Saturday, October 23, 2004

EU just can't let go

After meeting with Sha'ath in Brussels, Solana said that the EU will support Israel's disengagement from Gaza if it meets the following five requirements:
You don't even want to know what the requirements are: The very fact that this moron from Spain (why wasn't HE on this train?) has the gall to make demands on Israel, or even assume that Israel really cares wether the EU will 'support' disengagement (whatever the hell that means) but never worries about the murderers who massacred his own countrymen DISQUALIFIES him and the organization that employs him from any role in the Middle-East (apart from sponsoring Arafat, they can never be stopped from doing that!).
Solana also said the EU will present the Palestinians with a working plan for after disengagement. "We are ready to contribute and to co-operate with our Palestinian friends on all the elements that they need: security, or administration reform, or whatever is necessary," Solana said.
And there you have it. "All their Palestinian friends need, whatever necessary".

Yes, we really want Solana to help.

Supreme Court bars fence construction near Hebron

This is what happpens in a democracy, ruled by laws, enforced by courts.

You are an Arab living your life in your village. And then them Jews start building a big ole fence. So what's an Arab to do?
You unite with your neighbours, get a lawyer and go sue. Is what you do.

And you win.
Supreme Court Justice Miriam Naor on Thursday issued an interim injunction barring the army from implementing a military land seizure order for land belonging to residents of five Palestinian villages along the southern section of the security fence.
This is not the first time Arabs protested the fence in court and won. And forced the Army to reroute the Fence.

In Iran on the other hand, you get
stoned to death for a 'sharp tongue'. Well, I guess it's a system. Barbaric, but there you are.

Do they have love parades in Arabia?

They do in Israel.

Love. You can't really have any bad connotations with that, can you. Except when
saying "You love life, whereas we love death".
Tens of thousands of people thronged to the Tel Aviv promenade midday Friday. According to police estimates, some 100,000 attended the parade, while organizers said 200,000 were there.

After making their way down the promenade, parade attendees convened in Charles Klore park, where a large rave was held until sunset.

As in all large public events, the Love Parade was heavily secured by police and security forces.
Of course, in Israel, those who love life have to be protected from those who love death. Especially the death of Jews.

Golda Meir had it right

Golda Meir was the first female Prime Minister in the world. The country she led was Israel. Not only can women vote in Israel (men can too, by the way), they can even become PM!
She once said:
There will be peace in the middle east when the Palestinians love their children more than they hate the Jews
So when will there be peace? Well, Arafat recently did another step in the other direction:
More than a year after bowing to international pressure, the Palestinian Authority again is broadcasting a video that encourages children to help terrorists, even if it means becoming a ‘Shahid’ (martyr).

The US Senate last year viewed the video which shows children in frenzied war dances between scenes of their using violence in combat zones. The video has been aired in Gaza almost daily for the past two weeks.

The PA news agency also has reported that children in Gaza actively help terrorists by bringing them water and supplying information. These actions duplicate school book texts which teach the denial of Israel’s right to exist.
No further comment.

Friday, October 22, 2004

CARE worker pleads for her life

Margaret Hassan, Irish director of CARE International in Baghdad is married to an Iraqi.
She is also the next in line to have her
head sawed off by Muslim Psychopaths.
In the video aired Friday by the Arabic-language TV channel, an unblindfolded Hassan is speaking to the camera, sobbing and crying.

"Please help me, please help me, these might be my last hours.... Please help me, please British people ask Mr. (British Prime Minister Tony) Blair to pull the troops from Iraq and not bring them to Baghdad.

"Please, please I beg of you, the British people, to help me. I don't want to die like (Kenneth) Bigley. I beg of you, I beg of you."
Can you imagine the type of person it takes to make a woman this scared, to torture her with the prospect of a death as gruesome as Bigley's, or Berg's, or Perl's? They probably showed her the video of the atrocity, and I don't mean the heavily compressed, small-enough-for-Internet version. She will have seen the master copy. Most people will break down when faced with a threat like that.
And Margaret Hassan
is credited with helping the poorest and neediest Iraqis.

"She's not involved in any politics or religion," Tahseen Ali Hassan said at a news conference. "She's serving this organization for over 12 years. It was really a shock to me."
I can imagine. If she's not involved in any religion, am I to infer she has not converted to Islam? Perhaps now's a good time. After all, it's either that, become dhimmi, or have your head sawed off.

Or we can just kill all the psychotics. Before we start rebuilding Iraq, perhaps it would be a good idea if the country was made ready to accept and embrace the efforts of people like Margaret Hassan. Currently, I don't understand why people bother. Or, if you think the cause is worth the risk, why complain when Al-Zarqawi bites you in the ass?

Update: BBC now also reports on Mrs Hassan's plea. They quote some interesting statements from the video:
"Please help me. The British people, tell Mr Blair to take the troops out of Iraq and not bring them here to Baghdad.

"That's why people like myself and Mr Bigley are abducted, and we might die."
Of course, it's almost a certainty that her words were dictated to her. She may or may not actually believe that the presence of British troops were the cause of Mr Bigley's death. For the record: Mr Bigley's death was caused by the sudden unexpected (well, unexpected by his body, if not his unbelieving eyes) separation of his head from his body. A separation effected by a sawing motion of a medium-sized knife, handled by one of the world's sickest individuals. To place the blame on anyone else but the murderers is plain deluded.

But if Al-Zarqawi and his copycats are less than 100% responsible, the remaining percentage falls squarely on the shoulders of the victims themselves. After Nick Berg, no one but members of the armed forces have any business there, unless adequately protected. To assume immunity from the depravity of insane Arabs like Al-Zarqawi is arrogant or naive, or both. To subsequently place the blame for your predicament on your government can reasonably be excused. But an excuse it remains.

The French should learn Arabic - not English

You think I'm kidding? Or you think it's MY opinion? According to this BBC report, a deputy from Chirac's ruling party thinks so.
A report calling for all school children in France to learn English has started a heated debate.
The report, part of a review of the French education system, said English should be made compulsory.

France's report said standards of English in schools were poor and worsening.

Its conclusions have been challenged by some politicians, including one deputy from the ruling UMP party, Jacques Myard.

He told Le Monde: "English is the most-spoken language today, but that won't last."

He said Spanish, Chinese and Arabic were all growing in importance.

"If we must make a language compulsory, it should be Arabic," he said.
Actually, I agree. I cannot think of a more appropriate punishment for the French than being forced to learn to speak Arabic.

But even my opinion is moot. Because an estimated ten million 'French' already speak Arabic. And because in a few short decades, the majority of citizens in France (technically called the 'French') will know no OTHER language BUT Arabic.

Israel raid kills Gaza Hamas 'man'

The BBC no longer calls terrorists 'militants'. Not that they have bettered themselves and now call them terrorists, quite the contrary. A Hamas leader (of terrorist naturally) is now called 'a Hamas man'. The good news is that this Ghoul (YES, THAT'S HIS NAME!!) is nevertheless quite dead.
An Israeli air strike on a car in the north of the Gaza Strip has killed Hamas rocket expert Adnan al-Ghoul and an aide travelling with him.
Mr Ghoul was among Israel's most wanted and a Hamas spokesman vowed "painful" revenge as crowds milled around the mortuary where his body was taken.
As you can see from the picture, there were plenty of other ghouls around in the ensuing Car Swarm (c).

All in all, a good day by any Jew's reckoning.

Update: Haaretz has more on this 'Hamas man'
Al-Ghoul was responsible for assembling a number of explosive devices used in suicide bombings in Gaza, and had masterminded the development of homemade Qassam rockets and anti-tank missiles. Israel tried to target Al-Ghoul and top Iz a Din al-Kassam militant Muhammad Def in 2001, but the two escaped.

Al-Ghoul had been involved in Palestinian terror groups for more than 20 years, starting off in Fatah, and later joining Islamic organizations. For years he received wages from Palestinian security services.
Haaretz (an Israeli newspaper!) calls Hamas terrorists who fire Kassam rockets at Sderot with the aim to murder Jews 'activists'. They compensate this moral outrage by presenting another nice picture from the festivities:

Well, at least life's not dull in gaza.

Update 2: Another picture of Arabs on a memento-hunt

"Ahmed, I'll trade you Al-Ghoul's thumb for these three toenails."

What type of people ARE they?

In case you're still wondering what type of people support organizations like International Solidarity Movement (remember Rachel Corrie?), FrontPageMag lifts the curtain a bit. Well, actually, the curtain gets completely torn away. Who comes to a PSM (Palestinian Solidarity Movement; synonimous with ISM) rally? (Held btw at Duke University in Durham, North-Carolina, USA)
An activist from StandWithUs told me that the approximately 400 people who attended the PSM conference "did not seem like students. They were people of all ages, on tight budgets."

An activist from the American Jewish Congress provided some more answers: "The conference was made up of mostly white, middle to lower class racists. Supporters of various left-wing groups such as Answer, Sustain, Code Pink, United for Peace and Justice, Rukus.Org were there. Many seemed like flower children gone wrong. In their passion for the Palestinians and for 'human rights' they seem to have lost their way and become anti-Semitic. They hate President Bush, the American governent, large corporations and Israel. They blame Israel for ALL the world's problems. One middle aged African-American woman, a gray panther, said "If Israel ceased to exist the world's problems would go away."

Another activist described the PSM conference-goers as "lost, uneducated, almost-street people who seem to have found new life by supporting the PSM. Many from the Bay area seem to have missing links. Many were members of Brit T'Zedek, and they came with shaved heads, pierced noses, lips, and tongues. Many were older women. They seemed to have no idea that gay women would be killed in the disputed Palestinian territories but not in Israel. They wore keffiyas, political buttons, and tee-shirts that said "We are all Palestinians."

A third activist remembers this sight: "A small number of Arabs, African-Americans, and good old southern white 'boys,' joining members of Aryan Resistance. Seeing white racists support African- and Arab-Americans in support of Hamas and Fatah was a strange sight."
I am always particularly struck by gay people supporting Arabs/Muslims. Even open calls for the murder of homosexual men and women does not deter gays. "We are all Palestinians." Of course you are. Hey Mary, try kissing your girlfriend in Ramallah or Nablus. In fact, I dare you to hold her hand.

FrontPageMag. Read it all and be wiser.

Saddam Hussein's Philanthropy of Terror

Here's an incredibly detailed analysis of the workings of Saddam's terror network - and yes, Al Qaeda is definitely 'mentioned'. Deroy Murdock has done some outstanding work.
Let’s start with money. At a minimum, we know that Saddam Hussein’s government supported terrorism by paying "bonuses" of up to $25,000 to the families of Palestinian homicide bombers. How do we know this? Tariq Aziz, Hussein's own deputy prime minister, was stunningly candid about the Baathist government’s underwriting of terrorist killings in Israel.

“President Saddam Hussein has recently told the head of the Palestinian political office, Faroq al-Kaddoumi, his decision to raise the sum granted to each family of the martyrs of the Palestinian uprising to $25,000 instead of $10,000,” Aziz, announced at a Baghdad meeting of Arab politicians and businessmen on March 11, 2002, Reuters reported the next day.
But then again, it seems like terrorism against Israel is not terrorism. is packed with facts and references to studies and reports. A valuable asset.

Peace At Any Cost

Great analysis at FrontPageMag on why the Left is intent on self-destruction.
'In a pathetic attempt to make restitution for Israeli "occupation of Arab land" in 1948, the Left wants to sacrifice Jews who have lived there since 1967. This explains why the Left clings so desperately and tenaciously to a "peace process" whether one is possible or not. Any agreement or move which leads to a Palestinian state vindicates what happened in Israel's War of Independence, legitimizes our existence and frees us from the burden of responsibility for Arab refugees.

Giving up the West Bank and Gaza means no longer having to say "I'm sorry." There would be no need to defend the Jews' moral, legal and historical rights to live in the West Bank and Gaza, or anywhere else. If Palestinians can be convinced or forced to accept a state in the West Bank and Gaza, we're off the hook. For the Left, creating a Palestinian state is doing penance. Then, they hope, Israel will be accepted by the world.'
And what are the chances of that happening?
Please read it all.

Presbyterian Church gathering pace

I referred earlier (here and here) to the US Presbyterian Church, getting heavily involved in Middle-East politics, on the side of the Jew-killers, like Hezbollah and Syra. Well, it seems they're only just getting started. This WND article reports on the Church's wish for peace and justice for the 'Palestinians':
"We are interested in peace and justice for Palestinians as well as in the relationship between Syria and Lebanon and Syria and Israel," delegation coordinator Peter Sulyok is quoted as saying.
They're not that interested in peace and justice for Israel. But that must be because you just can't talk to those bad, mean Jews.
ADL noted a comment made by one of the Presbyterians who took part in Sunday's meeting with the Hezbollah leader.

"As an elder of our church, I'd like to say that according to my recent experience, relations and conversations with Islamic leaders are a lot easier than dealings and dialogue with Jewish leaders," the group quotes Elder Ronald Stone as saying.

Stone of Pittsburgh, Pa., reportedly praised Hezbollah at the meeting, saying, "We treasure the precious words of Hezbollah and your expression of goodwill toward the American people."
"treasure the precious words of Hezbollah." Arguably the largest and best organized terrorist organization in the world. Designated as such by the US Government.
And I wonder why the Jews are not that keen to talk to them. I couldn't be because of the divestment moves, or the rest of the activities that unequivocally place them on the side of the terrorists? Nah, that couldn't be it.

Try keep in mind, this is a major CHURCH we're talking about. So what's next? Donations?

Thursday, October 21, 2004

IMRA - Syria praises Presbyterian Church

As a Christian Church, you know you have arrived when you get praise from the Syrians.

Ziegler - The Man From U.N.S.R.R.F. (*)

(* UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food)
As I've
commented recently, Jean Ziegler is a man with a mission. Wether the mission was the reason for his joining the UN (best place on earth if you want to destroy Israel), or he became infected on the job is no longer relevant.

What matters is that UN Watch has discovered some intriguing 'coincidences' in the timing of Ziegler's actions against Israel.
The truth about Ziegler, as a simple Google search will reveal, is that his "right to food" activities are in fact initiated as part of orchestrated political campaigns. Not coincidentally, Ziegler, who resides in Switzerland, sent his May 2004 boycott letter to Caterpillar three days after a political "action" notice was issued against this corporation by "Collectif Urgence Palestine" - a Swiss group, dedicated to boycotting Israel, with which Mr. Ziegler has been active. Mr. Ziegler's letter was then promptly posted on the website of this group's boycott campaign. How many other boycott letters Ziegler has sent is a mystery. Their target is not.
Apart from these transparent orchestration, what evidence is there that Ziegler is biased against Israel?
When he should be speaking out for the hungry of Burundi, Chad, or Liberia - places that actually do rank as Food Emergencies - Ziegler is instead preoccupied with vilifying Israel for, as he puts it, starving the Palestinians. His accusations will resonate with certain audiences. Yet it carries one minor flaw: whatever genuine problems do exist in the West Bank and Gaza, starvation is simply not one of them. In fact, by any comparative measure, Palestinians are eating far better than neighboring populations. If one looks at the percentage of underweight children - the most meaningful cross-country comparable indicator - the UN's 2003 Human Development Report reports that the West Bank and Gaza has the lowest rate
(3%) compared with any state in the Arab Middle East, East Asia, the Pacific, South Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Latin America (except Chile). Yet a country like North Korea (60%) has never been targeted by a single Ziegler boycott letter.
Not that any evidence was needed anymore: From Ziegler's hysteria it is clear that this creature (almost called him a man, go figure!) is driven by something - and zeal doesn't quite cover it.

Anne Bayefsky: Vote Bush

This thru IsraPundit
Anne Bayefsky makes the case that many have made before her: If the well-being of Israel is a priority for US citizens, they can only vote for President Bush.
Moving forward means — in the words of the president's recent U.N. speech — that "we must take a different approach" from that of tolerating and excusing "oppression in the Middle East in the name of stability.... Commitment to democratic reform is essential to resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict. Peace will not be achieved by Palestinian rulers who intimidate opposition, tolerate corruption, and maintain ties to terrorist groups."

President Bush's stand has not been without political costs. As he pointed out in the second presidential debate: "You know, I've made some decisions on Israel that are unpopular. I wouldn't deal with Arafat, because I felt like he had let the former president down, and I don't think he's the kind of person that can lead toward a Palestinian state. And people in Europe didn't like that decision. And that was unpopular, but it was the right thing to do."
And if you still think Kerry will do as good a job or better, take a look at who the terrorists, their financiers and suppliers prefer as the next US President:
...a Pew Research Center survey released in March of this year showed large majorities of Pakistanis (67 percent), Jordanians (96 percent), and Moroccans (90 percent) hold unfavorable opinions of the president. A poll released by the Arab American Institute in May shows that the vast majority of Arabs in Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates view American policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict unfavorably. The Iranian Tehran Times proclaimed in June, "Kerry is exactly what the U.S. needs right now." Israeli military intelligence chief Maj.-Gen. Aharon Zeevi told Israeli cabinet ministers in July that "Arafat is waiting for the month of November in the hope that President Bush will be defeated. At the same time, the Pew and Zogby data show that sizeable portions of the Arab populations surveyed are favorably disposed to Osama bin Laden.
The same people who are 'favorably disposed to Osama bin Laden' want John Kerry for President. That should tell you something. If it's what THEY want, it can't possibly be good for decent human beings.
Anne Bayefsky is of course
required reading.

Diary Of Holocaust Victim Made Public

Another Anne Frank, she is sometimes called.
The previously unknown diadry of 18-year-old Helga Deen - who was murdered along with her family by the Nazis at the Sobibor death camp in 1943 - has been loaned to the Tilburg Regional Archive in the Netherlands.
This really is more than I can bear to read. I read it anyway. So should you.

The Independant also features this subject:
Ms Deen's diary journal shows how desperation slowly set in. In an excerpt dated 6 June, 1943, just after 1,300 children were deported to Auschwitz and Sobibor death camps, she wrote: "Transport. It is too much. I am broken and tomorrow it will happen again. But I want to [persevere], I want to because if my happiness and willpower die, I too will die."
More Jews were transported and murdered from the Netherlands than from any other country. Certainly proportionally, but even in the absolute sense, only Germany itself lost more Jews than did the Netherlands, of all Western European countries.

How was this possible? Is there a lesson to be learned that would be relevant today?
Most experts agree that the Dutch were at best very passive. Its efficient bureacracy stayed in place after the German occupation, and blindly followed orders to supply relevant information about the Dutch Jewish population.
Dutch police too cooperated almost to perfection.
There were more Dutch citizens who betrayed Jews in hiding than there were who hid or otherwise supported Jews.

Today's Dutch differ in this respect from their WW2 ancestors not one iota. If anything, Jews are liked less now than they were then. Israel is no longer seen as the underdog, and the taboo that the Holocaust laid on anti-Semitism (that was always dormant to begin with) is rapidly eroding. About a year ago the EU tried to suppress a
poll that showed that 59% of all EU citizens thought Israel was the greatest danger to world peace. Ahead of countries like N-Korea, Iran, China, etc.
Nearly 60% of Europeans said yes when asked in the Eurobarometer survey if Israel presents a threat to peace, putting it ahead of Iran, North Korea and the US, each of which polled 53%.
In the Netherlands, that percentage was a staggering 74... (links to Dutch article).

So what's it like in Holland these days? Well, let me give you
a clue:
The first European country that will effectively become an Islamic state is the Netherlands. The numbers speak for themselves: In the four largest cities – Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Utrecht and The Hague – Muslims already form a majority among those under the age of 14. Mohammed is now the most frequently registered first name for Dutch boys.
I live here until I can't stand it anymore. I want to see the ship go down. You see, unlike my family in WW2, I have a country I can go to. But if the Dutch keep going this way, they will be dhimmies before I'm retired. And I'm not too sure I mind that at all.

Wednesday, October 20, 2004

Open Letter to America (Oh how could you!)

Dear America:

I am writing to you to convey my dismay at the way you treated that lovely Mr. Yusuf Islam. Do you know, I had been fully brainwashed by your propaganda. I firmly believed that yours was the land of the free, the worthy country that had created institutions such as Mom, Coke and Apple Pie (please excuse me while I dab at my eyes), the place where Sex, Drugs and Rock'n Roll go to die. To be perfectly honest, America, and if you'll pardon my somewhat common English, I wasn't half proud of you.

And now I hear that you denied entrance to that nice Mr. Yusuf Islam. Dear Lord, do you know who he used to be? More importantly, do you know who he IS? He has been a pillar of the Muslim community in London for years! He founded charities to fight hunger in Africa! He donates most of his royalties to noble causes! Well, maybe not
Amnesty International and such but that must count for something, nevertheless. And he IS a Brit.

Surely you will not allow a minute thing like a
fatwa for apostasy to cloud your judgement. Who can remember 1989 anyway? I did expect a bit more from you, you know. What his saying Rushdie was blasphemous and deserved to be killed amounts to is: he READ THE BLOODY BOOK and OF COURSE he found it BLOODY AWFUL! It induces catatonia in less that 5 paragraphs, it is an absolute waste of 549 pages and that can hardly be endured with fortitude. I rather badly wanted to throttle the man myself. (And don't be daft, he never supported Hussein, he supported AllSaints, the British girls band, for pity's sake. That is simply bad journalism.) So really, you do see how it could happen. Most unfortunate, I'm afraid. Do you think you could be overreacting just the tiniest bit?

Besides, Mr. Islam did clarify his former statement. He explained very articulately that a
death penalty may be carried out only by a court of law. And quite frankly, America, so do you quite regularly (it does get a tad tiresome at times, you know. One shouldn't discuss such matters openly, it's all so unpleasant). Granted Mr. Rushdie is NOT poor, retarded or black. But he has an Indian posh accent, you do see how that can be MOST AGGRAVATING.
Really, America, I'd been led to expect more from you. And such a fine singer too. Leave the poor chap alone.

UPDATE: Oh the bloody idiot! Would you believe I received the most flaming email? Patriot, this is your homework: go look up sarcasm in the dictionary. (A dictionary is a very large book that lists words from A to Z and their definition. Books are wondrous things but even the easiest ones require some level of intelligence to be processed so you might want to not tax yourself. Dictionaries are available online.) And yes, I'm a bad American and you were right, I'm obviously a dyke. (My people also killed Christ, in case you hadn't noticed, that makes me a kyke dyke.) NEWSFLASH, you blinding git: you are the type of American we all fear. You are a waste of Indians. And it's YOUR comment, not YOU'RE comment, you freaking moron! Is that American enough for you? It's like a bloody epidemic. Now go repaint your trailer before Jerry Springer comes on.

Your very own Agony Aunt

I’ve been invited by Dany to join his blog. Bullied into it, really. I tried reasoning with Dany. Have you ever tried reasoning with Dany? Quite. So here I am.

And I don’t know what I’m doing here. Let me rephrase that: I DON’T KNOW WHAT THE HELL I’M DOING HERE!

I should think it’s pretty obvious he doesn’t need me. Oh but he does. Because he’s FACTUAL and ANALYTICAL so, apparently, he needs Someone Like Me. (Uhm.) NO, HE DOESN’T! People who come here are looking for facts. For terseness. For logic. This I cannot provide. I told him and told him and told him again. But does he realise that? Does he listen? No. He says THAT’S WHY I should come round, so you lot can have the emotional perspective. The impulsiveness. (Do I detect someone quietly humming “Girl you be a woman now”??? Stop it this minute!) And loads of cursing too. (If you are delicate skip the feeling-filled blue posts. Your life will be bleaker but you shall be SAFE).

And since we all know how moving I am, you’ll want to keep your hankies close-by - oy, speaking of which, I just had the most INTUITIVE IDEA! Why don’t we make this a comprehensive blog? Why discuss politics and Human Rights only? So very droll and dry - and we know Dany WOULDN’T WANT THAT! So please don’t be shy. Between the two of us we should be able to fix your impotence problems, your bad relationship with the in-laws, your fear of heights and open spaces. Do give us a ring.

In the meantime, I’ll do my best to emote.
*Coy eyelash batting*

Who are the anti-Semites in France?

According a report quoted in the JeruzalemPost, well, hardly anybody really. Remember the fall-out over the EU's attempt to suppress a report they had requested, because the results were not politically correct? Then, when the cover-up failed, heavy emphasis was placed on anti-Semitic incidents where the perpetrators were neo-Nazi's or similar morons.

Anyone who actually read
the report could only conclude that the vast majority of attacks on Jews and Jewish institutions has been perpetrated by Arabs/Muslims. Period.
...from the perpetrators identified or at least identifiable with some certainty, it can be concluded that the anti-Semitic incidents in the monitoring period were committed above all either by right-wing extremists or radical Islamists or young Muslims mostly of Arab descent, who are often themselves potential victims of exclusion and racism ; but also that anti-Semitic statements came from pro-Palestinian groups (see country report Italy: public discourse) as well as from politicians (see country reports Germany, Greece, Finland, Austria) and citizens from the political mainstream (see anti-Semitic letters, e-mails and phone calls in Germany as well as in other countries).
The quote above still contains a reference to 'right-wing extremists'. These are certainly hateful people. But the rest of the entire report makes it clear that (Arab) Muslims are mostly responsible, often allied with (sometimes but not always extreme) left-wing groups.

Of course, for the French, who have anywhere between six and twelve MILLION Muslims in their midst, this is unbearable. So they wrote their own report, commissioned by Interior Minister Dominique de Villepin (you remember him, he used to be the French Foreign minister, but got demoted so Chirac could save a little face with Bush).

This new French report finds that not only are Muslims not to blame for anti-Semitic incidents, neither are neo-Nazi's! No, in fact it is
Disaffected youth and marginalized individuals are more likely to perpetrate anti-Semitic attacks than those with ties to the Palestinian cause or neo-Nazi groups
Wow. They must have a lot of 'disaffected youth and marginalized individuals' in France. And the fact that about twelve procent of France's population consists of Muslims is just a stunning coincidence.

UN insanity

Uganda is a member of the world's foremost human rights organization, the UN Commission on Human Rights. The same commission chaired by Lybia in 2003. This year it is chaired by Tunisia, another Arab country (which automatically means it is not a democracy).
Commission on Human Rights procedures and mechanisms are mandated to examine, monitor and publicly report either on human rights situations in specific countries or territories (known as country mechanisms or mandates) or on major phenomena of human rights violations worldwide (known as thematic mechanisms or mandates).
Keep this mandate and Uganda's place in it in mind when reading this BBC report:
Uganda's security forces routinely torture suspects, the Human Rights Commission says in its annual report.
"[Torture] is either presented as part of training, or a learned practice," the report says.

"We need to explain to all officials that actually torture is not acceptable under any circumstances and the government has already ratified the convention against torture," [Nathan Byamukama of the Uganda Human Rights Commission] said.
Yes. Please explain it to them. It shouldn't be that hard to understand, as Uganda is a serving member of such an august body.

What is the point of such an organization? Its purpose is completely defeated by the fact that the commission is for a large part made up of the very perpetrators of human rights violations.
Cuba has been a member for as long as anyone can remember. And we all know how well Fidel treats his beloved subjects.

It's a joke. A very sad one. And no one is laughing.

Motive for kidnap?

The director of CARE International in Iraq (a charity) has been kidnapped. A British-born woman, married to an Iraqi, and with dual nationality. Quelle surprise. It seems that even dramas and tragedies can become routine for everyone, except of course for those directly involved.

But what really bugs me is this:
"We're unaware of any motive for the abduction and as far as we know, Margaret is unharmed at this point," [Robert Glasser, chief executive of CARE Australia] said.
Does he mean 'unaware' in the official sense? He's received no demands? Or does he really claim he does not understand why people get kidnapped in Iraq? And most of the time subsequently get their heads sawed off?

Why Israel can have a Bomb and Iran can NOT

This thru IsraPundit.
There's been a lot of
moral equations between Israel and Iran because of Iran nuclear aspirations, the jist of which is "Well if Israel can have nukes, why can't Iran?".

Well, here's an example of the prime reason why:
Iran is a barbaric country.
A 13-year-old schoolgirl has been sentenced to stoning in the town of Marivan (northwestern Iran). Zhila Izadi was condemned to death by stoning after giving birth to a child in prison 2 weeks ago.

She was accused of committing ‘moral sin’ and giving birth to an ‘unholy child’. Her brother a 15-year-old boy who was also accused and is currently in prison in Tehran was given a sentence of 150 lashes, in accordance with Islamic laws.

On Aug. 29 the Judiciary sentenced a woman, named Hajieh Esmaeel, to death by stoning in Iranian port city of Jolfa. Her fate remains unknown.

On Aug. 15 of this year the Iranian regime publicly hanged a 16-year-old girl by the name of Atefeh Rajabi in the Iranian town of Neka for her ‘sharp tongue’.
Quite apart from the draconian penalties for even the slightes trespasses, what really stands out is the arbitrary manner in which 'justice' is rendered. The case of Atefeh Rajabi is dealt with in much more detail in this post, where it becomes clear that the 'judge' sentenced her to death not for the 'crime' that she was prosecuted for (persecuted is more like it), no, she was sentenced to death for her 'sharp tongue' during the 'trial'. Seems like the pervert couldn't take rejection.

NOW magine these people with the ability to launch nuclear weapons. I know you get it now, don't you?

Tuesday, October 19, 2004

MEMRI on the Religion of Peace (c)

From MEMRI, the following rants are what passes for a rationalization from Magdi Ahmad Hussein, the Secretary-General of the Egyptian Labor (Islamist) Party.
There's so much drivel here I'd need a bulldozer to get to the other side, but some parts are worth commenting on:
"The violence is currently directed at the occupation. This is legitimate violence. This is Jihad against occupiers. 99% of the violent operations target the foreign occupation of the Arab and Islamic nation. Therefore, they are not included in the conflict with the [Arab] rulers.
This is obviously and blatantly a lie. Even today, at least four Iraqi's died and eighty or more were wounded in a mortar attack AIMED at fellow Arabs. Hundreds if not thousands of Iraqi's have died at the hands of Muslim terrorists since Saddam has been ousted.
...the war effort is not restricted to those who actually carry weapons. The war effort includes transporting supplies. Aren't supply lines part of military activity? The Halliburton company and its efforts to steal the Iraqi oil – aren't they part of the war effort, whose goal is to steal Iraq's resources? The war effort isn't simply carrying weapons. An Iraqi interpreter working for an American soldier – isn't this part of the war effort? Undoubtedly, all those killed, as far as we know, were non-civilians.
If you're not a soldier or a policeman, you're a civilian.
But this maniac's definition would include all women. They bear children see, who can become (or indeed ARE0 enemies. So kill all women.
Teachers. They teach languages, a skill to become an interpreter, who as stated above is fair game. Kill the teachers.
Children certainly. They have the potential to become, well, ANYTHING! Must kill them!
All fair game! Eeven
charity workers, married to Iraqi's!

For every reasonable Muslim that makes it to any news outlet, there's fifty of these depraved lunatics rushing to drown out the sounds of reason by ranting and raving. So,
Thomas Haidon, I do not have much hope for you.

US State Department revolution?

On NationalReviewOnline John Cullinan reports on an unusual (some might even consider it an astounding) step by the US State Department, traditionally the breeding ground for new members of the "I love Saudi Arabia" club.

"And the Earth stood still..."
...the State Department recently designated Saudi Arabia as a "country of particular concern" in its annual religious-freedom report... ...this unprecedented step may — just may — signal the start of a tectonic shift for the better in the troubled U.S.-Saudi bilateral relationship, and in the broader war against Islamist terrorism.

Saudi Arabia's welcome, if belated, addition to State's religious-freedom blacklist — along with the likes of Burma, China, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, and Vietnam — fulfills the clear policy mandate of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (IRFA). This measure explicitly recognizes that religious freedom is inseparable from the full range of other basic human rights, whose promotion and observance in turn advance vital U.S. interests and reflect basic American values. Where religious freedom is threatened or denied, so too are other basic human rights; and such violations of universally agreed-upon norms often reflect wider threats to international public order.
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for actual, tangible changes in the US attitude towards the oil leeches. Although Saudi is itself in constant danger from terrorist attacks and political overthrow, it has always sponsored and pampered to the needs of those same terrorists as long as they did their 'business' abroad, preferably against Jews. There is every chance that some day, the Wahabbi cult leaders will pay the price for their duplicity. But it won't be America that will make them pay.
Designating Saudi Arabia as a country of particular concern marks "a sea change," notes Rep. Tom Lantos (D., Calif.), ranking member of the House International Relations Committee and co-chairman of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus. "For years there was an unspoken attitude that...friends like the British, the French, and the Germans could be criticized, but Saudi Arabia was beyond criticism," he says. "This is just a straw in the wind that Saudi Arabia will be treated just like any other country."
Tom Lantos is one of the good guys, a genuine force against evil.
During his press conference, the Hungarian-born congressman, who is the only Holocaust survivor ever to serve in the US Congress, reserved his harshest criticism for Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat.
"Arafat is a poison in the region... a plague and a pest who has contributed to the tragedy and suffering of Palestinians and Israelis for a long time," Lantos said.

"His destructive, irresponsible, and monstrous behavior has brought death and destruction to his people and suicide bombings to Israel. The sooner he fades into oblivion the better of the region will be," he added
Egypt’s military buildup in preparation for a future war with Israel can and must be halted by cutting off US aid to Cairo, Congressman Tom Lantos said this week.

Lantos, the ranking Democrat in the House International Relations Committee, plans to introduce legislation that would phase out the $1.3 billion Egypt receives annually in US military aid, Middle East Newsline reported Tuesday.

The senior California representative noted that while Egypt has no serious external threats to its sovereignty, Cairo continues to add weaponry and additional units to its massive war machine.
But he's kidding no one here: As long as billions and billions are to be made off Saudi, that country will NEVER be treated 'just like any other country'

What Bush can't say but would like to

In this FrontPageMag article, Lawrence Henry speaks for President Bush on issues where Bush himself is limited in what he can say because of political considerations. Henry makes a very valid point when he can't name the French or the Turks for what they are, because he still needs them in some way. I have to admit, I too am sometimes frustrated by any politicians ability and willingness to keep on dealing with scum and vermin when they KNOW perfectly well what the score is. But then, this is exactly what politics are about. I am not into politics, could never be, and so I don't have to take anyone's sensitivities into consideration when I say the French are corrupt swine who would sell their parents AND their children for a chance to be boss in Europe. Bush knows this better than I do, but he can't say it because
... the United States still depends on French cooperation for fighting terrorism in North Africa.
The EU, onder the de facto leadership of France also
...held up Turkey's membership in the EU unless the Turks denied us passage through Turkey for [the Fourth Infantry Division]. [For use in the war in Iraq - Ed]
Bush's problem becomes more acute when in a debate, Kerry attacks him on such issues, realizing full well WHY bush holds his current positions but is unable to elaborate on them. I guess it's a fair political ploy, if not honorable or ethical. But what politician even recognizes those concepts anymore?
Anyway, Lawrence Henry takes the President's place and
explains his positions for him. It's enlightening, so read.

Monday, October 18, 2004


Apologies for the repetition but this is oh so relevant:
This is the same United Nations that did nothing when Red China invaded and occupied Tibet.

This is the same United Nations that stood by while Rwanda went about the business of slaughtering hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.

This is the same United Nations that has been unable to stop the Sudan from conducting genocide against more than a million of its Christian citizens. And Sudan is a member of the UN Human Rights Commission!

This is the same United Nations that has been unable to persuade Syria to withdraw its occupation troops from Lebanon.

This is the same United Nations that has stood by for years as the Palestinians waged a terrorist campaign against the Israelis and then chided the Israelis for building a fence as a means to defend themselves.

This is the same United Nations that needed a coalition led by the United States to force Iraq to withdraw from its invasion of Kuwait and then spent twelve years passing one useless resolution after another to get Saddam Hussein’s Iraq to disarm. After its Oil-for-Food administrators and key members of its Security Council wallowed in corruption, it faintly blessed the US effort to remove an important base for terrorist planning, training, and funding.

This is the same United Nations that needed the United States to intervene when the North Koreans invaded the south in the 1950s and whose atomic energy agency has been unable to stop North Korea from developing nuclear weapons. Now Iran is thumbing its nose at the UN.

Since the founding of the United Nations in 1948, there have been 291 wars resulting in 22 million deaths. The US Department of State lists 36 terrorist organizations operating with impunity in at least 60 UN member nations. Some 47 member nations are dictatorships and the UN roster includes six terrorist states.

Please, let us not even discuss its human rights record. At one point, it ejected the United States from membership in its Human Rights Commission and installed Libya to chair its meetings. Libya!
I really have nothing to add. But you read it all.

UN? Think again!

In United Nations Fails the "Global Test", (paraphrasing John Kerry), Ralph Reiland highlights a few key points from the Duelfer report pertaining to the UN role in the confict with/in Iraq, and why the 'sanctions' that were supposed to have been in place since the end of the first Gulf War were a joke, and were actually helping Saddam.
“It’s pretty clear that the Iraqi strategy and tactics of dividing the Security Council were having a fair amount of success,” said Charles Duelfer, the chief of the Iraq Survey Group, in public testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee. “Iraq was within striking distance of a de facto end to the sanctions regime.”

Saddam got within striking distance by corrupting the Oil-for-Food Program. With the UN in the role of overseer, Saddam was given a green light to sell oil in order to get funds to import “humanitarian goods.” Instead, as Duelfer told Congress, Saddam exploited the program to pile up billions in illicit money, import military items expressly banned by UN sanctions, and develop a massive kickback scheme to buy the votes and influence of strategic individuals and countries.

Especially targeted by Saddam were three veto-wielding members of the Security Council --- Russia, France and China. The bait was cut-rate oil vouchers which could be offloaded on the world markets at the going rate or surreptitiously swapped for cash. The alleged beneficiaries identified by the Survey Group included individuals with close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, and French President Jacques Chirac, i.e., Russian politician Vladimir Zhirinovsky, retired UN Oil-for-Food director Benon Sevan, and former French Interior Minister Charles Pasqua.
There were many reasons why France and Russia did everything they could to stop the US from acting against Iraq within the framework of the UN. Thank God President Bush decided to step outside that framework.
What it does show once more (not that it needed more showing) is how corrupt the very idea of the UN is. When even democratic countries like France cannot be trusted to act and vote according to the official merits of a case, how can anyone deal seriously with countries like Syria, China or Zimbabwe, countries that are officially equal or even superior to countries like Denmark or Australia?
...Russia and France subsequently becoming the two most vociferous opponents of military action against Iraq. France went further, assuring Saddam that it would use its veto in the Security Council to prevent any invasion [emphasis mine - Ed].

Having successfully corrupted and divided the international community, Saddam was a step away from celebrating the end of sanctions and reconstituting his WMD programs.

Iraqi nuclear scientist Mahdi Obeidi, writing in the New York Times on September 26, stated that “our nuclear program could have been reinstituted at the snap of Saddam Hussein’s fingers. Iraqi scientists had the knowledge and the designs needed to jumpstart the program if necessary.” Additionally, Duelfer reports that Saddam “clearly intended to reconstitute long-range delivery systems” for missiles with strike capacities in excess of 600 miles.
Technically speaking, there probably were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq at the time of the invasion. However, as the Duelfer report shows, the urgency to invade was even greater than Bush knew (or let on). And if it was up to the swine Chirac, Saddam would still be sitting pretty. But he's not. Thanks to US 'unilateralism'.

RoPMA (c)* - Religion of misoginy

*Religion of Peace My Ass

FrontPageMag has
this report on the attitude of (some?) male students at Baghdad University towards their female co-students.
Guards at al-Kindi University in Baghdad last week arrested a man carrying nearly 10 pounds of TNT in a bag.

"The terrorist admitted that he belongs to an Islamic group," university security chief Sameer al-Sumaidai said. "When we asked him about the one who sent him, he replied, 'It is God who sends me.' "

Pamphlets found on campus declared: "If the boy students don't separate from the girl students, we will explode the college. Any girl student who does not wear a veil, we will burn her face with chemicals."
This really is hopeless. What do you do with a person like that? How did he get to be so, so... INSANE?!
Psychotics like these do not exist in a vacuum. They do not pop into life with these ideas conceived from conception. What type of society spawns monsters like these, in such numbers, with such intense hatred for women, for infidels, indeed for life itself.
...student Rana Fuad was abducted as she was leaving the campus. Within an hour, the young woman, still dressed in blue jeans, was found unconscious at the college gate.

Miss Fuad stopped going to classes and refuses to talk to the press.

"Rana is in bad psychological condition," friend Sheatheh Ahmed said. "She was kidnapped by three masked men who told her they would burn her face with chemicals if she puts on such clothes again, and that this was her last chance."

The campaign of intimidation already is leading to an exodus of students from campuses.
Iraq has a very long way to go yet.

Islam: A Totalitarian Ideology?

Islam: A Totalitarian Ideology?
Long but very interesting article. Two knowledgeble men argue for and against the thesis.
Ibn Warraq says yes, Islam is a totalitarian ideology.
All Islamic human rights schemes such as the 1981 Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights; the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam (circa 1990), etc., severely restrict and qualify the rights of individuals, particularly women, and minorities such as non-Muslims and those such as apostates, unbelievers, and heretics who do not accept Islamic religious orthodoxy.

As for religious minorities, the relations of Muslims and non-Muslims were set in a context of a war: jihad. The totalitarian nature of Islam is nowhere more apparent than in the concept of Jihad, the Holy War, whose ultimate aim is to conquer the entire world and submit it to the one true faith, to the law of Allah. To Islam alone has been granted the truth -- there is no possibility of salvation outside it. It is the sacred duty -- an incumbent religious duty established in the Koran and the Traditions -- of all Muslims to bring it to all humanity. Jihad is a divine institution, enjoined specially for the purpose of advancing Islam. Muslims must strive, fight and kill in the name of God:
Warraq then proceeds to quote relevant sections from the Koran and Hadith to make his point. He does not need to do much convincing, as he has the daily media on his side (albeit unwillingly) to prove his point.

Thomas Haidon is fighting an uphill battle, but I know him as an honourable and courageous person. He is the right man for this job.
Muslims believe that there is a duality in Islam of the Quran and Sunnah. Objectively speaking, there can be no real duality between the two. The Qu'ran (in Islam) is the undisputed word of God, which is recited today almost exactly as it was upon revelation. Ahadith arguably are forms of hearsay (what individuals claim they saw or overheard the prophet said and did). While aspects of the Sunnah may be valid, is it not inconceivable that the Caliphates following the death of the Prophet Mohammed created ahadith to consolidate political power, and use them as tools to control early Muslims? There is literally an entire "science" within Islam devoted to determining the validity of ahadith that is so complex that it confounds many Muslims. This duality has almost lead to the deification of the Prophet Mohammed among Muslims today. The essence of Islam is believing in God, and God alone. While the Qu'ran does command that Muslims should learn from the Mohammed as a prophet of God, as set forth in the Qu'ran, it does not explicitly require following of ahadith or Sunnah.

Whether Mr Waraq likes it or not, there is a growing movement of Muslims (albeit still a significant minority) who genuinely wish to radically reform Muslim thinking, to make it consistent with peace and modernity. The Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism, and the Centre for Islamic Pluralism are two such organizations leading this movement, and are taking steps toward defining the scope and establishing the framework for comprehensive reform.. I ask that Ibn Waraq not marginalize us. I ask that he engage in meaningful dialogue with Muslims who are serious about reform. I look forward to further elaborating on some of my points in future dialogues with him.
If all Muslims were like Thomas Haidon (who is a convert from Catholicism), there would be no Arab-Israeli conflict. But I do feel he engages in a bit of wishful thinking. I once called him naive, and in the correspondence that followed, I felt corrected by him. He is not naive. He does see the Islamic world for what it currently is.
But to maintain that millions of radical Muslims have it wrong, and that hundreds of millions of Muslims who back them or 'merely' agree with them also have it wrong, that is denying reality. Why does Mr Haidon feel he knows better than the most respected (by Muslims that is) scholars of the most respected (by Muslims that is) university in the Islamic world? And they essentially agree with mr Warraq!

I am no scholar of the Koran, but I am well aware that there are strong contradictions in this book. You can make a random claim and prove it by relevant quotes.
The Bible (particularly the Old Testament) too contains sections that when taken at face value automatically relegate Jews and Christians to a barbarian status. Just about any crime carries an automatic death penalty, and just about anything is a crime. So if Jews and/or Christians still lived by the literal interpretation of the Old Testament, the world would be in even more trouble than it is today. And the Bible would not be to blame, and neither is the Koran.
The wait is for the time that Muslims treat their holy book the way most Christians and Jews do theirs. In Haidons words, a reformation. The problem with Islam is that IT is still in medieval stages. Its crusades seem to have only just begun.
Required reading.

If this Jew were an Arab, he would have been lynched long ago

But among the Jews, criticism of ourselves is the norm, not the exception.
Gideon Levy makes me sick, but I need to debunk some of his drivel, so here goes.
More than 30 Palestinian children were killed in the first two weeks of Operation Days of Penitence in the Gaza Strip. It's no wonder that many people term such wholesale killing of children "terror." Whereas in the overall count of all the victims of the intifada the ratio is three Palestinians killed for every Israeli killed, when it comes to children the ratio is 5:1. According to B'Tselem, the human rights organization, even before the current operation in Gaza, 557 Palestinian minors (below the age of 18) were killed, compared to 110 Israeli minors.
First off (and it won't be the last time I say this), the death of a child a an earthshaking tragedy. One child's death is a human disaster in its very own right. Of colossal proportions. Period.

Now comes the bad news for Gideon: Many more will die before it stops, or even gets any better. Israel is in a war for its very survival, a war initiated by the Arabs, and fought with every and all means at their disposal. Misguided idiots like Gideon Levy refuse to realize this. This war is not an excuse to murder children (at least, it is not for the Jews) but the deaths of children is one of the unavoidable consequences.
Besides deliberately targeting Jewish children, the Arabs have been using their own children as human shields, as couriers, as child soldiers and even as suicide bombers. This STILL is no reason for targeting them directly. But a choice between Jewish lives, including our own children, and Arab lives, including their children, is no choice. Particularly when you realize this war is being waged by them, against us, in varying degrees of intensity, for more than a century now.

Palestinian children would stop dying the moment the Arabs stop waging their total war against Israel. Because the fighting would stop. It really is that simple.
Palestinian human rights groups speak of even higher numbers: 598 Palestinian children killed (up to age 17), according to the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, and 828 killed (up to age 18) according to the Red Crescent. Take note of the ages, too. According to B'Tselem, whose data are updated until about a month ago, 42 of the children who have been killed were 10; 20 were seven; and eight were two years old when they died. The youngest victims are 13 newborn infants who died at checkpoints during birth.
This is the point where Levy loses all semblance of sanity: He starts to use Arab figures in his indictment of the IDF. If we were to believe those, thousands of Arabs died in the Jenin battles. In fact, fifty-seven Arabs died there (almost all of them combatants), as did twenty-five IDF soldiers. If the IDF was without scruples, as Levy claims, they could have just bombed Jenin, for weeks if need be, and save those Israeli lives.

The worst thing Levy does though is subtle and insidious. He counts all the dead, on both sides, and comes up with ratio's. But included in the Arab dead are ALL THE MURDERERS, ALL THE SUICIDE BOMBERS, all the armed men and women actively engaged in the war against Israel. The willingness (of a Jew even!) to morally equate the
four girls and their mother, pregnant with their fifth sister with an Arab murderer goes beyond the insane.

But like I said. This 'man' can post an op-ed in a major newspaper. Ok, it's a very leftist newspaper, but still. And he won't be lynched. No fatwa will be issued. Heated arguments may arise (if I know the average Israeli...). But he'll live.

Sometimes I like the Arabs' ways better. Not this time though. Levy does not deserve to die. Being spit in the face, yes. Death, no.

Sunday, October 17, 2004

EU nominee 'victim of hate drive'

I don't agree with this man's political views one bit. I don't believe in any God, certainly not in his. I think gay people should not be ostracized, and I certainly think politicians should stay out of people's private lives.
But this has to go two ways. If people want to have the 'right' to say there's nothing wrong with homosexuality, then expect and allow other people to say the opposite.

I become especially suspicious when European Christian politicians are in effect being pursecuted for what THEY believe, when Muslim clergy and politicians
get away with statements on the same subject that are simply outrageous. In fact, the man had been banned from Morocco for being too fundamentalist and having ties to terrorist organizations! But HE is free to do as he pleases in Europe.

No so this Christian, Italian politican. You see, HE spreads hatred... So what's wrong with this picture; One man simply quoting from a two or three thousand years old, things he believes in, and this man gets condemned. Another man does the same thing, only the book is not as old, say fourteenhundred years old, but the quotes are objectively far more offensive. Yet relatively speaking, hardly any offense is taken?

The double standard of the Left is sickening.

Off-topic: May we hear more of this man

Kilroy-Silk was once best know for hosting a BBC talkshow every morning. Until he was effectively fired for voicing some accurate but politically incorrect views on the war on terror and the Arab countries:
WE ARE told by some of the more hysterical critics of the war on terror that "it is destroying the Arab world". So? Should w e be worried about that? Shouldn't the destruction of the despotic, barbarous and corrupt Arab states and their replacement by democratic governments be a war aim? After all, the Arab countries are not exactly shining examples of civilisation, are they? Few of them make much contribution to the welfare of the rest of the world. Indeed, apart from oil - which was discovered, is produced and is paid for by the West - what do they contribute? Can you think of anything? A nything really useful? Anything really valuable? Something we really need, could not do without? No, nor can I. Indeed, the Arab countries put together export less than Finland.
For the entire article, go here. It's great!

Kilroy-Silk was a promising rising star in the Labour party as well, the Labour party being the official representation of the BBC, if you will.
So now the former talkshow host has found a new home for his political aspirations. And apart from aiming for the top position in
UKIP, he is now taking the EU to task for corruption and misapropriations of funds.
East Midlands M.E.P. Robert Kilroy-Silk of the U.K. Independence Party was today harassing officials in Brussels by handing in a string of 16 written Parliamentary Questions designed to expose various matters relating to Britain’s membership of the European Union.

There were hard-hitting questions on the role of EUROPOL, the cost of Britain’s E.U. membership and the dismissal of Commission staff for ‘whistleblowing’ on corruption and fraud, plus other questions designed to demonstrate that eurozone countries who adopted the euro three years ago were doing substantially worse economically than the United Kingdom, Sweden and Denmark, which stayed out of the single currency.

Mr Kilroy-Silk said: “I’m doing the job I was elected to do - exposing the harm being done by our membership of the European Union”.
Read the questions asked of European parliament here.

The EU in many ways is as sick an organization as the UN is. It exists for the greater glory of France, and just like in the UN, the French have somehow convinced the other participants that membership in the organization is somehow a good thing! Yes, really, pay for an extra hundred thousand or so civil servants, give up your sovereignty and let the French tell you what's good for you.
Kilroy-Silk pays particular attention to the persecution of 'whistleblowers', people who expose corruption and fraude within the vast EU bureaucracy. There is an official policy against such persecution, but in practice, life as you know it is effectively over for whistleblowers.
So good luck to you, Mr Robert Kilroy-Silk. For what it's worth, you have my blessings.

And just to prove the point...

To furthermore build my case for me, this moron from the British band Primal Scream has the following to say on the situation in Israel:
It is often said that the Palestinian issue is so difficult and sensitive that it's better not to get involved. But the truth is, it's not. It's easy. There is no shortage of musicians ready to show their support for the Palestinians at this time in their struggle. Ian Brown, Super Furry Animals, Mogwai, Peter Doherty, Massive Attack (3D is DJing) and many others wanted to join us, but couldn't because of other commitments.

The truth is that most people can see what is taking place on the ground in the Middle East. And they can see who needs our support. Everyone knows who is under the boot and who's got the mouthful of broken glass. The Palestinians are a prisoner nation, refugees and exiles treated like ghosts. Now we want them to feel our solidarity.
The idiot then continues to demonstrate where he got his roots, he tells of his father supporting the Sandinista's in Nicaragua. Well that'll prove your credentials!

Final proof of my point:
The way it looks to us, every Palestinian is a political prisoner - and every Palestinian has the right to be free.
The Way It Looks To Them. There you have it. This ignorant f*ck (sorry, no other word will do) has some image in his head, and he now knows the score. Chalk one up for the media at large, they sure do a hell of a job indoctrinating our impressionable artists.
So sad. Oh well. Never mind.
Why I'm playing Britain's first major gig for Palestine

Opinions are like certain bodyparts...

...Everybody has one. This blog in fact is full of my own opinions. So what's wrong with that, you ask. Well nothing much I guess. It's nice to think your opinion amounts to something because you actually know what you're talking about, but ignorance doesn't seem to stop most people from having an opinion on the situation in the Middle-East, a subject this blog is dedicated to.

It would be nice if adult people, with a right to vote on things (talking about the civilized world here of course, countries like Germany, Canada and Israel) would exercise some form of self-discipline and really inform themselves on the issues at hand. After all, the rights are (or should be) accompanied by the responsibilities.

But most people are not burdened by such notions. Many people can't be bothered to vote at all, which isn't that surprising either, considering the difference various governments make (not very much at all). It must seem to people it will make no difference if they vote at all, or if they do, who they vote for.

So it's quite something to make the effort to vote at all. A bit too much to ask perhaps to actually read up on the subject(s), and be informed. So for that, it seems, people look towards someone they feel IS informed. Could be a website, a newspaper, a priest, a teacher, even just a knowledgeable friend. Hopefully a combination of such sources, from various ends of the political spectrum.

Some celebrities are aware that their fans (or a portion of them) are not yet bound to one party or another. So they take it upon themselves to inform the fans personally. Unaware of (or indifferent to) the fact that (most of the time) they know sh*t themselves because THEY have not made the effort of informing themselves.

Sean Penn traveled to Iraq. And thought HE now knew. He SAW. But in fact he was always so blind that whatever he was going to look at, he was only going to see what would fit into his preconceived notions. And so everything he saw confirmed his worst fears. And he only got more angry than he already was (is that at all possible?).
Now Penn feels he has something worthwhile to tell the world. It could be that he, and all the celebrities like him are just famous people who hold a passionate view about something, and because they are famous, we will all know how they feel, and they don't care wether we agree or not.
It could also be that they use their status to influence other people. I guess there's nothing wrong with either option. It's just that, when people don't take the responsibility that comes witht the right to vote, and don't inform themselves but look to their idols for guidance instead, they've effectively cast their vote with someone who happens to make music they like, or movies they enjoy. Their emotional preferences dictate their voting, JUST AS IT DOES FOR THE CELEBRITY.

For me personally, musicians and other artists telling me their political preference causes problems. They usually feel very different than I do on many subjects. I think there's a simple explanation for this fact.
Their very talent and ability to make beautiful music that moves me (a prerequisite for me to listen to it) is grounded in their ability to tap into their emotions. Rational music does not exist. Real artitsts are often tortured souls, to varying degrees.

But this same emotional basis for their art also disqualifies them from making a sound judgement on affairs that NEED to be judged rationally, dispassionately, unless of course they are still intellectualluy honest and can set aside the prejudices that usually come along with the trade. This doesn't happen very often.

So when an artist whose music I own tells the world he supports the political aspirations of terrorists and murderers, they loose a fan in me. I refuse to sponsor a person with diametrically opposed views, especially if those views can have direct physical consequenses to people I love. I also walk away from concerts if an artist decides to treat me to an unwanted bonus. Many in the audience may happen to agree with the artists' view, but I don't want to know, even if he and I happen to feel the same way. It is not why I went to the concert. Let him do what he does best, and refrain from showing his ignorance on global issues. Many politicians are not that well-informed, even though it is their job. Journalists too are often too arrogant to really investigate any more.

So please, celebrities of the world. Resist the urge to tell the world what to do, just because you are in a position to. The heart may show the right course to follow, but only if you've truly made the effort to be informed. THEN tell others what you think, and if you must, what THEY should think as well. Until then, Keep on Rockin' in the Free World...

What Alice Cooper thinks...

Annan rejects Iraq oil bribe claim

Well, if Annan says it isn't so, then it must not be true.
Particular attention was allegedly given to French and Russian nationals due to the fact that the two countries hold permanent seats on the UN Security Council.

But Mr Annan firmly dismissed the claims: "I don't think the Russian or the French or the Chinese government would allow itself to be bought because some of their companies are getting contracts from the Iraqi authorities," Mr Annan said.

"I don't believe it at all," he added.
BWAHAHAHAHA!! <wipes tears from eyes> Of course not. Just like he wouldn't believe his own son would steal millions (or is it BILLIONS?) from the UN, which is headed by... you guessed it! So, you can choose to take the word of what
amounts to a mafia don when it comes to bribery.
This time it isn't cutlery, baked hams and wine-cellar locks that have gone missing, but at least US$11 billion ($17 billion), depending on who is doing the counting - or rather, the guessing, since the UN has been curiously disinclined to investigate where all that money went.

Whatever the sum involved, it vanished from the UN-administered Iraq Oil For Food programme, and unlike last year's petty looting, those at the centre of suspicion aren't lowly bureaucrats but a tight cluster of high-up insiders centred on the office, family and inner circle of Secretary-General Kofi Annan himself.
And the UN 'isn't releasing documents and balance sheets'. Cool eh? You can steal and defraud, AND decide what documents the accountants get to check if your financial dealings can withstand daylight. the end of 1998, the UN appointed a Swiss company called Cotecna to administer the programme, which would supervise the flow of some US$100 billion ($155 billion) in oil receipts, before it was finally shut down last November, when the UN reluctantly surrendered the job to the US-appointed Iraqi governing council in Baghdad.

What was Cotecna? For one thing, the former employer of Kofi Annan's son, Kojo, who was on the payroll until shortly before the contracts were awarded, when he became a contract consultant.

Cotecna's job involved squaring the income from oil sales against the goods that were allegedly purchased.

If Saddam's Iraq wanted to import ambulances from Saudi Arabia, the contract of sale had to be approved and the incoming goods inspected by Cotecna, as did tens of thousands of other items, from Russian hoes to Belarus welding rods.

In the first year alone, Cotecna pocketed $6 million ($9.3 million) for its services. After that, because the UN isn't saying, its share of the bounty is anybody's guess.
Of course that anti-Semitic scum Annan would cover for the Russians and French: They are part of the same criminal organization that HE heads! And this time I don't mean the UN!

Kojo (Kofi's son) has a knack for shady deals, and clearly networks his way thru his fathers contacts. Here's another example of how the Annan family does business:
...It is a bizarre tale involving a wayward nephew of president Robert Mugabe,the son of a former Saudi oil minister, as well as the son of the UN chief.
It is set against the backdrop of a Pounds75 million contract to redevelop Harare International Airport, the little-known Isle of Man-registered company that won it, and Mugabe's new mansion.
Please read the New Zealand News article, as well as the article on corruption in Zimbabwe.