Grieving for America

Every now and then, I feel a sadness for what I see happening in America, and I go into a kind of grieving process. I go through the usual processes of shock, denial, anger in a fairly predictable manner. Specifically, there are areas in which I mourn on an almost continuous basis: public education and university education; our leftist-bias Judiciary; Environmental destruction of our prized public lands; a nation growing ever-more impoverished. The sadness I feel is not for myself, but for our innocent children, who will inherit this debacle.

But the next stage, acceptance, is a much harder step, as the interlocking forces bent on the destruction of America always seem to open old wounds. There can be no closure, because the underlying ills in America lie deep and unfathomably against the grain of what I once perceived to be a self-correcting moral compass.

The loss of any moral compass has been a deliberate agenda of the ACLU, the NEA, and Leftist professors who have a childish need to destroy the white, conservative, Judeo-Christian base. The Left will not rest until they tear down what they perceive as the power structure of the Right, which represents and stands for our national interests, as outlined in the US Constitution.

In a 2000 interview with Mary Pride of Practical homeschooling Magazine, John Taylor Gatto (former New York State Teacher of the Year) had this to say of institutional schooling:

Quote:

John Taylor Gatto: Let me begin by characterizing where I’m coming from. I taught for thirty years in the Manhattan Public School. It was never my intention to teach. It happened by accident. I expected only to teach for a year or two. I got caught up in what seemed to me inexplicable problems that were so interesting that I would ask, “Would you mind if I stay an extra year?” When I woke up, thirty years had passed. After I got out, I still didn’t have the answer to these puzzles. That was almost exactly nine years ago, and I set out to answer my questions. Had I known that it would take nine years to do that, I might very well have gotten a new set of questions. But as it was, one thing led to another, and I began to see that schools were functioning exactly as they had been designed to function, and that just puzzled the heck out of me. I said, “How could this happen? What purpose would explain schools being the way they are?” So I’ve been on a detective hunt for nine years.

And what I’d like to say first of all to homeschoolers in particular – because they’re right on the front lines, and they have to depend largely on themselves for courage and for inspiration – is that you made the right choice. You’ve made a choice to free your children to be the best people they can be, the best citizens they can be, and to be their personal best. But had you allowed those kids to remain in the grip of institutional schooling, the kids would have become instruments of a different purpose. People should understand that the local insanity that they think they’re reacting against, if that’s in fact their motive for homeschooling, is institution-wide, it’s quite intentional, and it leads to an end that’s useful to somebody.

MP: But not to parents or children.

JTG: Not to children. Not to me. (Small laugh.) I hope not to you. But it is useful to a certain idea of history. The hypothesis is that national states ceased to exist in reality just about a hundred years ago. That is – they exist in legal reality for most of their citizens, but for the guiding parts of the citizenry, they haven’t existed for a full century.

MP: Yeah, they’re citizens of the world.

JTG: So there is no United States, there is no China, there is no Saudi Arabia, there is no Germany. There’s an international virtual nation made up of a small elite leadership, and this leadership guides the destiny of the masses. Now, the problem they run into, is that all sorts of traditional ways to live had created institutional forms. Christianity had created churches, the family structure was almost universal, tradition was a strong part of most parts of the world at most times. All of these things had to be overthrown, but they couldn’t be overthrown by military force, it had to be done slowly, incrementally, and the most efficient way to do that was through children. So you have to isolate the children from those things for the better part of the day, for the better part of their youth, and you have to inculcate them with a different attitude. You have to make them antagonists of their parents, their religions, their own cultures, their local traditions. You have to get them to swear allegiance to some distant ideal, whose leaders they can’t even see.

Is there a better factory to break down loyalty to local authority than a disruptive classroom? Think of it for a moment. Most of the children in a disruptive classroom are victims of the disruptors. If the authority has no power to offer relief to the people being victimized, a profound transformation takes place in relationships. Not only do the children write the teacher off as of no use, but after all, who confined them there in the first place but their own parents? So here you see a way to sever these parochial connections, for the good of a global principle. Which of course, is meant to result ultimately on a citizenry schooled in responding to external rewards and punishments, not in internal acts of conscience.

Like Mr Gatto, I have questions: Given that that the elitists have largely succeeded in high-jacking our educational goals; given that these same elitists have largely usurped our democratic processes; given that the Judicial branch, and the executive branch are in lock-step in their quest to sink our ship of state – what do we do now? The first order of business is to put doubt from our minds, and get to work. There are many people in America who would like to see the United States crumple and fold. I understand that. How do we muster will enough to bring this slide to a halt? It is not as if there is no one fighting at every step of the way. America has many warriors, true warriors, both men and women, who have rallied to her defense.

Why does the Left appear to be be so successful? Probably, it’s just an inherent factor in a democratic republic.

American President Woodrow Wilson in 1913 opened the door for such chicanery, when he allowed private interests to control our money supply…

The year is now 1913, the year after Woodrow Wilson was elected president of the United States. Prior to his election he needed financial support to pay for his campaign, so he reluctantly agreed, that if elected, he would sign the Federal Reserve Act, in return for that financial support.

In December 1913 while many members of Congress were home for Christmas, the Federal Reserve Act was rammed through Congress and was later signed by President Wilson. At a later date, Wilson admitted with remorse, when referring to the Fed.”I have unwittingly ruined my country”.

Actually 1913 was a pivotal year: it was also the year that the (unratified) sixteenth amendment was pushed though Congress, as well as the year that the (third) central banking system was adopted, in the form of the Federal Reserve Bank, which was and is a privately-held banking system to which our nation is currently in thrall. Congress has the power, if not the will, to abolish the Federal Reserve, and put us back on a gold standard.

I believe that the righting of America will be possible if we, as a nation, address 1. the fundamental basics of money and governmental spending and, 2. The education of our children, including university-level training. The whole educational process must be re-vamped from top to bottom.

Congress, being mired down in it’s own problems, lacks the will to address the problems of education, and certainly, we cannot look to them to redress a hundred years of unsound fiscal policies. That leaves open the question of where the power to put these usurpers down will come from. A national prolonged out-cry from a nation of outraged citizens would probably do it, but that isn’t likely to happen. Like most watchdogs, I have more questions than answers. Never-the-less, the questions need to be asked.

Meanwhile, on the policy of homeschooling, we can take Karen De Coster’s words to heart:

…Homeschooling folks have greater objectives for their children than do most parents, and that is, to shield their children from the harmful, unwanted effects provided by outcome-based education techniques; they wish for their children to develop a sense of spirituality and a values system that is desired in the home, and can only be taught at home, by family; they desire an individualized, more classical-oriented education for their children; they wish to control the daily influences that their child receives; and they wish to make all time spent learning quality time, which cannot be the case in the never-ending, disciplinary atmosphere of the public zoo.

Some folks homeschool their children because they exalt the individuality of their offspring and they take parental responsibility seriously. This is showing the greatest respect for God’s gift to them. If you don’t homeschool your kids, that’s your choice. However, keep your empty-headed slurs to yourself, shut your mouth, and put these folks on a pedestal, because they deserve it.

September 5, 2001

 

The rest of us had better find a proper sword, and go forth into battle. It is not too late.

Please go to my other site: No Apology, as it is the one I currently use. WordPress is proving too much of a hassle, even though I like it in many ways, and will try to keep it updated.

Time To Circle The Wagons

June 4, 2007

I want to bring to your attention the nature of two different battle-fronts in which America is currently embroiled: and some thoughts on how they are inter-related.

One is the threatening encroachment of an Islamic Caliphate, of Muslim intolerance for anything non-Muslim, and their stated goal of world-wide Shari’a Law, which involves converting Dar al-Harb to Dar al-Islam – essentially, rolling up the infidel world like a giant cigar, smoking it, then putting down a new carpet, called Islam, in which the world under Shari’a Law would know peace as Muhammad envisioned. Jews die, Infidels suck hind-tit.

The other battle-front concerns the current administration’s implementation of a pan-global plan to dissolve the borders and the sovereignty of the three countries of the United States, Canada and Mexico; that is, creating a North American Union purporting to achieve dominance on the world stage of commerce and trade.

The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America was conceived and hatched by the Council on Foreign Relations, long considered to be a sort of shadow-government of the United States. The CFR dates back to 1921 and several successive presidential administrations have been covertly putting this proposal of a New World Order in place. Robert Pastor is currently the chief proponent and author of several books advocating a North American Union; a coalition of corporate-government agencies, conceptually similar to, and competing with the EU, winner-take-all. Whoever has the most marbles when he dies, wins. I guess.

Implementation is by stealth agenda, which is being advanced in an almost identical manner in which the European countries have seen their national sovereignties dissolve. There is no official Congressional participation. This is an end-run around the will of the American people. The global elitists want to run the world, and they don’t want the great unwashed mucking things up with things like “freedom”, and “liberty”, and “sovereignty”.

My introduction to all this insanity came as I began investigating the illegal immigration situation in America. I had no goal; I just wanted to discover the forces behind a seemingly mad immigration policy. When I discovered the SPP/Superhighway plot and it’s logical extension, the North American Union (NAU), I had part of my answer: the Bush administration hasn’t been enforcing current immigrant/border laws because it intends to dissolve the border post-haste. While investigating the desert around the Tucson/Phoenix area, I learned that it has been the residence of choice for Islamic terrorists since the 1980’s, and that the University of Arizona is pandering them. Each time I learned something new, I kept casting my net wider until the larger academic community came into focus.

There I learned from David Horowitz that the Leftists professors have hi-jacked the academic world, and that the NEA is full of secular humanists who are serving at the pleasure of Gramscian philanthropic foundations, such as Rockerfeller and Ford Foundations. It was in the foundations themselves that I saw the inter-connectedness of Socialist/Fascist policies. The Socialists need the Fascists to gather the money up – something which the Socialists themselves have never been able to do. The academic community is subservient to the vast wealth of the tax-free foundations.

The universities have come to rely on their money cows, and are thus beholden to them. So much for academic freedom and diversity of ideas. And our public school system is equally a disaster-by-design. Dumb ‘em down. Keep the parents, even the teachers out of the equation. I personally know of fine teachers who despair at the injustices the boards of education hands down.

The Feds now have a tight grip on the educational processes. The Federal “No Child Left Behind” policy is part and parcel of a plot to keep our children bound by the cords of mediocrity. Keep them focused on meaningless testing, rather than educating our children. Thinkers are simply too dangerous, so they teach our children that they don’t need to think. Instead, they are taught what to think. It’s all part of the relative humanist’s plan to destroy family values. Destroy the family and people are so much easier to control. Phyllis Schlafly has written much about this, and about the collusion of the NEA with judicial branch of government. Activist judges. Activist feminist federal judges.

In a 1993 pamphlet to teachers, the NEA had this to say:

“Allegiance to a nation is the biggest stumbling block to the creation of international government. National boundaries and the concept of sovereignty must be abolished. The quickest way to do this is to condition the young to another and broader alliance. Opinion favorable to international government will be developed in the social studies curriculum in the public schools.”

I learned that our children are being taught never to offend anyone’s feelings (unless they are white), that gay is good, feminists need to be in power because men are the root of evil, Christianity sucks, two Mommies, or two daddies are just as good as a mother and father; that the ACLU is their friend in all things(especially decadent, gay sorts of things), and anyone who disagrees with NEA policies will be given further special sensitivity training, since the diversity training they get at the beginning of the year didn’t take. Parents have no say in the education of their children, nor do the teachers. They are left with no choice in the matter. Home school while you can. Oh, and if you are white, you are wrong by default. End of story. I could do a whole rant on this, but I won’t. There be treachery afoot, Gramscian ideas corrupting the liberal view of the world, and ideological intolerance contempt of a moral point of view. So much out of balance, and tilting to the left.

Investigation into school policies also revealed the true intentions of CAIR, which led me to the process of propagation of radical Islam by the Wahhabi Islamists, and the grand scheme of the Islamic Caliphate; and how the Leftist organizations in academia, politics and the MSM are providing the PC cultural climate in which the white, educated, middle-class are the skunks and anyone with a brownish tint to their skin have been granted a de facto Federal most-favored status, because they are or were somehow victims of discrimination. The Muslims have been quick to cash in on that agenda.

As I began to write about what I was discovering, I learned of The 910 Group, shortly after its inception, on the Gates of Vienna. I got hooked up with them, and have continued my investigation into the nefarious doings of organizations such as CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood, et al of that stripe.

But the problem of illegal immigration continues to plague me, and my investigation into that reveals a much more sinister plot. When I go after a story, I like to get at the root of it, but damn, the more I pulled at the root of illegal immigration, the worse it got. I have spent the past six weeks digging into this whole “Brave New World” thing. And what I am finding is simply staggering to behold. Even if you discount all the conspiracy theories going around, and I do not discount them – not all of them, anyway – the sheer brazenness, the treacherousness of the pan-global plan to integrate the countries of the United States, Canada and Mexico into a New World Order, with no Congressional oversight, or discussion even – well, let’s just say, it has my full attention.

Our government under George W. Bush has been re-organized with the SPP as a national priority of the highest order, involving DHS, the State Department, the Justice Department, as well as other coordinating agencies doing the bidding of the afore-mentioned. This is not conjecture. Go to Judicial Watch, read. I will post more sources as an update to this post. (see update below)

I see two possibilities in America:

One, we step up, defeat and dismantle the global plan to take over the world, starting with hauling anyone who is involved in the SPP agenda before a Special Congressional Investigation, and uncover the true intent of this current administration regarding this whole sorry affair. Then take the steps to decommission this SPP/NAU project, and indict and convict anyone and everyone found guilty of high crimes and treason. This can all be accomplished by the power of the spoken word.

If we somehow manage to do that, we will have finally taken off our PC gloves, and will be in a position as a nation, to deal with the Leftists, and the Islamists. The Republic government will have prevailed, the will of the people restored. I am hopeful we can achieve victory mainly because the Bush administration has characteristically jumped the gun, and has also grossly under-estimated the will of the American people. Once we get the lid off this thing, the stink will be unbearable.

Two, we allow our country and its citizens to be sacrificed on the alter of the Global Elite Order of Wisdom and Beneficence, aka GREED. Then it’s good-night nurse. Democracy will simple vanish into the night. Our children will inherit a nightmare of unimaginable proportions.

You may not agree with my findings nor share my conclusions. But one thing is certain: America needs you. And the world needs America. The real America, not the rotting politicians and corporations – not the Save The World contingent, either. The world needs to see real Americans stand up and guide our country back to sanity. They need to see that good can triumph over evil. Maybe we all need to see it.

We will only see it, if we fight for it.

Cross-posted at The 910 Group Blog
Trackbacked at Woman Honor Thyself
Update: Here are a few sources on the SPP/NAU:

Council on Foreign Relations

Source Watch

World Net Daily

New American

UNC Dept. of Edu

Stop the SPP

The Eagle Forum Website

Our Shrinking Liberties

Our liberties, personal and otherwise are shrinking daily, hourly. Almost anyone in a position of power is working to limit our freedom. And that’s not going to change. Politicians are working in concert with the Administrative and Judicial branch, creating laws which have as their goal to restrict our speech, to restrict our freedom to raise our children, to restrict how we think, speak and act. It is the Humanist’s dream to deny us the right in short, to act in accord with Judeo-Christian values. And to the extent that many of us were not brought up at least to try to follow the Ten Commandments, they have already largely succeeded.

The Cultural Relativists are laying down a totalitarian vise which no one in America, let alone the world can escape. The Cultural Relativist’s aim to put our future in the hands of a few elitists is achieved by creating and spreading notions of moral doubt and confusion. Since the sixties, obedience to impulse has been encouraged in order to dilute the concept of right action. Irony of ironies, we have become more ‘tolerant’ only to end up losing our freedom. The notion of tolerance, as defined by ‘do your own thing’, Herbert Marcuse (Eros of Civilization) – is that anything coming from the Left is good, anything coming from the Right is bad and not to be tolerated.

In our K-12 school system the ‘No Child Left Behind’ policy of the Bush Administration has been diabolical and disastrous. They first set up impossible goals to achieve test results, then they never got around to provide funding, while at the same time holding a sword over the heads of school administrators. This leaves them no choice but to try to teach students how to take a test, leaving aside just about everything of importance in a child’s education. Hell, even the NEA is opposed to it (!) and considers it an unworkable way to blackmail school administrators.

In our universities there have been unprecedented pressures brought to bear upon college students to kowtow to the Leftist ideology, and to buck the saddle is to risk being labeled ‘racist’ or ‘homophobe’, Islamophobe, etc. Students are forced make ideological decisions before all the facts are considered. To be even once so labeled means one can no longer be a member of the cultural elite. There is no option for redemption save abject, debasing apologies to the offended parties. Apologies which almost certainly will not be accepted, because by your act of insensitivity, you will have shown yourself to not be one of them, ergo, a piece of crap. The Left’s war on academic freedom is relentless, and the message is clear: (If you are white) NEVER cross the line of offending the Multicultural Victim’s Feelings. It is simply inexcusable. To show them the error of their ways, anyone who dare cross that line in the name of freedom of speech, there is a ’sensitivity’ re-education class. It’s not optional.

The Nanny State, engorging its bloated self on the fruits of labor (by unfair taxation) of the People, daily grows bigger, more powerful, less prone to self-correct. We are rendered powerless by a taxation system administered by a corrupt system of government, and yet many believe it to be just. It is not just. America’s citizens are being reduced to living in a Welfare State, or in the ever-growing prisons. This is as the elites would have it. A populace kept at the edge of existence is easy to dominate and control. The power elites don’t want people properly educated. They can get people with the skills needed to implement their designs. Just import them. Why raise up a nation of men and women able to think for themselves? Too hard to control.

The gods must think we’re crazy.

As an example, currently, there is a concerted attack on freedom of expression in the form of ‘Hate laws’. Rep. Keith Ellison, in concert with CAIR and the ACLU, will in the coming months and years, do his best to make it a crime to confront the radical Islamists as they begin to insinuate themselves in a position to realize their dream of an Islamic Caliphate in the world. By exploiting our legislative and justice system and using the Leftist tool of ‘Multiculturalism’, they will try to tie the hands of students, parents and right-minded Americans, making it impossible to stop them by legal means. By whatever means, they must be stopped.

Frankly, as important as it is to fight the Islamists, I consider the threat of an Islamic Caliphate to be of secondary importance to that of stopping the take-over of our government by the governing elite. Government has taken on a new persona in the past 30 years, which is becoming a mouthpiece for the ‘New World Order’ which President George Bush, and his father before him have laid out, and which Orwell and Huxley and CS Lewis The Abolition of Man warned us about way back when.

Illegal immigration has been allowed to swarm our land because the plan is to eliminate the border anyway.

Time to turn off the TV, folks. There’s work to be done.

The Clash of Civilizations

February 15, 2007 by libertyrules| 03:02:21 | Comments [0] | Edit This

The Saga Continues…and the pressure to fold will rise. Everyone in Canada (and many I suspect, like myself, in the USA as well) will be watching this one closely. All the players are weighing in. Clearly, this test case will have far-reaching consequences, both for the Quebecers and Muslims alike.

CTV News

Muslims hope to ‘dispel myths’ in Quebec town

Updated Sun. Feb. 11 2007 11:07 PM ET

A delegation of Muslim women brought pastries and dialogue to a small Quebec town that has adopted a controversial code of conduct apparently aimed at their faith.

“It appears that there’s a misunderstanding — a sort of generalization over many things that we believe is our duty to clear up for them,” May Haidar of the Canadian Islamic Congress told CTV Montreal in Herouxville.

Local officials in the mostly white, French-speaking, Catholic town of Herouxville, northeast of Montreal, adopted a code of conduct for immigrants two weeks ago.

Town councillor Andre Drouin, who wrote the “Community Standards” resolution, said, “We want the whole world to understand we are no kind of racist.” He told CTV Montreal he realizes some of the words used in the resolution are harsh, but he remained resolved over its message.

“The thing that you need to be sure of is that we’re going where we’re going to go. Please give me the right to state who I am, basically,” he said.

Haidar called the resolution a “discriminatory statement. The Charter of Rights gives every individual the freedom to live and act and wear whatever he wants,” she said. The Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC) and Canadian Muslim Forum (CMF) have both decried the statement as “deliberate hate-mongering.” They both say the town council was wrong to publicize a code of conduct that “clearly propagates negative stereotypes of Canadian minorities.” The two groups are considering filing a joint complaint with the Quebec Human Rights Commission. “What we have seen in the Herouxville declaration is symptomatic of a dangerous trend in Quebec and Canada that could set multicultural progress back generations,” the two groups warned in a news release.

The town council will decide whether to reword the next of the resolution at the next town meeting and will make changes if warranted, but Drouin said the list will remain in place.Drouin told CTV News that he has received about 2,000 e-mails of support — 700 more than Herouxville’s population of about 1,300.

Vigorous debate

CTV Montreal reporter Paul Karwatsky said there was a lot of vigorous debate at Sunday’s meeting, but the event was peaceful as the Muslim women tried to bridge their beliefs with town residents and leaders.

“Most of the people who turned up to greet (the women) didn’t know what to expect, so they were pretty reserved at first,” said Karwatsky. “But once most realized that the women were there to simply voice their concerns and explain Islamic culture, most happily listened.” One female resident told CTV Montreal, however, that while the women have every right to visit, “they could have gone to another village.” One man complained about the Muslim womens’ headscarves.

The town’s resolution has stirred into the larger “reasonable accommodation” debate for minorities and immigrants in Quebec. In Montreal, the debate has focused on paid days off granted to Muslim and Jewish school board employees who observe religious holidays.

Quebec Premier Jean Charest, saying the debate has gotten out of hand, launched a formal government commission last week to examine the matter.

Two respected academics, Charles Taylor and Gerard Bouchard (brother of former premier Lucien Bouchard), will have one year to prepare a report. However, Mario Dumont, leader of the Action democratique du Quebec, issued a letter in January saying there should be limits on accommodating minorities. A poll about that time found that about three in five Quebecers admitted to having some racist feelings towards ethnic groups.

Other controversies have erupted in Canada. For example, Ontario decided against allowing sharia law courts for mediating Muslim family disputes. But some observers are taken with the bluntness of the Herouxville code. Errol Mendes of the University of Ottawa thinks it says something about the nation as a whole.

“I think it’s reflective of the fact that Canada is actually fracturing into two nations,” he said. The urban nation where 80 per cent of Canadians live, and the rural parts of Canada which do not have a lot of interaction with immigrants and different cultures.”

—————————————————————-
(and in the National Post)

Herouxville wants immigrants that fit in with its citizens
Quebec town outlines societal ‘norms’ for would-be immigrants
Dene Moore, The Canadian Press
Published: Monday, January 29, 2007

HEROUXVILLE, Que. — A sign at the entrance of this rural Quebec town says: Herouxville welcomes you. Unless, that is, you plan on stoning a woman to death, sending your kids to school with a kirpan or covering your face other than on Halloween.

The town council of Herouxville, a sleepy town dominated by a towering Roman Catholic church, has adopted a declaration of “norms” that it says would-be immigrants should be aware of before they settle in this town.

“We’re telling people who we are,” said Andre Drouin, one of six town councillors and the driving force behind the declaration passed earlier this month. The small town, near Shawinigan in central Quebec, has only one immigrant family and wants more. But Drouin said the declaration, which was posted on the town’s website and sent to the provincial and federal immigration ministers, is the result of a number of recent culture clashes across the country.

In Montreal, a dispute erupted after the windows of a gym were obscured to block the view of exercising women from the Hasidic Jewish synagogue across the street and swimming pools have been asked for gender-specific swim times to accommodate religious groups. Men were banned from prenatal classes at one Montreal community centre to accommodate Muslim, Sikh and Hindu women and a city police publication came under fire for suggesting female officers should defer to male colleagues when dealing with men from certain religions.

In Toronto, a judge caused an uproar last month by ordering a Christmas tree removed from a courthouse so as not to offend non-Christians. Debate has raged in Quebec in recent weeks about so-called “reasonable accommodation” of ethnic, cultural and religious minorities and a Montreal police officer is facing disciplinary action over a song circulating on the Internet about it.

“I asked myself, `How is it that these people can ask for such things?’ And the only possible answer is that these people do not know who we are,” Drouin said.

According to the five-page declaration, in Herouxville children sing Christmas songs at Christmas and adults can drink alcohol. Immigrants want to be part of Canada, Drouin said, and to do that they need to know what is acceptable and what isn’t. It’s something the federal immigration department has failed to do, he said.

Drouin said the more accommodations made for minorities, the greater the divide.
“One of these days you will have (many divided) groups in Canada and groups in Canada, or groups in any country, doesn’t make a country,” he said.

Premier Jean Charest said Monday that in Quebec men and women are already equal under the law and that Shariah law has been rejected. Quebecers are tolerant, Charest said.

“I think it’s an isolated case,” he said.

B’nai Brith Quebec deemed the declaration “an anti-immigrant, anti-ethnic backlash” and Salam Elmenyawi, head of the Muslim Council of Montreal, called it insulting.

“Why are they picking on Islam and Muslims?” he asked, adding he wonders why the Herouxville council hasn’t weighed in on society’s ills in general.

The declaration is full of stereotypes, he said, adding that his wife can drive a car and Muslim women do have rights. Elmenyawi said Quebec is tolerant overall, but the Herouxville council is “confused and misguided. I can’t imagine Muslims immigrating there,” Elmenyawi said.

But Drouin, who was juggling dozens calls Monday, said the town, which has just one immigrant family among its 1,338 residents, welcomes newcomers.

“We need them and we want them. And we also want them to have made the correct choice for them,” he said. He said the town council has received about 2,000 e-mails, the vast majority supportive. The declaration was the talk of the town, a typical Quebec village stretched out on a country road just north of Shawinigan.

“I’m not a racist but, at a certain point we’re all going to end up that way,” Carole Casabon, one of many local residents who support the declaration, said as she served up some regulars at the Pub 842.

“If we travel abroad, we try to adapt to their way of life. But when they come here, they abide by their own rules.”he central Quebec town.

Premier Jean Charest said today that Quebec is a tolerant society and the town’s resolution is an isolated case.

Quebec is in the middle of a debate about what is considered reasonable accommodation of racial, ethnic and religious minorities.
- The tendency of the Left to ride rough-shod over the Christian Right values is obscene and predictable. It will not be the Muslims who force the cave-in, if that happens, but the Leftists in government who, believing no cultural values are better than others, will tip the scale. IMO. We shall see who prevails.

-See Vanishing American for more on this-

Daw’ah in Herouxville, Quebec

Note: This visit by the Muslim women is a typical Daw’ah ploy, soon to be followed by a more stern rebuke for the good town of Herouxville. Then off come the gloves, out come the lawyers. And Andre Drouin, the town councillor, looks to be ready for a good fight. This is re: my Feb 2, 2007 post.

Muslim women visit Que. town that passed code of ‘norms’
Canadian Press (National Post)

HEROUXVILLE, Que. — Clad in traditional Islamic head scarves, a delegation of Muslim women paid a visit Sunday to the Quebec town that passed a controversial code aimed at potential immigrants.
Six women, accompanied by a handful of male and female Muslim students, appealed for changes to a so-called “code of life,” which lays out societal norms for Herouxville, 165 kilometres northeast of Montreal.

The declaration, passed by the town council last month, says a person’s face should not be covered, except at Halloween, and that children should sing Christmas songs in December.

It warns would-be immigrants that women can vote, drive and dance if they choose. It says adults can drink alcohol and children cannot bring weapons, religiously symbolic or not, to school despite a Supreme Court of Canada ruling that has already upheld that right for Sikh Canadians.

Although the list has no legal weight, it clearly targets religious minorities, said May Haidar, one of the women who made the journey to the community of 1,300 on Sunday afternoon.

“We’re disappointed by this `code of life,”’ Haidar said.

“It’s apparent there is a misconception and a wrong view of Muslim women, so we want to open a dialogue to let them know us and, of course, we want to know them.”

The town has already toned down the declaration, handing out another version Sunday that removed references to stoning women to death or burning them with acid.
The council said in a statement that the media misinterpreted some aspects of the documents. But much of the code remained the same and the council repeated a call for changes to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to avoid “unreasonable accommodation” of minorities.
Andre Drouin, the town councillor behind the list of norms, said residents were eager to welcome the visitors and prove they are not racists.

But Drouin was unrepentant about the list and said it will stay put.

“No major change,” he told reporters.

He said the council has received thousands of e-mails from all over the world. “We’re not alone in this,” Drouin said. “The e-mails we’ve received… they all say the same thing: `We’re behind you.”’

One nearby town has passed a resolution in support of Herouxville but has not adopted their own “norms.” Another has passed a resolution in support of multiculturalism. The debate over accommodation of ethnic, cultural and religious minorities continues to rage in Quebec and Premier Jean Charest has named a special commission to study the issue.

The Canadian Islamic Congress is still considering a human rights complaint against the Herouxville council.

Haidar, a member of the congress, said no decision has been made.
“We’re going to see what is the reaction from officials in Herouxville and then we’ll see,” she said. About 50 residents came out to meet the women Sunday, sipping coffee as they waited.

Louise Trudel spoke at length with one of the visitors. She said it was nice but accomplished nothing. “We didn’t even speak about the `code de vie,”’ she said. “At a certain point it (accommodation of minorities) must stop.”

Her debate partner, Samira Laouni, felt differently. “For me it was very beneficial,” she said. “I didn’t leave my kids with my husband for nothing.

Another note: Were it not for the encouragement Mr. Drouin received in the many e-mails, it would be much more difficult to hang tough. Keep those e-mails going out to him.
He’s about to find out what real pressure is…

Dr. Sanity Is Right

This is not the first time Dr. Sanity has nailed the Left…

Dr. Sanity
Shining a psychological spotlight on a few of the insanities of life
Saturday, February 10, 2007

ALL THE LEFT’S AGENDA IN A SINGLE CARTOON

Rarely do you find an example that so clearly demonstrates the real agenda of the neo-marxist fascism of today’s political left.

In “The Four Pillars of the Socialist Revival”, I identified four key epistemological and ethical strategies that provide the foundation of the ideological agenda of the socialist and communist remnants aggressively pursuing power in the 21st century.

They are:

• Radical Environmentalism – (“humans are behind the imminent disaster of global warming and only aggressive government intervention can prevent disaster”)

• Political Correctness – (“reality, truth and morality are all subjective”)

• Multiculturalism – (“all cultures are equally good except for western culture which is uniquely bad; who are we to say that freedom and democracy are any better than tyranny and oppression?”)

• Terrorism – (“terrorism is the only option of those who are oppressed by the western imperialist capitalists and is perfectly justified. George Bush/America/the West is the real terrorist”)

A big h/t to Dr Sanity

Go read her whole post:
————————————————-

**And while I’m on the subject, here is more of the Leftists attack on our freedom:**

Thought Police Strike Again

Newest ‘Hate Crime’ Bill Violates Constitution: Attempts End-Run Around Free Speech

h/t – FaithAndDominion.com
February 5, 2007

Lancaster, PA: The Constitution Party, the country’s third largest political party in terms of voter registration, warns Americans that the latest federal ‘hate-crime’ bill introduced in the House of Representatives is a dangerous threat to Constitutionally protected rights. H.R. 254, introduced by Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, D-Texas, is another version of proposed legislation passed by the House in 2005 and the Senate in 2004. Only strong public outcry and a Republican controlled Congress kept this type of legislation from becoming law. Now that Democrats are in charge there’s a tough fight ahead to keep this dangerous bill from passing. H.R. 254 would make certain types of speech a federal offense. So-called ‘hate crimes’ legislation is dangerous for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the blatant unconstitutionality of such laws. ‘Hate crime’ laws would allow federal “thought police” to interfere in the law enforcement authority of states and localities – something our founders were clear was NOT to be allowed.

H.R. 254 would require every state to pass and enforce ‘anti-hate’ laws. It would outlaw stating a “bias” against certain ‘federally protected’ groups such as homosexuals. Constitution Party National Chairman Jim Clymer warned “So-called ‘hate crime’ laws could mean the Bible would be considered ‘hate literature’ and preaching from it would be ‘hate speech’ because of references to religious teachings on homosexuality or other behaviors. The Orwellian implications of these types of laws mean Bible-believing Christians could become criminals simply because they spoke out about their beliefs.”

Citing a 2004 case in Philadelphia, where 11 Christians were charged under a ‘hate-crimes’ statute for peacefully protesting at a gay rights rally, Mr. Clymer, a practicing attorney, said “Law-abiding Americans became criminals because they exercised a right our forebears fought and died for”. “By introducing the Anti-Defamation League’s (ADL) federal ‘hate crime’ bill into Congress for the second time, Rep. Jackson-Lee shows she’s bound and determined to stifle your First Amendment Rights no matter how many times she has to make a run at it”, noted Constitution Party Communication Director Mary Starrett who added: “The Constitution Party condemns H.R. 254 as an affront to our liberty. Today, ADL-inspired ‘thought crime’ laws are stripping nations of free speech.

“In Canada and many European countries, it is a crime to use the internet to criticize ‘federally protected’ groups, such as homosexuals and Muslims. In England, two men who called Islam ‘wicked’ were indicted under Britain’s ‘hate crime’ law and now face seven years in prison. Those horrors do not belong in America!”

Referring to the group behind this bill, Clymer noted: “Congresswoman Jackson-Lee’s H.R. 254 is being pushed by the same group, ADL, responsible for the British law that says truth cannot be used as a defense in court. only the complaints by members of specially protected groups who say their feelings have been hurt are being allowed. The reality of what these types of laws are doing and have done to people across the world should be a chilling reminder to Americans to oppose these laws while we still can” warned Clymer.
……………………………………………………………………………………

This is not about some gay boys’ rights. Truth be told, in my day they were called ‘queers’, because such outlandish, decadent behavior was not tolerated. Full stop. Ok, today’s world is different, more accepting and tolerant, right? Then answer me this. If the world is such a tolerant and accepting place today, why is it that the dangers of self-censorship can be seen throughout all of the science disciplines, the media, publishers of books and magazines, writers, journalists (not necessarily two different animals), teachers, law enforcement, and yes, politicians? Self-censorship invades our conversations with peers, our behavior among strangers, and certainly to an increasing extent, in the blogging world – as witnessed in YouTube’s zealous active censorship of what it considers objectionable.

What is the net result of all this self-correcting, Politically Correct speech and work sanctions?

Well, it creates fear. Fear of sanction. Fear of being seen as insensitive, fear of being considered racist and bigoted, fear of rejection by ones peers, fear of loss of job and income, fear of being passed over for grant money, if the wrong areas of scientific research are pursued, fear of others’ opinions in the political arena. Ah, the threat of lawsuit, of losing one’s livelihood, threat of having one’s reputation stained, the threat of being bombed! – these are all operating in our lives today to some extent.

FEAR- FEAR – FEAR. Is it worth it? Who stands to gain from this fear-mongering, designed to produce apprehension and doubt? Well, the environmentalists for sure. Never mind that our planet has seen countless ice ages come and go, without any apparent help from humankind.
Who stands to gain if I am labeled a racist? Not the blacks who live next door, or indeed any of the average ‘people of color’ I work with. Al Sharpton? Most assuredly, racists of his ilk, J.J., or any black politician would automatically milk it, if they could get some recognition, some perceived moment of, “Aha! gotcha, you whitebread mofo.” But I have no name recognition, therefore would be of no use to the Al Sharptons or the Jesse Jacksons.

Nevertheless, the threat of censure, willingness to punish a white man for hurting the black’s feelings is very real. The blacks must be constantly reminded that they are the victim, so the racial profiling scam can flourish. Again, only more laws can protect him from the bigoted white man. And men such as Al Sharpton to make sure everyone is paying attention.

Any offense, taken individually, just doesn’t add up to keeping the threats and the fear-mongering going. But taken together, these provide a nanny government with fuel to make laws and more laws, outlawing such offenses. It’s simple. The government will protect us from ourselves. The government will pass laws protecting our environment from its inhabitants – laws protecting you from me, never mind there are already on the books a fairly complex set of laws governing the social interaction of its citizens. No, no – we need more laws (and lawyers), and a relentless bureaucracy to implement them. And the government has ‘useful idiots’ aplenty. Couldn’t function without them. In a democratic country such as ours, there are just enough checks and balances to keep the wolves off balance. With constant vigilance, may it always be so.

In our universities, the students face a constant and pervasive threat of censure, of outright loss of freedom of speech – or worse. Their newspapers are under attack, their clubs, their right to protest is met with an iron hand. It’s really outrageous, and it comes from people (usually) acting out of a well-intentioned credo, to protect and preserve liberalism and cultural relativism by whatever means available. And it’s getting more pervasive, with the inclination of a great many colleges to continue creating ’sensitivity programs’, and making them mandatory.

Does anybody in their right mind think that there will not be a price for these clumsy attempts at social engineering? The pendulum will swing back the other way. It’s Nature’s way.
Nature, be it human or otherwise, will always win out.

STUDENTS INVESTIGATED FOR ANTI-TERRORIST PROTEST

San Francisco State University Investigates Students for Anti-Terrorism Protest

STUDENTS FOR ACADEMIC FREEDOM
By Foundation for Individual Rights in Education
02/08/07

SAN FRANCISCO, Calif., February 8, 2007—In a profound display of disrespect for free speech, San Francisco State University (SFSU) is investigating its College Republicans for hosting an anti-terrorism rally on campus in which participants stepped on makeshift Hezbollah and Hamas flags. After students filed a complaint claiming they were offended because the flags bore the word “Allah,” SFSU initiated an investigation into accusations of incitement, creation of a hostile environment, and incivility. Members of the College Republicans then contacted the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) for assistance.

“At a public university, stepping on a flag—even burning an American flag—is without question a constitutionally protected act of political protest,” FIRE Vice President Robert Shibley said. “The right to protest is at the very heart of the First Amendment, and means nothing if only inoffensive expression is permitted. The College Republicans “offense” took place on October 17, 2006, when they held an anti-terrorism protest in SFSU’s Malcolm X Plaza. During the protest, several members of the group stepped on butcher paper they had painted to resemble the flags of Hamas and Hezbollah.

Unbeknownst to the protestors, the flags they had copied contain the word “Allah” written in Arabic script.On October 26, a student filed a formal complaint with the university against the College Republicans. By December, Director of the Office of Student Programs and Leadership OSPLD had concluded its investigation and had passed the case along to the Student Organization Hearing Panel (SOHP), a panel of students, faculty, and staff members who will deliver a verdict on the charges. The College Republicans contacted FIRE, which wrote to SFSU President Robert A. Corrigan on January 23, 2007, to protest SFSU’s unlawful actions and to remind this public university of its obligations to protect students’ constitutional rights. FIRE’s letter emphasized that “incitement” and creating a “hostile environment” are legal terms that are not applicable to the College Republicans’ actions of stepping on a flag. FIRE wrote that “SFSU has a duty to uphold the First Amendment rights of all of its students, even if their expressive activity offends the religious sensibilities of some.” SFSU replied to FIRE’s letter on January 29 by saying that the university is investigating the complaint “to give all parties the confidence that they will be heard and fairly treated by a panel that includes representatives of all the University’s key constituencies.”

Yet students report that OSPLD has the power to dismiss baseless charges after concluding an investigation. SFSU’s student group misconduct procedures also give OSPLD Director Greenwell the option of settling the complaint with an “informal resolution of charges.” Instead, Greenwell passed the case along for trial before SOHP. If SOHP finds the College Republicans guilty, punishment could range from a letter of warning to the revocation of recognition.“In a free society, neither SFSU nor any other agency of the government has the power to investigate a group simply for disrespecting a religious symbol,” FIRE’s Shibley said. “By continuing this investigation, SFSU is not just charting new territory in campus repression, but its actions come into direct conflict with the United States Constitution. The charges against the College Republicans must be immediately dismissed.” FIRE is a nonprofit educational foundation that unites civil rights and civil liberties leaders, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals from across the political and ideological spectrum on behalf of individual rights, due process, freedom of expression, academic freedom, and rights of conscience at our nation’s colleges and universities. FIRE’s efforts to preserve liberty on campuses across America can be viewed at www.thefire.org.

CONTACT:
Robert Shibley, Vice President, FIRE: 215-717-3473; robert@thefire.org

Arab-Americans like "24"

————————————————–

In Defense of ‘24′

An Arab-American defends the real-life Bauers.

WSJ Opinion Journal
BY EMILIO KARIM DABUL
Wednesday, February 7, 2007

“I am an Arab-American as well as a fan of “24.” The two things are not mutually exclusive,despite what the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and other such groups have to say about this season’s opening episodes possibly increasing anti-Muslim and anti-Arab prejudice in American society. Most of the terrorists represented in “24″ through the years have been Arab Muslims. Why? Well, probably because most terrorists today are, in fact, Arab Muslims. As a descendant of Syrian Muslims, I am very well aware that the majority of Muslims world-wide are peaceful, hard working, and law abiding. That still does not change the fact that the greatest terrorist threat to the U.S. today comes not from the ETA, the IRA, etc., but from one group: Islamic terrorists.”

“And this is what makes “24″ a compelling drama every week. Instead of pretending Islamic terrorists don’t exist, the show presents frighteningly real worst-case scenarios perpetrated by Osama bin Laden’s followers. So CAIR thinks it’s over the top for the terrorists in “24″ to blow up Los Angeles with a nuke? Please, if bin Laden and his crew had nukes, most of us would be way too dead to argue over such points.”

“There is a dangerous trend in the U.S. today that involves skirting the truth at the risk of offending any individual or group. When Bill Cosby talks to African-Americans about self-respect and responsibility, and says publicly what many have been saying privately for years, he’s branded a “reactionary,” “misinformed,” “judgmental,” and so on. When “24″ confronts America’s worst fears about al Qaeda–whose goal remains to kill as many Americans as possible whenever possible–the show is said to be guilty of fueling anti-Muslim and anti-Arab prejudice.”

“Well, here’s the hard, cold truth: When Islamic terrorists stop being a threat to America’s survival, viewers will lose interest in “24,” because it will have lost its relevancy. Until such time, I will continue to watch “24″–because, believe it or not, the idea that there are Jack Bauers out there in real life risking their lives to save ours does mean something to me. And as for “24″ causing a possible backlash against Muslims and Arab-Americans, where’s the evidence of that? The show is now in its sixth season and there hasn’t been one recorded incident of any viewer ever slurring or attacking any Muslim or Arab-American because of something that happened on the show. More to the point, in the latest episode President Palmer stated, “The American Muslim community is the greatest line of defense against these terrorists.” He advocates strengthening ties with Islamic leaders across the U.S., and is opposed to measures that would in any way infringe upon the constitutional rights of Arab Americans.”

“That said, I would certainly welcome more characters in movies, TV programs and novels who reflect the overall Arab-American experience. Truth is, most of us don’t have bomb-making skills or a desire to become human missiles. And there are Muslim and Arab-American CTU heroes out there, as well as doctors, superdads, women scientists, etc. But just as it took Saul Bellow to give literary voice to the Jewish-American experience, we need our own storytellers to weave the pastiche of tales that make up Arab-American life.”

“In the meantime, the next time a journalist decides to report on Arab-American concerns about shows like “24,” maybe he could actually talk to someone other than CAIR and the Muslim Public Affairs Council, and seek out Arab-Americans with a different point of view.”

“We actually do exist.”

“And maybe that same reporter could take a closer look at CAIR. Ask CAIR about the Holy Land Foundation and its support of Hamas. Ask it about the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and the CAIR board member who was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in that case–yet still sits on CAIR’s board. Look a little closer, and maybe you’ll find that CAIR has good reason to get nervous about shows like ‘24.’”

“Because terrorists and their supporters continue to hide among us in plain sight, we need Jack Bauer, now more than ever.”

Mr. Dabul is a free-lance writer and the author of Deadline, a novel about modern terrorism.

What’s Washington Up To?

from NRO

February 7, 2007 6:45 AM
By Deroy Murdock

Stick Ethanol in the Museum of Unintended Consequences
(Washington has found a way to raise the price of fuel and tortillas at the same time.)
…and piss the Mexicans off.

Many Democrats and some Republicans applauded President Bush’s State-of-the-Union proposal for a 20 percent reduction in gasoline use over the next ten years, largely through greater reliance on ethanol. Bush’s idea, however, is adding corn-based fuel to the fire in Mexico City. Existing federal laws that mandate ethanol in U.S. gasoline have diverted trainloads of corn from America’s food supply-chain to ethanol factories. This boosted U.S. corn prices nearly 80 percent in 2006.

That’s bad enough if you buy corn on the cob for a weekend barbecue. But it’s much worse if you are a poor Mexican surviving on corn tortillas. The price of a kilo (2.2 pounds) of tortillas recently has shot up 55 percent, from 5.5 to 8.5 pesos. Poor Mexicans are not taking this sitting down. In fact, some 75,000 of them stood up on January 31 in Mexico City’s giant Zocalo plaza. More than 200 unions and social-action groups organized protests to denounce the rising price of this basic Mexican staple.

“[Felipe] Calderon stole the elections, and now he’s stealing the tortillas!” screamed one banner, chiding Mexico’s narrowly elected, new president. According to the Associated Press, the normally free-market Calderon has been trying to get manufacturers to follow a gentlemen’s agreement to keep tortilla prices flat. How has American energy policy inspired political instability in Mexico? This is a pristine example of The Law of Unintended Consequences. When big government does big things, all sorts of wacky stuff happens, and rarely for the good.

Uncle Sam gives ethanol manufacturers a 51-cent-per-gallon subsidy. Anyone who wants to import ethanol is welcome to — provided he pays the 54-cent-per-gallon tariff slapped on ethanol imports. This is one reason for another unintended consequence: gasoline prices shot up last summer since ethanol, largely produced in the Midwest, had to be shipped south and to both coasts to be blended, by law, with gasoline. Importing Brazilian ethanol into Atlantic and Pacific ports would have made sense, but then-House Speaker Dennis Hastert hated the idea, since that would put competitive pressure on his corn-farming Illinois constituents.“I don’t see an economic plus in it right now,” Hastert sniffed. What other unintended consequences could the federal government’s ethanol-mania propel?

First, poor Mexicans will feel even poorer as tortilla prices stay high or climb even higher. At the margin, watch for more of them to throw up their hands and head north, to a neighborhood near you.

Second, as fuel companies buy more and more corn, prices will rise for corn flakes, corn bread, popcorn, corn syrup, and other food items. Grocery bills should grow, at least marginally.

Third, humans eat corn, but so do cows, pigs, and chickens. Meat prices will rise, hurting U.S. consumers and making American meat exports less competitive on world markets.

Fourth, if they have not already, members of the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee will notice these increases in consumer and producer prices. Fearing inflation, they could start increasing interest rates. That would slow the economy and push into foreclosure more Americans with variable home mortgages.

This economic damage will accelerate if President Bush promotes, or if the federal government mandates, a one-fifth drop in gasoline use by 2017. According to estimates by Cato Institute scholars Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren, writing in the Winter 2007 issue of The Milken Institute Review, “If all the corn produced in America in 2005 were dedicated to ethanol production…it would have reduced U.S. demand for gasoline by, at most, 12 percent.” So, to reach Bush’s 20 percent goal, corn production must grow to 167 percent of its 2005 levels, and every kernel must go into ethanol. Kiss your corn pudding goodbye.

Cultivating that much corn will require even more farmland. Securing it likely will require chopping down the same trees that inhale the carbon dioxide that humans and cars exhale. If Al Gore is telling the truth, this will increase global warming. So one of the environmentalists’ favorite tools for fighting global warming could actually exacerbate it. Meanwhile, as the Wall Street Journal editorialized on January 27, “ethanol increases the level of nitrous oxides in the atmosphere and thus causes smog.”

How lucky we are to have a government big enough to tie its own shoelaces together.
—————————————
(from WSJ)
No wonder, then, that the price of corn rose nearly 80% in 2006 alone. Corn growers and their Congressmen love this, and naturally they are planting as much as they can. Look for a cornfield in your neighborhood soon. Yet for those of us who like our corn flakes in the morning, the higher price isn’t such good news. It’s even worse for cattle, poultry and hog farmers trying to adjust to suddenly exorbitant prices for feed corn–to pick just one industry example. The price of corn is making America’s meat-packing industries, which are major exporters, less competitive.

What’s worse, the supposed environmental benefits of ethanol just aren’t true:

As an oxygenate, ethanol increases the level of nitrous oxides in the atmosphere and thus causes smog. The scientific literature is also divided about whether the energy inputs required to produce ethanol actually exceed its energy output. It takes fertilizer to grow the corn, and fuel to ship and process it, and so forth. Even the most optimistic estimate says ethanol’s net energy output is a marginal improvement of only 1.3 to one. For purposes of comparison, energy outputs from gasoline exceed inputs by an estimated 10 to one.

And because corn-based ethanol is less efficient than ordinary gasoline, using it to fuel cars means you need more gas to drive the same number of miles. This is not exactly a route to “independence” from Mideast, Venezuelan or any other tainted source of oil. Ethanol also cannot be shipped using existing pipelines (being alcohol, it eats the seals), so it must be trucked or sent by barge or train to its thousand-and-one destinations, at least until separate pipelines are built.

If nothing else, the continued survival of the ethanol subsidies is a testament to political power.
—————————-

Good Lord. You mean to tell me that with all the geniuses on Capitol Hill, they couldn’t think this one through? Well, I had just as soon start subsidizing the freaking Mexicans, so they can eat their godamn tortillas, rather than have the economy destabilized further in Old Mexico, as we used to call it. Is there anything Washington can’t fuck up? (I knew you were gonna say that.)

Can’t you just picture the Green Party’s enthusiasm, if Washington starts talking Nuclear Power? Hey, if Iran can build nuclear reactors for “peaceful purposes”, maybe it’s time we put that back on the table. Who wants it? Nobody. But then who wants the Wahhabi Caliphate in their backyard, either? It’s beginning to look like: 1) we either develop an alternative fuel, and dry up the Islamists’s money, or 2) we go kick the shit out of the Middle East (No, I mean REALLY kick the shit out of them), and take their toys away from them.

Where’s Churchill when you need him? Oh, not in Merry Old England, aka the British Dhimmihood, the Multicultural pisspot of the world.

h/t little green footballs

Taking the fight to Islam

Taking the fight to Islam

In 1989, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali Muslim, supported the fatwa against Salman Rushdie. But on moving to Europe her views changed and she turned against Islam. Two years ago she fled Holland after the brutal murder of her artistic collaborator Theo van Gogh. Who is this fierce critic who lives under the constant threat of death?

Andrew Anthony
Sunday February 4, 2007
The Observer

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is not the only critic of Islam who lives with round-the-clock protection. But surely none wears their endangered status with greater style. The Dutch Somali human-rights campaigner looks like a fashion model and talks like a public intellectual. Tall and slender with rod-straight posture and a schoolgirl smile, she is a thinker of stunning clarity, able to express ideas in her third language with a precision that very few could achieve in their first. This combination of elegance and eloquence would be impressive in any circumstances. Under threat of death, it is nothing short of incredible….

the article goes on to say:

When it comes to words, Hirsi Ali is not one to look for the mincer. She speaks in a language that makes no concessions to the softening euphemisms of political correctness. Those immersed in circumspection and ever vigilant to the contemporary sin of offence are bound to ask themselves if she’s allowed to say what she says. In this respect her predicament is reminiscent of the moment in Basic Instinct when Sharon Stone lights a cigarette under interrogation in a police station. She’s told that’s it’s non-smoking environment and she replies: ‘So arrest me.’ Hirsi Ali’s life is already in jeopardy. She’s long past the point of polite restraint.

Some observers find her forthright approach refreshing and, indeed, intoxicating, but many
recoil from her unadorned conviction. Writing in the New York Review of Books, the historian Timothy Garton Ash described Hirsi Ali as a ’slightly simplistic Enlightenment fundamentalist’. Last year when Garton Ash chaired a discussion with Hirsi Ali at the ICA, he seemed both to admire the incisiveness of her quietly spoken logic and to wince at its unshakeable conclusions.

‘For him,’ Hirsi Ali laughs, ‘the Enlightenment is complex. For me, it isn’t. There’s nothing complex about it.’ A student of 17th- and 18th-century political ideas, she doesn’t mean that she thinks the Enlightenment was some kind of uniform philosophical movement. The simplicity, for her, is the legacy of the Enlightenment, the things we take for granted about Western sociopolitical culture: the rule of law, the rights of the individual, freedom of expression. To Hirsi Ali these are bedrock precepts that should not be compromised in the name of cultural diversity.

To read the whole article, go here.