window Theory". Some may recall the great cleanup of New York City over the past few years. Then and there, the Police Commissioner, William Bratton employed the theory as the cleanup commenced.

Here it is. Ask yourself how much it applies to the current Islamic war:

"[The Broken Window Theory argues that] minor nuisances, if left unchecked, turn into major nuisances: that is, if someone breaks a window and sees it isn't fixed immediately, he gets the signal that it's all right to break the rest of the windows and maybe set the bulding afire too."

To me, it speaks volumes. Great book.

The Only Solution in/for Iraq?

Barking Moonbat has posted what might end up being the only realistic solution for Iraq:

(1) Appoint a military governor for the country and give him absolute power, to include public executions if necessary. (2) Send in 100,000 more troops for a six month deployment and wipe out the “insurgency” once and for all. (3) Close and seal the borders with Syria and Iran - station troops on the borders to shoot first and ask questions later. (4) Start pumping oil as fast as possible to pay for all this. (5) Divide the country into three states: Sunnistan, Shiastan and Kurdistan and appoint a regional government over each - US military at first, gradually transitioning to Iraqi civilian control as soon as they act like they really want to govern properly. (6) Send half of the already “trained” Iraqi battalions to Afghanistan to fight Al-Qaeda there and tell them they can come home as soon as they wipe out the Taliban. (7) Disband all Iraqi militias and completely destroy any who object - and that includes Al Sadr’s goons.

Distasteful? You bet. The only answer? Quite possibly.

Oh - and here's number 8: Start holding the mainstream media responsible for publishing fabrications as the truth. (Ref: Getting The News From The Enemy).

Seeing the Unseen

Bill Whittle has posted part one of an excellent new essay: Seeing the Unseen. Follow the link. (Hat Tip: LGF)

Things that leave me slack-jawed

I've written this opening line about ten times because I'm still so astounded by what's popped up on this morning's CBC website (http://www.cbc.ca). I think we're all used to seeing media reports that go out of their way to slant opinion rather than report facts (ref: The Toronto Star), but these couple of headlines take the cake:

Saddam Hussein sentenced to death A U.S.-backed Iraqi court has imposed imposed the death sentence on former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein for crimes against humanity.

What the hell does "U.S.-backed" mean? That he didn't get a fair trial? That Ramsey Clarke (the dhimmi) didn't vigorously defend him? That the whole thing was a puppet show?

Honestly. Of course, what they should have done was pull him out of that hole he was hiding in and executed him on the spot.

Here's the other:

Hundreds of protesters demand PM act on Kyoto

Hmm. Hundreds, huh? I wonder if any of them have ever read the salient points of the accord? My favourite is the section allowing nations to trade emissions limits for cash.

Oh well, if "hundreds" of people know better that the 30 million that live in this country, we'd best get right on this, right?


****

Update: The CBC web page has changed its Saddam headline to remove the "U.S.-backed" portion. I wonder if they were responding to complaints, or whether they realized just how retarded it was. On the other hand, maybe they didn't want to give credit to one of the few countries in the world with enough balls to go in and take out this embarassment to the human race.

A Long Time Between Posts

Wow - more than a month. I've been absolutely overwhelmed with work to give this blog the attention it deserves of late. Even now, I'm typing between sandwich bites.

So here, for those of you that've missed it, is a collection of headlines of late from http://www.jihadwatch.com.

After all, what's a day without *something* from the "Religion of Perpetual Outrage"?

Is there really anyone left that doesn't believe that World War III hasn't started? (Aside from Jack Layton and Eric Margolis, that is)

"Youths" torch buses around Paris

Bali bombing pair freed on early release

Pakistani jihadists slam Musharraf, US in Eid sermons

Iran expands uranium enrichment

Online Fatwas Incite Young Muslims to Jihad

Jihadis turn from Iraq back to Afghanistan

Indian PM: "Credible evidence" of Pakistani involvement in 7/11 blasts

Jihadist holiday video calls for jihad and slaughter of "Crusaders"

Burka-clad woman unchecked at airport


And that's just from the past three days!

Wake up, Canada. Wake up, America.

Europe - Go back to sleep.

Alastair Gordon

I'm on the emailing list of the "Canadian Coalition for Democracies" (Alastair Gordon, President).

Today, I received (in my email inbox), a copy of Mr. Gordon's latest contribution to the National Post.

It's a beauty, and here it is:

When Stephen Harper addresses the UN today, Alastair Gordon hopes his remarks might sound something like this...

Ladies and gentlemen, it is a pleasure to be here today. Where to start? Let's go to the Far East and work our way round the globe.

- Taiwan is a peaceful, self-made democracy with the world's 17th largest economy. Yet it has consistently been denied entry to the UN. Meanwhile, Iran, a wretched theocracy threatening the world with nuclear Armageddon, is a member not only of the UN General Assembly, but also of the Human Rights Council. Canada will now support Taiwan's full participation in the UN and its agencies. I am also taking this opportunity to announce Canada's withdrawal from the "One China" policy embraced by my predecessor.

- Across the Taiwan Strait, there is mainland China, the largest recipient of Canadian foreign aid. Tell me: Why does a $1-trillion economy send its tax dollars to an $8-trillion economy? Should a manufacturing colossus such as China enjoy the preferential tariffs normally reserved for a developing nation? Are we helping China buy the missiles it aims at Taiwan? Simply put, our aid for China is over.

- Moving south and west, we come to India. India has been independent for less than 60 years, yet has created the world's largest democracy with the world's largest middle class. Canada will sponsor a resolution proposing that India become the next permanent member of the UN Security Council.

- Next, Iran. Attention, Europe: The nuclear missiles Iran wants to build will be able to incinerate your cities. Yet many of you pander to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by demonizing Israel and America, while secretly praying that they neutralize Iran and save your hides. Smart people shouldn't appease an apocalyptic madman like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. If you insist on doing so again, you'll be on your own when Paris is reduced to radioactive rubble.

- Afghanistan. Here, the UN took a principled position. I am grateful to the men and women who make up the UN-authorized forces in that country. But I really do not understand this talk of a "traditional" peacekeeping and rebuilding mission as distinct from a combat mission. Rebuilding Afghanistan while the Taliban remain active is like building homes in the middle of a brush fire, while proclaiming that there is no need to first extinguish the flames. I am proud to tell you that Canada's army is staying the course in Afghanistan.

- And now we come to Israel. In its first 42 years, the UN tabled 370 resolutions condemning Israel and zero resolutions critical of the PLO or any Arab state. When Syria slaughtered 20,000 of its own citizens at Hama in 1982, or when it sponsored the destruction and occupation of Lebanon, or even when Iraq massacred its Kurdish citizens with poison gas ... nothing. So here's Canada's approach: We will vote no on every anti-Israel resolution until we see such reprimands applied even-handedly against all players in the Middle East according to the scale of their misdeeds.

Following the election of Hamas in Palestinian elections this year, Canada stopped funding the Palestinian Authority. Now a contrived "Unity Government" has its hand out for more Western aid. Should we really provide funding to parties whose goal is to obliterate Israel? Maybe if the Palestinians were forced to provide a real education to their children and build a real economy instead of living off Western welfare, they could become a fierce economic competitor, and pummel Israel in the marketplace of goods, services and ideas. (That would do more economic harm to Israel than, say, the United Church Womyns' Collective boycotting Jaffa oranges.)

- For decades, the world's refugee problems have been resolved through UNHCR. Only one group of refugees, the Palestinians, has its own refugee agency, UNRWA. Fifty-five years after its founding, the plight of Palestinian refugees is worse than ever. UNRWA is complicit in an education system that teaches children to hate Jews and glorify martyrdom, and provides Hamas with money for terror. Canada will end its funding of UNRWA, and direct those resources to UNHCR.

Finally, I would like to offer an invitation. There are a few members of the UN who recognize that a brutal global jihad is being waged against the free world, but more who are friends or appeasers of that jihad. Today, I am inviting the leaders of those democratic nations who have proven their commitment to defending freedom and tolerance to join me at a Conference of Free Nations to be held in Canada. There, we will take the historic first steps in forging a Western alliance to defeat this brutal common enemy.

Thank you.

© National Post 2006

YAAFM vs. The High Road

There is a large segment of the population that can engage quite effectively in the debate with respect to Global Terrorism, the Middle East, and ever-increasing atrocities undertaken by members of the "Religion of Peace".

For example, and even though a previous post of mine looked upon the man with disdain, Eric Margolis is intelligent enough to put forward his ideas in a rational form, regardless of how misguided I (or anyone else) happens to think he is.

This is what I consider to be the "high road" of debate: sound ideas articulated in the hope that through logic and reasoning, you'll be able to sway the opinion of others.

On the other hand, there's a group of people who are simply so far beyond intellectual redemption that there's just no point in discussing anything with them. This group rears its head on a semi-regular basis in our country, and the cream of the crop has now risen to such a level of stupidity, that the only thing you can say is "YAAFM".

I give you lowlights from the Toronto Star's latest "Voices" column, and people's opinion of the fifth anniversary of 9/11, and the prospect of another terrorist attack.

Brace yourself.

"I am not worried about a terrorist attack. I am tired of the fear mongering by the governments and the media." Katryn Gerrard, Cambridge, Ont.

"No! I'm more worried the greedy buggers running our oil companies will continue to fleece us by pretending they have nothing to do with the world price of oil. They will create further havoc by reinvesting little in their infrastructure causing further increases when the rusty pipes leak." Mike Murphy, Sault Ste. Marie, Ont.

"I will worry more if the war mongering politicians are low in the polls for re-election. When Bush was down in the polls, 9/11 happened. When Blair was down in the polls, the London bombings happened. As Harper was loosing support, Canadian Security Intelligence Services busted an alleged terrorist ring about to attack Canada. Could it all be coincidence?" Bryan McNaughton, St. Catharines

"No. I'd be more worried about mortgage title fraudsters, or getting shot in a drive-by." Colin Rutter, Toronto

"It won't happen in Canada if your government is wise enough to get out now and stop lending Canada's name to the evil empire's crusade to take over the Middle East to line the pockets of U.S. corporations." Paul Perkins, San Francisco, Calif.

Katryn, Mike, Bryan, Colin, and Paul:

YAAFM(s)

Give it up, Eric

It seems as though The Toronto Sun's Eric Margolis is determined to continue his slide into irrelevance.

Take a peek at his column of last week at http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Margolis_Eric/2006/08/27/1779431-sun.html

In it, you'll find his well-crafter rationale as to why the Tamil Tigers are "freedom fighters", as opposed to the Canadian-Government recognized terrorists they are.

Perhaps wishing to outdo himself, this week's missive at http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Margolis_Eric/2006/09/02/1797803.html takes aim at Donald Rumsfeld's remarks on Islamic "appeasers". He (Margolis) consummates his column (and quite possibly his career as an effective commentator) by stating "The real closet fascists are in North America".

My take?

I guess he didn't like being referred to as an "appeaser", and decided to throw what little common sense he had left out the window, prior to putting pen to paper.

Knock, Knock.

Hey Eric - get that would you? It's the "clue" door.

Jack Layton - Canada's Shame

Even if one were to put aside feelings about the man's politics, Jack Layton can't help but come across as the pompous fool he his.

Here's this week's ramblings:

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/2006/08/31/1789786-cp.html

In part:

"NDP Leader Jack Layton says Canada should pull its troops out of Afghanistan by February because the mission has gone astray."

"...Layton said the Afghan mission has lost its direction. It has no clear goals, no exit strategy and no criteria to judge success, he said at a news conference Thursday. 'This is not the right mission for Canada,' he said. 'There is no balance. In particular, it lacks a comprehensive rebuilding plan and commensurate development assistance.' ""



Hey Jack: Develop this:

The "Red Cross Rocket" - You decide

Earlier posts to this blog highlighted, I think, a war-within-a-war.

I'm referring to the highly successful propaganda war waged by Hezbollah - against the Israelis - within the confines of the western media.

Here's a refutal worth reading:


http://theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20308892-7583,00.html?from=rss

You decide.

Personally, I think Hezbollah staged the whole thing, with a very educated eye as to how this war will be won - not on the battlefield, but at the breakfast table.

The Corruption of the Media

If you read anything at all today, make sure it's this:

http://www.eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/corruption-of-media.html

It's "EU Referendum's" final take on the Qana "massacre" during the recent Israel-Lebanon war.

It's bad enough to be duped by the media due to their perpetual sloppiness.

It's even worse when they're duped into becoming propagandists' stooges.

The Truth or More "Fauxtography"? You decide.

The recent war in the mid-east brought out the best (worst?) in some of the mainstream media's PhotoShop abilities. Those were discussed here earlier.

Here's the latest. It's long, but worth the read.

http://www.zombietime.com/fraud/ambulance/

You decide.

Are You Stupid?

[James Judd] ...the director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service said Tuesday that the spy agency avoids racial profiling because it is "fundamentally stupid'' and does not knowingly use information gleaned under torture offshore because the practice is "morally repugnant.''

http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=b0fe9a33-b253-4213-859e-d48b9f47bdf7&k=97263

Hmm.

Well, I guess I'll agree with him when white 78 year-old grandmothers start bombing stuff.

In the meantime, Mr. Judd, you have your head up your ass, and I'm of the opinion that you're "fundamentally stipid". Perhaps your resignation should be forthcoming?

...and I don't care how "morally repugnant" you find it, and I don't care if intelligence information is beamed down from Neptune. If you get information that helps prevent another 9/11 or 7/7 or any other terrorist attack, you'd better bloody well use it.

Welcome to Canada!

Welcome to Canada. We're glad you're here. For some of you, we can't even begin to imagine the kind of life you had where you came from. So be a part of us.

Before you get settled in, though, here's a couple of rules to follow:

1. Leave any hatred and mistrust of the police where you came from. The hard-working police in Canada are dedicated men and women who maintain the rule of law in this country. That means if you see someone breaking the law, call 911 and tell them. Don't automatically assume that all cops are "on the take", because they aren't.

2. Leave any hatred and mistrust of other ethnic groups where you came from. We have enough problems of our own. While those problems may pale in comparison to what you've been through, they're our problems none the less.

3. Your culture is yours. Share it with us. Let us know why you're you, and we'll let you know why we're us. Don't think for a minute, though, that being of a different culture means that you're immune to criticism either as an individual or a group. Because you're not, and here, none of us is. If you do find yourself criticized, crying "racist" doesn't help.

4. Here's a list of our friends: The United States, The United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, the Caribbean countries, Israel, most of Europe, hell - most of the world. Here's a list of countries and groups we're not overly fond of: Hezbollah, al Qaeda, Islamic Jihad, and any other terrorist organization including the warlords running parts of Africa, and the governments of Iran and North Korea. If you're here to support the bad guys, turn around, 'cause we don't want you.

5. Strive for success. Start a business. Be part of the community - not just "yours", but "ours". Teach your children right from wrong without using another ethnic group or culture as (bad) examples.

6. Women have rights in this country. If your culture deems women as "second-class", or that it can be justified to beat or kill them, then it's best to stay where you are.

7. Drop the hyphen. We don't need to know that you're a "this"-Canadian or a "that"-Canadian. Simply "Canadian" is fine, thank-you.

- - - -

Anyone else like to add to the list?

"Green Helmet" Strikes Again!

Have a look at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vPAkc5CLgc&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Folehgirl%2Eblogspot%2Ecom%2F

to see our favourite "movie director" ochestrate filming for the press in Lebanon.

Disgusting.

Read "Sandmonkey's" conversation with his grandmother about this at
http://www.sandmonkey.org/2006/08/11/on-the-sanctity-of-the-dead/

Photo Fraud in Lebanon

http://www.aish.com/movies/JP/PhotoFraud.asp

'nuff said.

The "Broad Strata" Strikes Again!

Astounding!

Twenty-one arrested in the UK for plotting to blow up airplanes mid-flight!

These "Broad Strata" folks sure get around!

Where's the Outrage?

It's just after noon, and 100 Hezbollah rockets fired into Israel have killed eight civilians.

Be careful you don't get trampled by the world's media as they rush to condemn this outrage.

This Is What's Going On In Canada

So pay attention.

Item 1: "Hezbollah’s violent ideology hits Montreal streets," by Peter Subissati at Judeoscope

"...Onlookers such as myself were taken aback by odious chants directed at Israel, the United States and the Harper administration. Supporters of Hezbollah, which has been designated a terrorist group by the federal government since 2002, branded pictures of their spiritual leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, as well as a surprising number of the group’s infamous yellow flag that depicts a hand clasping a Kalashnikov machine gun. Meanwhile some of the protesters hoisted other posters that showed the mangled corpses of Lebanese civilian victims under the banner “made by Israel”, while others wearing kaffiyehs displayed a large Israeli flag that was defaced with a swastika painted over the Star of David.

"After having heard countless cries of “death to Israel”, “vive le Hezbollah” and once in Arabic “death to the Jews”, I addressed some of the protesters by shouting back “am Yisrael chai” (the people of Israel live) and “shalom aleichem” (peace to all). The incident then turned violent when a fanatic ran up to me suddenly, punching and strangling me quickly as I fell onto a parked car on Ste. Catherine St. As the attacker was restrained and ushered away I then yelled “Are you crazy? This is Canada, so act civilized like everyone else watching you.” The unknown assailant was then reintroduced by protest-organizers into the crowd to avoid detection by the numerous members of the media and policemen who had witnessed the assault. Other disgruntled anti-Israel protesters then attempted to enter my place of work where I sought refuge yelling “Jewish pig” and “down, down Israel” as police and bystanders sealed the entrance briefly, preventing the mob from breaking the storefront."


Item 2: "Fearing for safety, Muslim official quits," from the Globe and Mail

"Tarek Fatah, the outspoken, controversial communications director of the Muslim Canadian Congress, has resigned, citing concerns for his safety and that of his family.

"Mr. Fatah said he will also resign from the MCC's board, severing all official ties with the organization he helped found.

"It's not just for me. It's for my wife and my daughters," he said in an interview.

"Part of it is also to get out of the limelight."

"Mr. Fatah's socially liberal views have always been controversial within the Muslim community, and in the past month he has been the subject of an e-mail campaign aimed at the Canadian news media.

"Along with his resignation, Mr. Fatah has filed a report with Toronto Police detailing what he says are a number of threats he has received since 2003. A police investigation is under way."

- - - -

Ok, we asked for it, and we got it. "Come to Canada! Keep your culture!" No one has the cajones to say "Come to Canada BUT LEAVE YOUR HATRED BEHIND!", or "Come to Canada - we'll do our best to not act as though we're superior to you as long as you do the same".

All this comes from the multicultural ethos that states that all cultures (except for ours, apparently) are not subject to any sort of scrutiny, not subject to any kind of criticism.

And this is where it's going to become very, very sticky.

Let's say that things escalate in the mid-east. I don't think this is idle speculation, I think it's a foregone conclusion. If you disagree, look at some of the other posts on this blog. If you still disagree, remove your head from the sand (or wherever else it might be) and do your own research.

At any rate, our historical position has been the support of Israel. What happens if, as a result of the staged "massacres" (et.al.), the moonbat portion of our population ends up siding with the radical immigrant portion, and causes a sway in foreign policy in favour of the Arab nations instead?

At best, we'll end up as a neutral country in this global war.

At worst, we'll end up on the wrong side.

Either possibility should send a shudder down the spine of every right-thinking Canadian, regardless of the number of hyphens they have in their nationality.

We Live in Amazing Times

Really, we do. I'm sure in a few years this'll look like the stone age, but for now, it's quite something. We see pictures of a war 1/3 a world away almost as soon as they're taken.

And we also fall for some of the most insidious propaganda.

Follow this link http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/07/milking-it.html to see what I mean. To summarize, the same green-helmeted "aid" worker in Qana is photographed during the course of the day holding the same poor dead child up to show the world what animals the Israelis are.

Never mind that that Israel blanketed the area with leaflets begging people to leave, never mind that Hezbollah is deliberately targeting civilian areas, and never mind that the cowards in Hezbollah continue to use human shields day in and day out.

Now further analysis at http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/188571.php offers proof that the event was staged by Hezbollah with already-in-rigor bodies (showing no signs of ever being crushed in a blown-up building)

Mark Steyn recently wrote: "We live in an age of inversely proportional deterrence: The more militarily powerful a civilized nation is, the less its enemies have to fear the full force of that power ever being unleashed. They know America and other Western powers fight under the most stringent self-imposed etiquette. Overwhelming force is one thing; overwhelming force behaving underwhelmingly as a matter of policy is quite another."

And to top it off, we have the world media acting as Hezbollah's stooges.

God help us all.

So why won't they take Israel up on its offer?

Israel's intentions were made quite clear at the beginning of the current "conflict":

"You want us to stop shelling you? Then return our soldiers and stop firing on us".

Pretty straight-forward, huh?

Well, to a rational person (or group of people), yes, it would be straight-forward.

Unfortunately, Israel (and by extension, we) isn't/aren't dealing with rational people.

Sandmonkey (http://www.sandmonkeyblog.com), I think, puts it best:

"This is what this feels like: A never-ending war. The Battle that will never end, mainly because the Israelis are willing to Kill to stay alive, and because the arabs are willing to die to kill them. I don't think Peace is possible, mainly because you need a common ground for peace, and a level of acceptable losses. The Israelis will always reach a point where their losses become unacceptable, and they will push for Peace. Not for our side. Our acceptable losses are limitless, as long as we win. When your acceptable loss is your own death, what is there to compromise on?

"The Israelis want to destroy Hezbollah, but they can't, because it's a culture and a nation. You want to destroy Hezbollah? You have to kill every single person who supports Hezbollah and its Ideology. You have to eleiminate [sic] almost all of the Shia in Lebanon. You have to engage in ethnic cleansing, and you can't do that! Now, since YOU CAN'T DO THAT, you will lose. It is inevitable. In order for the gun to kill the idea, it has to kill everyone who holds the idea. Since you can't do that, the idea will always win. The cause will always survive. The Israelis maybe willing to kill for Israel, but the arabs are willing to die for the cause. There is no winning for the israelis. Only degrees of losing!"

Part of Hezbollah's campaign, of course, has been on the P.R. front, with some of the Western media (hello, CNN?) eating it up as they give these bloodthirsty killers air time.

There was a Hezbollah spokesman on TV the other day, comparing their fight to that of the Americans in their war of independence. Once I got over the sheer audacity of the remarks, I realized that this specious argument will undoubtedly suck in the majority of people who can't see beyond a 30-second sound bite.

Just for Hezbollah's information, the Americans didn't use human shields in their war. Can Hezbollah claim the same? Didn't think so.

I think of some more examples when I'm not so pissed off about the whole thing.

CAIR-CAN: The Wind Changes

An email from Andrew Whitehead of www.anti-cair-net.org

The Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-CAN) is up in arms over a pending visit by the Rev. Franklin Graham to Winnipeg for a Christian gathering:

http://winnipegsun.com/News/Winnipeg/2006/07/12/1680337-sun.html

CAIR-CAN questions why Rev. Franklin Graham is welcome to preach, while British Imam Riyad ul-Haq had obstacles placed in his path to preclude him visiting Canada.

The simple answer is that while people may disagree about the message of Rev. Graham, he has never called on Christians to turn their back on Canada, to refuse to assimilate, to go on "Jihad" against their own country nor has he used rabid hate speech to define non-Muslims. Graham has never issued the call, "convert to Christianity or die"; nor has he ever been suspected of terrorist ties.

The reason the overall majority of Canadians do not fear Graham is because there is absolutely no worry that he will incite riots, call members of any faith "monkeys and pigs", or insult his hosts using vile and contemptible words. In short, he’s harmless.

CAIR-CAN Executive Director, Karl Nickner:

"Based on the different reactions to the comments of both religious leaders, some Canadian Muslims are wondering whether a double standard is being applied…as Muslims and as Canadians, we stand firmly against any hateful religious speech by representatives of all faiths."

Is there a double standard? Of course there is! Islamic terrorism supporters are simply not welcome in Canada…why is this so hard for CAIR to understand? The right to free speech ends when you call for terror-murdering people not of your faith.

David Oulette, director of the Canadian Coalition for Democracies (CCD), said:

http://canadiancoalition.com/nationalpost20060616/KeepClericOutOfCanada.html

"The problem is that this sheik has a history of radical discourses that incite hatred toward non-Muslims, speaking of plots by non-Muslims against Islam and the Muslim world in general [and] glorifying martyrdom in the way of Allah, which could be interpreted as an incitation to violence,"

ul-Haq:

"Of the peoples of the Earth, the ones that hate Muslims the most, the ones who are bitterest of their enmity towards Muslims, the most unrelenting, unforgiving, are the Jews and the mushrikin, idolaters in all their forms."

The telling point of this entire episode is how clearly it points out the thinking of CAIR’s leadership that they would compare Graham’s words to those of a contemptible Islamic terrorism supporter.

If we ever needed more proof that CAIR and CAIR-CAN are joined at the lips, this is it.
The direction of the wind has changed in Canada…a cold, arctic breeze has struck a cold blow to CAIR-CAN. Canadians don’t want for Canada what people like ul-Haq have done for England.

All Americans of good conscience applaud the Canadian Coaltion for Democracies for standing up for their country in these troubling times and working with their government for the common good.

The times…they are a’changing.



Andrew Whitehead
Director
Anti-CAIR (ACAIR)
ajwhitehead@anti-cair-net.org
http://www.blogger.com/www.anti-cair-net.org

Supporting Somalia's Barbaric Islamic Government

Via Andrew Whitehead at http://www.anti-cair-net.org:

Note: CAIR is the parent organization of CAIR-CAN - The Canadian Equivalent

On Wednesday, 28 June, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), posted a "CAIR in the News" item on their web site:

http://www.cair-net.org/default.asp?Page=articleView&id=39986&theType=NB

Ahman Al-Akhras, CAIR vice-chairman, writes:

"What has happened in Somalia, for the majority of Somalis inside and those who are abroad, is a positive change. I truly suggest that we should not prejudge this change, or any change for that matter, based on the religious affiliation of those in power."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SOMALIA_RADICAL_MUSLIMS?SITE=7219&SECTIonfiltered=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-07-08-18-17-22

"Positive change"? Does this mean that the thousands of Somali refugees in North America will be soon heading home to live in the new new Islamist paradise? Somehow, we don't think so.

What do these Somali immigrants know that we don't about this "positive change"?

Consider:

Failing to pray five times a day is now a death-penalty offense.
Social mixing by men and women is forbidden.
Music, of any type, is banned.
Television viewing is no longer permitted.
Public lashing is now the norm for various violations of Sharia law.

Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys has been appointed the new leader.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50980

CAIR calls this a "positive change" and "suggests" we not "pre-judge" this change. However, history has shown that whenever CAIR rushes in, it is often to defend and justify the actions of an Islamic terrorist, or suspected Islamic terrorist. In this case, CAIR doesn't dissappoint - SOMALIA'S NEW LEADER, Sheikh Aweys, is a suspected al-Quida collaborator.

CAIR has, once again, defended the indefensible simply because Islam is involved. Is there no Islamist group, no Islamist crime, no Islamist policy so vile, so hateful, so anti-human rights that CAIR will condemn it?
Apparently not.

CAIR beleives it can "educate" North Americans to accept an deology that calls for enforcement of prayer on threat of death, the banning of music, the public lashing of opponents, a prohibition on TV, or the end of social mixing by men and women, AS "POSITIVE CHANGE"?. No amount of "education" by CAIR – Funded by the Taliban-supporting UAE - or any other Islamic terrorist supporting hate group will make it happen.

Once again, CAIR has give us a picture of the "POSITIVE CHANGE" that WILL occur if Hooper’s vision of our Constitution being dumped for Sharia Law is realized.

How many time must CAIR tell us what they have planned for use before we begin to listen…and heed…their words?

Andrew Whitehead
Director
Anti-CAIR (ACAIR)
ajwhitehead@anti-cair-net.org
www.anti-cair-net.org


ADVISORY:
Subscribers are warned that the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) may contact your employer if CAIR believes you are using a work address to receive any material that CAIR believes may be offensive. CAIR has been known to shame employers into firing employees CAIR finds disagreeable. For that reason, we strongly suggest that corporate e-mail users NOT use a corporate e-mail account/address when communicating with ACAIR or CAIR. We make every reasonable effort to protect our mailing list, but we cannot guarantee confidentiality. ACAIR does not share, loan, sell, rent or otherwise publicize our mailing list. We respect your privacy!

Palestinian Body Armour

from Cox & Forkum (http://www.coxandforkum.com)

Wow.

Daily "Human Shield" Watch

From http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21408_Palestinian_Human_Shield_Watch

Word Verification has been turned on

I've been hit by a spate of "comment spam". To counter this, I've enabled "word verification" for anyone leaving a comment.

What this does is to prevent automated systems from adding comments to this blog, since it takes a human being to read the word and pass this step. Most "comment spam" is done automatically by software which can't pass the word verification.

The Religion of Peace

Click on the graphic for details

Daily "Human Shield" Watch

From the Toronto Star (http://www.thestar.com)

"Israeli forces on Thursday took over the remains of three abandoned Jewish settlements in the northern Gaza Strip and entered a nearby Palestinian town."

Does this offend you?

If so, you'll be happy as to what the Church of England is up to.

If not, you'll be disgusted.

Either way, browse over to http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=393651&in_page_id=1770&in_page_id=1770&expand=true for the whole story. As Rose Howard states afterward, "When is it going to be our turn to be offended?"

When, indeed.

No comment necessary

http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/000877.html

Had enough yet?

This tide must be turned.

Now.

No longer can we remain silent in the face of such offences to humanity. If you aren't blogging about this lunacy now, then start one. If you already are, then SHOUT that this is offensive to all sensibilities, and that it cannot continue.

Make posts. Send email to your elected representatives. Send email to those running for office. Talk to yur friends and family and make sure they're aware of what's going on, and don't let anyone tell you that these are "isolated incidents".

Because they're not.

The silence from some quarters of our post-Trudeau multicultural Utopia is deafening.

Speak Canada. We will be heard.

A few days ago, I mentioned in the comments section of one of the "Human Shields" posts that these kids should be watching Captain Kangaroo.

Hat Tip: Robert Spencer

From YNetNews (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3271274,00.html)

Egypt primes children for jihad

Egyptian cleric tells children's TV show: Come on to the jihad, encourages child-soldiers to join holy war

Yaakov Lappin

An Egyptian Islamic cleric working for the state ministry of religious endowment has used a children's television program to encourage young children to strive for holy war.

During program, made available by the Arabic translation service MEMRI(http://www.memri.org ), the cleric told a story about Muslim children in history keen to "sacrifice" themselves and kill "infidels" for the cause of Islam.

"Let's listen to a very beautiful story to learn about the courage of a child, and how, when a child is brought up in a good home, and receives proper education in faith, he loves martyrdom, which becomes like an instinct for him. He can never give it up," Sheik Muhammad Nassar told children on the program, which aired on the Al-Nas television channel.

"This story, my friends, is a beautiful story. Abu Qudama was the commander of the army of the Muslims, when they fought the Byzantines. The Byzantines had a very, very large army, whereas the Muslims did not have many fighters. So Abu Qudama walked down the alleys and streets, among the poor, calling: 'Come join the Jihad,' 'Come join the Jihad,'" Nassar said.

'Take my boy to the jihad'

He continued: "A woman said to him: 'Abu Qudama, I have a boy. I will give him to you. Take him with you to war.' He asked: 'Is he still a boy?' She said: 'He is 15 years old, and his father was martyred in the previous war. Since his father's martyrdom, he sits day and night, praying that Allah grant him martyrdom.'"

The Muslim commander is described as "praising Allah" for receiving the child-soldier from his mother.

Describing the participation of children in jihad, Nassar said: " Sa'id shot the first arrow, killing one (infidel). With the second arrow, he killed another infidel, and with the third, he killed a third. Then he was hit by an arrow, and fell to the ground as a martyr. He achieved the martyrdom for which he yearned. A little later, he drew his last breath. Sa'id, the 15-year-old child, was martyred for the sake of Allah. He died happy."

On a previous broadcast on Egyptian television in 2002, a three and a half year-old girl was asked to describe Jews. "They are apes and pigs… our God said so," was her reply. The girl's answer was enthusiastically received by the program's host. "Allah be praised. May our God bless her. No one could wish for a more devout girl. May God bless her and her parents," the host said.

- - - -

Can you think of anything more disgustingly evil?

Daily "Human Shield" Watch

From http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21373_Boo_Freakin_Hoo

"Here are the masked thugs holding a “press conference,” brandishing weapons and making threats. Notice the children on the stairs, as always, acting as human shields."

"We Hate Canada"

Well, we're not too fussy about *you*, either.

From FrontPageMag.com http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=23228

"We Hate Canada"

By Robert SpencerFrontPageMagazine.com July 5, 2006

Investigators have recently uncovered a series of Internet postings made by the wives of a group of suspected jihad terrorists. They include these comments (all spelling and punctuation is as it was written):

“Know what you will face one day. Let them call you a terrorist, let them make you look like a savage, but know that THIS [the American military] is the filth of the earth, the uncivilised destroyer of humanity.”

“[And] if [my husband] ever refuses a clear opportunity to leave for jihad, then i want the choice of divorce.”

“All muslim politicians are corrupt. There's no one out there willing to rule the country by the laws of Allah, rather they fight to rule the country by the laws of democracy.”

“Are you accepting a system that separates religion and state? Are you gonna give your pledge of allegiance to a party that puts secular laws above the laws of Allah? Are you gonna worship that which they worship? Are you going to throw away the most important thing that makes you a muslim?”

“May Allah crush these jews, bring them down to their kneees, humuliate them. Ya Allah make their women widows and their children orphans.”

“May Allah curse the jews.. Ameen”

These posts and others like them were written not in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia or Yemen. They were written in Canada by several of the wives of the jihad terror plotters recently arrested there: Mariya, the wife of the suspected plot ringleader, Fahim Ahmad; Nada Farooq, wife of Zakariya Amara, who is thought to have been Ahmad’s second-in-command; Rana, the wife of another suspect, Ahmad Ghany; and Cheryfa MacAulay Jamal, a convert to Islam and the wife of Qayyum Abdul Jamal, who is alleged to have stirred the others to act with his fiery sermons preaching jihad and hatred of Christians, Jews, and the West – and whose violent exhortations were tolerated by mosque officials because he took out the garbage.

Leftist analysts who explain Islamic jihad as a reaction to Western atrocities and oppression, as well as those on the Left and the Right who assume that education and exposure to Western culture and values will blunt the force of that jihad, are hard-pressed to explain the phenomenon of jihadists and jihad sympathizers who are born and raised in Western countries. Of course, the Council on American Islamic Relations and other advocacy groups attempt to fill this gap with their largely trumped-up reports of hate crimes against Muslims in Western countries, but when the best they can come up with are some insults at a supermarket, it’s hard to build a case for large-scale oppression of Muslims.

But if they are not oppressed, what would possibly have inspired the hatred and contempt these women feel for their own country? When asked what she thought was unique about Canada, Nada Farooq replied, “Who cares? We hate Canada.”

Why would someone who lives in Canada and benefits from its freedom and prosperity hate Canada? Almost certainly because she has been taught to do so. Nada Farooq and the other women who wrote the comments above have no doubt been taught that all non-Muslim society and culture is jahiliyya – ignorance or barbarism, worthless and to be despised.

The Egyptian Qur’an commentator and Muslim Brotherhood theorist Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966), whose writings are popular today among Muslims in the West, emphasized this: “It is not the function of Islam to compromise with the concepts of Jahiliyya [the society of unbelievers] which are current in the world or to co-exist in the same land together with a jahili system….Islam cannot accept any mixing with Jahiliyyah. Either Islam will remain, or Jahiliyyah; no half-half situation is possible. Command belongs to Allah, or otherwise to Jahiliyyah; Allah’s Shari’ah [law] will prevail, or else people’s desires: “And if they do not respond to you, then know that they only follow their own lusts. And who is more astray than one who follows his own lusts, without guidance from Allah? Verily! Allah guides not the people who are disobedient.”[Qur’an 28:50]…The foremost duty of Islam is to depose Jahiliyyah from the leadership of man, with the intention of raising human beings to that high position which Allah has chosen for him.”[1]

Likewise, Syed Abul Ala Maududi (1903-1979), founder of the Pakistani political party Jamaat-e-Islami, which is still the largest exponent of political Islam in Pakistan, declared that non-Muslims have “absolutely no right to seize the reins of power in any part of God’s earth nor to direct the collective affairs of human beings according to their own misconceived doctrines.” If they do, “the believers would be under an obligation to do their utmost to dislodge them from political power and to make them live in subservience to the Islamic way of life.”[2]

This is a matter of religious conviction. These ideas will not be dislodged by education about Western values, which are all part of the jahiliyya these women and their husbands despise, or by better access to jobs or housing. One primary lesson that authorities should draw from these Internet postings is that Islamic terror is not a problem that can be solved by social engineering. It cannot be assuaged by gestures of good will, negotiations or concessions. There is in Western countries today a large and growing population of Muslims, among whom are many who have no intention of assimilating or adopting Western values and perspectives, and who regard the West with as much or more disdain and contempt as these women show in their Internet postings. The jihad ideology as such must be confronted and combated, or it will continue to spread, and breed terrorists and subversives.

But for authorities to understand this and take positive steps to deal with it, they would first have to admit that Islam has anything to do with terrorism at all – something they have taken great pride in denying. And that denial only ensures that there will be many more jihad cells in Canada and Western countries, with the wives of the plotters cheering from the sidelines.

ENDNOTES:

[1] Sayyid Qutb, “The Right to Judge,” http://www.islamworld.net/justice.html.
[2] Sayyid Abul A‘la Maududi [here, Mawdudi], Towards Understanding the Qur’an, Zafar Ishaq Ansari, translator, The Islamic Foundation, revised edition 1999. Vol. 3, p. 202.

Human Shields

Here's another glowing example of the Palestinians using human shields, as they prepare for the festivities with Israel's "Operation Summer Rains" in Gaza.

Is there no depth to this depravity?

Thanks to Little Green Footballs (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/) for the photo.

What's All The Fuss?

This was sent to me in an email. I can't verify the original poster, so I'll leave it off. If anyone can point to the author, I'd be happy to give credit.

*** Update 04-Jul-06 ***

Located via Google search at http://americandaily.com/article/8987 - from a Doug Patton column of June 6, 2005. I've adjusted the balance of the post to reflect exactly what's on that page, as opposed to its earlier, edited, version:

I don't care! (June 6 2005: Ask Me if I Care About 'Mishandling' of Koran)
By Doug Patton (08/30/2005)

First, Newsweek pulled a Dan Rather on us, running a fabricated story just because they wanted it to be true. They told the world that an American guard at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention center had ripped pages from a prisoner's Koran and flushed it down a toilet. As a result, innocent people died when practitioners of Islam rioted in protest in Afghanistan.

Oops, said Newsweek, it seems we can't back up our story. Oh well, it's probably true; we just can't prove it. (Isn't it convenient for Newsweek that the media now have "Deep Throat" to talk about so they can revel in their glory days and divert our attention from their criminal negligence.)

The lie heard round the world about the flushed Koran has caused convulsions in the Bush Administration and forced the Pentagon to launch an investigation of unfounded allegations contained in an unsubstantiated story. The results of said investigation are now in, and it seems there are at least five incidents of "mishandling" of the Koran at Gitmo.

Well, guess what? I don't care!

Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11, 2001? Were people from all over the world, mostly Americans, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from our nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania? Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning death that day, or didn't they?

And I'm supposed to care that a copy of the Koran was "desecrated" when an overworked American soldier kicked it or got it wet? Well, I don't. I don't care at all.

I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11.

I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere possession of which is a crime in Saudi Arabia.

I'll care when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi tells the world he is sorry for hacking off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling, slashed throat.

I'll care when the cowardly so-called "insurgents" in Iraq come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques.

I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs.

I'll care when the American media stops pretending that their First Amendment liberties are somehow derived from international law instead of the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights.

I'll care when Clinton-appointed judges stop ordering my government to release photos of the abuses at Abu Ghraib, which are sure to set off the Islamic extremists just as Newsweek's lies did a few weeks ago.

In the meantime, when I hear a story about a brave marine roughing up an Iraqi terrorist to obtain information, know this: I don't care.

When I see a fuzzy photo of a pile of naked Iraqi prisoners who have been humiliated in what amounts to a college hazing incident, rest assured that I don't care.

When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank that I don't care.

When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran paid for by my tax dollars, is complaining that his holy book is being "mishandled," you can absolutely believe in your heart of hearts that I don't care.

And oh, by the way, I've noticed that sometimes it's spelled "Koran" and other times "Quran." Well, Jimmy Crack Corn and -- you guessed it -- I don't care!

And now for something completely different...

From one of my favourite middle-eastern blogs (Rantings of a Sandmonkey) at http://www.sandmonkeyblog.com/


This is an actual true story that was reported in the egyptian newspapers:

A Taxi driver was driving in Cairo at night when this old man who had a white beard and was dressed all in white stopped him and asked him to take him to a certain destination. The Taxi driver agreed and started conversing with the old guy, who was both friendly and courteous. Two other men signaled to the taxi to stop and the driver decided to pick them up as well, since the destination was on the way of the old guy's destination. After they boarded the taxi and he started driving again, he leaned on the old guy and said :" I hope you don;t mind me picking them up!", to which the old man said "Not at all, they are on my way anyway!". And that's when the 2 guys sitting in the back asked the driver: "Hey, driver, who are you talking to exactly?"

The driver replied, "to the old man sitting next to me of course!"

The two guys in the back looked all confused and said to the driver: "But the seat next to you is empty! There is no one sitting there!"

The astonished driver looked at the old man sitting next to him, who leaned over and with a strong hollow voice said: "They are right. They can not see me!"

The driver, getting all nervous, asked: "Why can't they see you?"

"Cause I am Azrael, the angel of death, and I am suppsoed to collect your soul in the next 10 minutes!", the man replied calmly. "If I were you, I would find the nearest mosque and go pray to god to forgive me for my sins right now!"

The man, terrified out of his wits to be sitting next to the angel of death and knowing that he is going to die in the next few minutes, stops the car at the nearest mosque he sees, runs out of it, and heads inside where he starts praying profiously for god's firgiveness. After being done with his prayers, he feels all calm and collected and ready to meet his maker, and steps out of the mosque to head back to his car and his impending doom…

..to find that the car, along with the two passengers and the man who said he was Azreal, was no longer standing there!

According to the papers, this is the third guy who fell for the same con in Egypt, leaving his car in the care of three strangers after one of them convinces him that he is the angel of death, and it was used before in both Saudi and in Jordan!

Canada - The "Torture" Nation

Thanks for the "heads up" on this from http://jihadwatch.org/

From today's Toronto Star (http://www.thestar.com):

Terror suspects 'tortured,' lawyers say

Tiny solitary cells under constant illumination, a mere 20 minutes of fresh air daily, and beatings at the hands of guards are indicative of the "torture" endured by some of the 17 people accused of plotting terrorist attacks in Canada, lawyers for the group said Monday.

The allegations of "cruel and unusual punishment" came as the court imposed a blanket publication ban on the legal proceedings, preventing the public from learning of any further evidence in a case of stunning allegations that has captured headlines around the world.

The treatment of the suspects, accused of plotting a number of terrorist strikes in Ontario that allegedly included bombings and taking senior politicians hostage, "constitutes torture," lawyer Rocco Galati said outside the court.

"That torture includes being kept in a room that's lit 24 hours a day, being woken up every half-hour, being beaten by the guards, on and on and on," said Galati, who represents Ahmad Mustafa Ghany, a 21-year-old health sciences graduate of McMaster University.

Ok, let's juxtapose that to the al-Qaeda manual found at(http://www.disastercenter.com/terror/
Al_Qaeda_Manual_Eighteen_LESSON.htm):

UK/BM-176 TO UK/BM-180 TRANSLATION
Lesson Eighteen PRISONS AND DETENTION CENTERS

IF AN INDICTMENT IS ISSUED AND THE TRIAL, BEGINS, THE BROTHER HAS TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE FOLLOWING:

1 . At the beginning of the trial, once more the brothers must insist on proving that torture was inflicted on them by State Security [investigators ]before the judge.

2. Complain [to the court] of mistreatment while in prison.

3. Make arrangements for the brother ’s defense with the attorney, whether he was retained by the brother ’s family or court-appointed.

4. The brother has to do his best to know the names of the state security officers, who participated in his torture and mention their names to the judge.[These names may be obtained from brothers who had to deal with those officers in previous cases.]

5. Some brothers may tell and may be lured by the state security investigators to testify against the brothers [i.e. affirmation witness ], either by not keeping them together in the same prison during the trials, or by letting them talk to the media. In this case, they have to be treated gently, and should be offered good advice, good treatment, and pray that God may guide them.

6. During the trial, the court has to be notified of any mistreatment of the brothers inside the prison.

I could go on, but I'm sure you get the idea.

Courage

It takes a great deal of courage to turn to people you don't know personally to ask for their help.

Just think - if people in the Black community in Toronto asked the police for their help - instead of perpetually "seeing nothing", would we have the same kind of carnage in the city that we've seen over the past few years?

If the Chinese community in Toronto were more forthcoming with their problems, would we have an "Asian Crime Unit" in the Metro Police trying to unravel Chinese organized crime?

Well, would we?

Let us, then, turn to the Muslim community in Toronto. I've had no shortage of things to say about these folks over the past few days, have I? Well, along comes Shahina Siddiqui, president of the Islamic Social Services Association. She's been to Ottawa to say, "We're not here to say we don't have an issue."

From the Toronto Star: "Of course we have an issue," she told a news conference on Parliament Hill. "But we can't deal with it ourselves. We're part of the Canadian society and so we demand that the Canadian society come forward, help us root out this."

Well, I can't say as I like the way she put it, but put it she did.

Is it a red herring? Perhaps some more posturing of the "victim culture"? How come none of the imams came up with this? Will the marginalized youth(s) listen to her?

I can only hope for two things: 1) She is successful in getting the help her community needs, and 2) those giving the help don't pussy-foot around the issues in doing so.

I'm going to keep an open mind on this - for now. I don't think I can be blamed for looking at it with a slightly jaundiced eye, though.