I Took This Shift Because Of Her --- Politics - Justice - And Wrestling With The Angel
Saturday, April 01, 2006
Attack On Iran
Already Being Planned
And, all I can say is, it's about damned time:
The Government is to hold secret talks with defence chiefs tomorrow to discuss possible military strikes against Iran.
A high-level meeting will take place in the Ministry of Defence at which senior defence chiefs and government officials will consider the consequences of an attack on Iran.
It is believed that an American-led attack, designed to destroy Iran's ability to develop a nuclear bomb, is "inevitable" if Teheran's leaders fail to comply with United Nations demands to freeze their uranium enrichment programme.
Tomorrow's meeting will be attended by Gen Sir Michael Walker, the chief of the defence staff, Lt Gen Andrew Ridgway, the chief of defence intelligence and Maj Gen Bill Rollo, the assistant chief of the general staff, together with officials from the Foreign Office and Downing Street.
The International Atomic Energy Authority, the nuclear watchdog, believes that much of Iran's programme is now devoted to uranium enrichment and plutonium separation, technologies that could provide material for nuclear bombs to be developed in the next three years.
The United States government is hopeful that the military operation will be a multinational mission, but defence chiefs believe that the Bush administration is prepared to launch the attack on its own or with the assistance of Israel, if there is little international support.
British military chiefs believe an attack would be limited to a series of air strikes against nuclear plants - a land assault is not being considered at the moment.
But confirmation that Britain has started contingency planning will undermine the claim last month by Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, that a military attack against Iran was "inconceivable".
Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, insisted, during a visit to Blackburn yesterday, that all negotiating options - including the use of force - remained open in an attempt to resolve the crisis.
Tactical Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from US navy ships and submarines in the Gulf would, it is believed, target Iran's air defence systems at the nuclear installations.
That would enable attacks by B2 stealth bombers equipped with eight 4,500lb enhanced BLU-28 satellite-guided bunker-busting bombs, flying from Diego Garcia, the isolated US Navy base in the Indian Ocean, RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire and Whiteman USAF base in Missouri.
It is understood that any direct British involvement in an attack would be limited but may extend to the use of the RAF's highly secret airborne early warning aircraft.
At the centre of the crisis is Washington's fear that an Iranian nuclear weapon could be used against Israel or US forces in the region, such as the American air base at Incirlik in Turkey.
The UN also believes that the production of a bomb could also lead to further destabilisation in the Middle East, which would result in Egypt, Syria and Saudi Arabia all developing nuclear weapons programmes.
A senior Foreign Office source said: "Monday's meeting will set out to address the consequences for Britain in the event of an attack against Iran. The CDS [chiefs of defence staff] will want to know what the impact will be on British interests in Iraq and Afghanistan which both border Iran. The CDS will then brief the Prime Minister and the Cabinet on their conclusions in the next few days.
"If Iran makes another strategic mistake, such as ignoring demands by the UN or future resolutions, then the thinking among the chiefs is that military action could be taken to bring an end to the crisis. The belief in some areas of Whitehall is that an attack is now all but inevitable.
There will be no invasion of Iran but the nuclear sites will be destroyed. This is not something that will happen imminently, maybe this year, maybe next year. Jack Straw is making exactly the same noises that the Government did in March 2003 when it spoke about the likelihood of a war in Iraq.
"Then the Government said the war was neither inevitable or imminent and then attacked."
The source said that the Israeli attack against Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981 proved that a limited operation was the best military option.
The Israeli air force launched raids against the plant, which intelligence suggested was being used to develop a nuclear bomb for use against Israel.
Military chiefs also plan tomorrow to discuss fears that an attack within Iran will "unhinge" southern Iraq - where British troops are based - an area mainly populated by Shia Muslims who have strong political and religious links to Iran.
They are concerned that this could delay any withdrawal of troops this year or next. There could also be consequences for British and US troops in Afghanistan, which borders Iran.
The MoD meeting will address the economic issues that could arise if Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president - who became the subject of international condemnation last year when he called for Israel to be "wiped off the map" - cuts off oil supplies to the West in reprisal.
There are thought to be at least eight known sites within Iran involved in the production of nuclear materials, although it is generally accepted that there are many more secret installations.
Iran has successfully tested a Fajr-3 missile that can reach Israel, avoiding radar and hitting several targets using multiple warheads, its military has confirmed.
Can't wait until that 700-ton bomb is ready.
Land Of Christ
Yesterday, Jamie Glazov, of Front Page Magazine, published an excellent interview with Serge Trifkovic. It is quite an extensive interview, but it is worth the read. I think I will excerpt it here in portions over a matter of a few days:
Glazov: Before we get to your book, let's talk about the Abdul Rahman case for a moment. He has just been released and is now in Italy. What do you think the key significance of this case is?
Trifkovic: This became a cause célèbre only because of the presence of American troops in Afghanistan: having Rahman killed for apostasy under their noses would have made too explicit a debacle of the already farcical neocon phantasy known as "democratizing the greater Middle East."
No, when Christians are routinely mistreated and killed by our other trusted friends and allies of the United States in the region - notably Pakistan, Egypt, and even the "secular" Turkey - you don't hear about it, there are no vigils, no protests, no offers of asylum.
Christians are routinely accused of "blasphemy against Islam," an offense that carries the death penalty as Pakistan has some of the strictest blasphemy laws in the Muslim world. Charges of blasphemy can be made on the flimsiest of evidence - even one man's word against another - and since it is invariably a Muslim's word against that of a Christian, the outcome is preordained.
In Egypt, supposedly a friend of the United States and the second largest recipient of the U.S. taxpayers' largesse, not a single murderer was convicted following the January 2000 massacre of 21 Coptic Christians in the village of Al-Kosheh, and smaller-scale massacres continue unabated.
An excellent source is "The New Persecuted: Inquiries into Anti-Christian Intolerance in the New Century of Martyrs" by Antonio Socci. Socci provides evidence that in the past century some 50 million Christians have been killed primarily or exclusively for the reason of their faith; an average of 160,000 Christians have been killed every year since 1990, the vast majority by Muslims in the Third World: East Timor, Sudan, Mauritania, Nigeria..
Socci laments the fact that "this global persecution of Christianity is still in progress but in most cases is ignored by the mass media and Christians in the West."There are two parallel processes overlooked in the current Middle Eastern crisis: the apparently terminal decline of the Christian remnant in the Middle East after 14 centuries of precarious dhimmitude, and the remarkable indifference of the post-Christian, latently Christophobic Western elite class to its impending demise.
Under the British Mandate, Palestine officially was a Christian country, with Bethlehem having a population that was 90 percent Christian. Today they are literally disappearing. Among over three million Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem, under 50,000 Christians remain.
By the year 2020 there will be no living church in the land of Christ.
Bans Display Of
From CBS News:
(CBS/AP) Dozens of high school students protested a temporary school policy forbidding students from displaying the U.S. flag, as well as flags from other countries, amid racial tensions following immigration rallies.
Skyline High School Principal Tom Stumpf said American flags were brazenly waved in the faces of Hispanic students and in one case a Mexican flag was thrown into the face of another student.
"When it involves the American flag and its abuse in vilifying other people, we simply will not tolerate it," Stumpf said. "They were using the symbol derisively as misguided patriotism."
As Dennis Prager often says, "You have to go to college to believe something that stupid."
Matter Itself Is
IBM Creates Tool Which
Could Be Used To Build
From Agence French Press:
The development was touted as a step toward making computers based on the spin of electrons and atoms.
"We have a tool in place to develop the product of the future," said German-born researcher Andreas Heinrich of IBM's Almaden Research Center in San Jose, California.
"We all know we can't shrink the silicon-based technology used in today's computers down to the atomic level. We have to look at a radically different concept, and that is what we are doing here."
The new method was called "spin-excitation spectroscopy" and used a specially-designed microscope capable of creating magnetic fields as much as 140,000 times stronger than that of the Earth, scientists said.
Researchers were able to manipulate atoms and measure the effect their spins had on each other, according to IBM.
"We can study the magnetic phenomena used in hard drives, but on the scale of single atoms," Heinrich told AFP. "It could enable us, in the very far future, to be able to build computer devices on an atomic scale."
Why is this important? Well, read this post from CUANAS.
Here is an excerpt:
What happens if you string atoms together into an atomic chain functioning as parelell processors?:
LOS ALAMOS, N.M. — The only hint that anything extraordinary is happening inside the brown stucco building at Los Alamos National Laboratory is a small metal sign posted in front:
"Warning! Magnetic Field in Use. Remain on Sidewalk." Come much closer and you risk having the magnetic stripes on your credit cards erased.The powerful field is emanating from the supercooled superconducting magnets inside a tanklike machine called a nuclear magnetic resonance spectrometer.
The device itself is unremarkable. N.M.R. machines are used in chemistry labs across the world to map the architecture of molecules by sensing how their atoms dance to the beat of electromagnetic waves. Hospitals and clinics use the same technology, called magnetic resonance imaging, or M.R.I., to scan the tissues of the human body.
The machine at Los Alamos has been enlisted on a recent morning for a grander purpose: to carry out an experiment in quantum computing. By using radio waves to manipulate atoms like so many quantum abacus beads, the Los Alamos scientists will coax a molecule called crotonic acid into executing a simple computer program.
Last year they set a record, carrying out a calculation involving seven atoms. This year they are shooting for 10. That may not sound like many.
Each atom can be thought of as a little switch, a register that holds a 1 or a 0, and the latest Pentium chip contains 42 million such devices. But the paradoxical laws of quantum mechanics confer a powerful advantage: a single atom can do two calculations at once. Two atoms can do four, three atoms can do eight.
By the time you reach 10, doubling and doubling and doubling along the way, you have an invisibly tiny computer that can carry out 1,024 (210) calculations at the same time.
If scientists can find ways to leverage this achievement to embrace 20 atoms, they will be able to execute a million simultaneous calculations. Double that again to 40 atoms, and 10 trillion calculations can be done in tandem.
The goal, still but a distant glimmer, is to harness thousands of atoms, resulting in a machine so powerful that it would easily break codes now considered impenetrable and solve other problems that are impossible for even the fastest supercomputer.
"We are at the border of a new territory," said Dr. Raymond Laflamme, one of the leaders of the Los Alamos project. "All the experiments today are a very small step, but they show that there is not a wall."
In other words, less than one hundred atoms would be faster than the largest computer on Earth today.
Ok, that is amazing enough, but there is a further implication to this atomic quantum computing. Think about it. We're talking about using atoms as computers.What is the world made up of?Yes, that's right, atoms.
But, if we can use atoms as microprocessors, then can we use the matter around us as microprocessors, turning the world itself into a gigantic computer?Ray Kurzweil believes that is going to happen
This is from an interview with Mr. Kurzweil from What is Enlightenment? magazine:
WIE: You mentioned earlier that as human beings we naturally seek to expand our horizons, and that in the future we will do so largely through the expansion of our intelligence. Do you see the expansion of human intelligence as an evolutionary end in itself?
RK: Well, it's a good question. It's like asking, "What is the purpose of life?" In my mind, we will ultimately saturate all of the matter and energy in our area of the universe with our intelligence, and I suppose you could say that's an end in itself. All of this dumb matter and energy around us will wake up and become sublimely intelligent. Then it will spread out to the whole universe at the fastest speed information can flow. And one could make an argument that it's not going to take an infinitely long time because there may be other ways to get to other parts of the universe through shortcuts like wormholes, which physics has postulated. Eventually the whole universe will, essentially, wake up.
Friday, March 31, 2006
... is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result:
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh ruled out any talk of the Hamas-led government he heads recognizing Israel or ending the fight against the Jewish state until Israel commits to withdrawing from Palestinian land.
But, the international community keeps on trying, proving that Hamas is sane, while the international community is, well ...
Thursday, March 30, 2006
I am very angry about the fact that Afghanistan has become a Sharia state. I have been venting my anger here, and at Infidel Bloggers Alliance, in a series of emotional posts.
Several commenters have thought it important to point out to me that it is better that we rid the world of the Taliban, and that therefore, things are better in Afghanistan because of the our work there.
I agree. Let me be clear, I never said that I regret the war to remove the Taliban. I am lamenting the fact that we have participated in the creation of a new government in Afghanistan, which is still one of the worst human rights abusers on Earth.
Our nation-building project has gone awry. We have not stood by our principles and we ought to be ashamed of ourselves. To simply stand back and say that this is what "Democracy" has created in Afghanistan, because this is the will of the Afghan people, is a pathetically insufficient way to deal with the problems we helped create.
In the aftermath of World War II, we forced our will upon the people of Japan and Germany. We forbade them to continue on with their inhuman policies. Afghanistan still having a law against "apostasy" is the equivalent of the Germans still rounding Jews up and taking them to concentration camps on our watch after WWII.
Think about that. We are allowing this, so, I say, we are creating it, because we are responsible for what is becoming of Afghanistan.
Here's an excerpt from a very thoughtful article from David Warren:
We forget that we are in Afghanistan only secondarily to create a democratic constitutional order. This is a means only, towards the primary end of eliminating Afghanistan as a refuge and staging area for international terrorism. The same end could be achieved, hypothetically, by other means. I don't have the stomach to list them. But according at least to the "Bush doctrine", it would be a lot easier, and ultimately less costly in blood and money, if the country could be made responsibly self-governing.
It is difficult to achieve responsibility in politics, even in the West. Those who argue that, given the violence and fanaticism we are encountering, we should get out of such countries as Afghanistan and Iraq, and leave them to their squalid fate, take an extremely irresponsible position. They must first explain what their alternative would be, to eliminate these countries as hatcheries of terror. They must consider the consequences of leaving elected, pro-Western governments, to be overthrown by ruthless psychopaths. They must justify abandoning the huge numbers of innocents who will be butchered and massacred when our troops withdraw -- including everyone who trusted us. And contemplate the effect this spectacle will have on our remaining allies.
"Cut and run" is the opposite of a moral position. But neither is it a practical position. The bargain it offers, even to us, is less pain now, for more pain later -- as Afghanistan and Iraq shift back from being importers to exporters of jihadis.
Yet among those willing enough, for the moment, to send troops and keep shooting, there is the alternative irresponsibility -- which consists in underestimating the size of the task. You have not won a war until your enemy ceases to be your enemy. And by this standard, we are a long way from victory.
In the First Television Interview of an Al-Qaeda Member Close to Osama Since 9/11, Abu Jandal Offers First-Hand Details About the Most-Wanted Man in the World. A former personal bodyguard of Osama Bin Laden says he is certain the al-Qaeda leader is planning an attack on the U.S.
In the first television interview with an al-Qaeda member close to bin Laden since 9/11, Abu Jandal tells Bob Simon first-hand details about the world's most wanted man for a 60 MINUTES report to be broadcast Sunday, April 2 (7:00-8:00 PM, ET/PT) on the CBS Television Network.
Abu Jandal, who was with bin Laden in Afghanistan from 1996 to 2000, says bin Laden's last tape on which he threatened consequences to the U.S. is not a threat, but a promise. "When Sheik Osama promises something, he does it.
So I believe Osama bin Laden is planning a new attack inside the United States, this is certain," he tells Simon in the interview conducted in Yemen earlier this month.
It's been long speculated that bin Laden is hiding in the tribal areas of Pakistan, but Abu Jandal says Afghanistan is the place. "Not Pakistan. I know the Pakistani tribe along the border very well. Yes, they can be very trustworthy and faithful to their religion and ideology, but they are also capable of selling information for nothing," he says.
Even if found, bin Laden will not be captured, says Abu Jandal, whho says the al-Qaeda leader gave him the authority to kill him if he was surrounded. "If he was going to be captured, Sheik Osama prefers to be killed than captured," he tells Simon. "There was a special gun to be used if Sheik Osama bin Laden was attacked and we were unable to save him, in which case I would have to kill him," says Abu Jandal.
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Lyrics Tim Rice
From Jesus Christ Superstar
I only want to say
If there is a way
Take this cup away from me
For I don't want to taste its poison
Feel it burn me,
I have changed
I'm not as sure
As when we started
Then I was inspired
Now I'm sad and tired
Listen surely I've exceeded
Tried for three years
Seems like thirty
Could you ask as much
From any other man?
But if I die
See the saga through
And do the things you ask of me
Let them hate me, hit me, hurt me
Nail me to their tree
I'd want to know
I'd want to know my God
I'd want to see
I'd want to see my God
Why I should die
I'd have to know
I'd have to know my Lord
I'd have to see
I'd have to see my Lord
What will be my reward?
I'd have to know my Lord
Then I was inspired
Now I'm sad and tired
After all I've tried for three years
Seems like ninety
Why then am I scared
To finish what I started
What you started
I didn't start it
God thy will is hard
But you hold every card
I will drink your cup of poison
Nail me to your cross and break me
Bleed me, beat me
Kill me, take me now
Before I change my mind
Our allies the Afghanis, those of the new "Islamic Democracy" we helped to create, are arresting more Christians in the wake of being forced to give up their first Moloch meal:
KABUL, March 28 2006, (LifeSiteNews.com) – US-based Christian news source, Compass Direct, reports that more Christians have been arrested for their faith in Afghanistan in the wake of the release of Abdul Rahman. Compass, a news service that tracks persecution of Christians mostly in Islamic countries, says harassment of the Christian community has been stepped up.
Compass says two more Christian converts have been arrested in other parts of the country, but further information is being withheld in the “sensitive situation” caused by the international media furor over Rahman.
Reports of beatings and police raids on the homes of Christians are filtering out of the country through local Christian ministers.
Let us, the creators, take responsibility for our creation. Those are our tax dollars at work. Lives, guns, bombs, all our resources, went to creating this.
We are responsible for Christians being arrested for their beliefs. We are responsible for the fact that Afghanistan is a Sharia State where the punishment for believing in any religion other than Islam, is death.
We are responsible for it. The blood is on our hands. We sign the death warrant of Christians.
"The best lack all convictions, while the worst are filled with passionate intensity."
- W.B Yeats
The Second Coming
The recent case of Abdul Rahman, the accused Afghani "Apostate" who was then pardoned, and has fled to Italy, is being seen by many as a victory for Democracy in Afghanistan. I have a hard time seeing it that way. It is very clear that Afghanistan succumbed to international pressure, and that they did so against their will.
Nowhere has there been any mention that this law has been taken off the books in Afghanistan.
Here is a little post from one of my favorite blogs, YARGB, which discusses the Rahman case as a kind of victory:
The case against Afghani Christian Abdul Rahman has been dismissed. I do not pray often, but I will admit I prayed for this man. And I still do.
This incident points out once again that democracy is a process not an event. Do we have the patience to stick with it? I think that remains to be seen.
Yes, Democracy is a process. But, let us be clear that there was nothing Democratic about this process. The world pressured Afghanistan into changing it's mind.
And let us also be clear, when we say Democracy we, vaguely (for we seem to think very vaguely on this subject), mean Constitutional Democratic Republic. We mean a Bill of Rights which respects our understanding of Human Rights. We mean Freedom of Conscience. We mean Freedom of Speech and Religion.
That is not at all what is going on in Afghanistan. Let us fool ourselves no longer. It is not moderate to fool yourself. It is not patient to fool yourself. The wages of fooling oneself is death. Your mind will die, and soon after that all that you hold dear will begin to move beyond your grasp. You will be removed from the world that you love. You will find yourself at the whim of chance.
Here's a question to ponder,
Would we have allowed the Germans to keep anti-Jewish laws after World War II?
We have lost to courage of our own convictions. We are forgetting who we are, and the principles we stand for.
Afghanistan is a Sharia state, and we paid for it with our blood and our money.
Is The World
The Anchoress says so:
Iran is the test case. It is the most dangerous political entity on the planet, and yet the world response has been catastrophically slow and reluctant. Years of knowingly useless negotiations, followed by hesitant international resolutions, have brought us to only the most tentative of steps–referral to a Security Council that lacks unity and resolve.
Iran knows this and therefore defiantly and openly resumes its headlong march to nuclear status. If we fail to prevent an Iranian regime run by apocalyptic fanatics from going nuclear, we will have reached a point of no return. It is not just that Iran might be the source of a great conflagration but that we will have demonstrated to the world that for those similarly inclined there is no serious impediment.- Charles Krauthammer, Time Magazine.
Is it possible that the “end” could be brought about - finally - not by those who scream “war, war,” but by those who have cooed, “peace, peace” and have displaced the moral certitude which centered past crisis-points (and which is required in order to take any action) with a nebulous theory of political correctness and “sensitivity” that has left us crippled, and unable to make a move for fear of…of what? Of being called a name by the rest of the world?
And she gives us this verse to ponder:
1 Thessalonians 5: 1-3
1 But concerning the times and the seasons, brethren, you have no need that I should write to you. 2 For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night. 3 For when they say, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape. 4 But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief. 5 You are all sons of light and sons of the day. We are not of the night nor of darkness.
Iran is our last chance. If we do not put an end to the evil in Iran, we will have past the point of no return, as, in my opinion, Europe has already done.
A few quick thoughts here:
1. I agree with Michelle Malkin about the affect of the protests. Unwittingly these walk outs will only help push the reforms that they are protesting (to the extent that they even know what they are protesting). This same thing happened in the mid '90s with prop 187 in California (that sought to deny social services to illegals). As memory serves, the measure was pretty close in the polls; that is until there were similar walk outs with thousands of students waiving flags and stopping traffic. The front page of the LA times had a 16 yr old hoodlum on the front page with a huge Mexican flag running down the middle of the street. I and many others knew that day, that 187 would pass. It would pass because those images symbolize everything that actual voters in this state actually fear. These walk outs are counter productive to their own interests and do not trigger sympathy but rather fear and outrage from those who actually have political power in this country. These protests will more likely lead to the opposite of what these students want (assuming most of them really want anything but an excuse to skip class thinly veiled as a principled stand).
2. Second, I fully agree with Dennis Prager's comment that the flaunting of the Mexican flag is simply ingratitude and there is nothing worse than an ingrate. The parents of these students fled the corruption, poverty, disease, and chaos of Mexico for the opportunities, stability, wealth, and order of the United States. Yet they celebrate the country whose ruling elite would rather engage in graft than provide a stable and prosperous society for their own citizens? Ingratitude is a very ugly thing and most Americans will not stand for it.
3. I have seen some talking heads on TV say silly things like this is the maturation of the Mexican political movement in the US. There is nothing mature or sophisticated about mobilizing teenagers to skip class. They are not voters, they will not impact voters (except to vote against them) and they will not be taken seriously. To impact this system one needs to build sustained grass roots organizations that can put pressure on government at all levels for years, even decades. These walk outs are not evidence of this. That being said, some day these students will be voters, and the hispanic vote is growing and that is something that in time cannot be ignored. But these students are not hispanic voters nor do they represent them.
4. On the Hispanic vote. The good news is that these protestors are still a minority of the hispanic community. Hispanic voters are often conservative on social issues but trend liberal on economic issues. Even on immigration, while most of them would be for more liberal policies, more than one would think favor tightening border security. For instance one recent survey found that 56% of hispanics favor maintaining or reducing immigration levels, but not increasing. Also 53% of latino voters favor laws denying drivers licenses to illegals. Also 55% believe they have to speak English and 79% believe they have to believe in the US Constitution to be considered American. High numbers also believed that moral values and the war on terror were important policy issues. My point is that these punk students do not represent most of the more responsible hispanics (legal or illegal) in this country. I also believe in the historical ability of American culture to assimilate those who come to our country (that is provided that we can actually control the amount of people that come at any one time).
5. In my view there is only one responsible party on the issue of the war on terror and only one party that recognizes the serious threat that radical Islam truly is. If that party is to maintain power, they must find a way to address security issues at the border. Meaning they must close it and control it. And they must do so without alienating hispanic voters with nativistic rhetoric or unreasonable policies, because a significant proportion of those hispanic voters could be allies (and increasingly so) in sustaining a political coalition. Republicans must maintain a winning political coalition well into the future; a coalition that will in turn allow Republicans to continue to fight the war on terror, rather than denying it exists as their opponents do. Hispanics must increasingly be considered part of this coalition an can be if the issue is handled correctly.
I believe Republicans must focus first and foremost on closing and controlling the borders and do so primarily for security purposes. That is the single most threating problem in terms of security and immigration. If this is not done then there is no reason to discuss any other programs guest worker or otherwise. However, I would not rule out such programs if the border were truly controlled.
03/28 : Student protest
Whittier area students from Pioneer, California and Whittier high schools walked out of classes to protest the proposed federal immigration bill March 27, 2006. The protestors put up the Mexican flag over the American flag flying upside down at Montebello High. (Leo Jarzomb/Staff photo)
Michelle Malkin sees reason for hope:
"I predict this stunt will be the nail in the coffin of any guest-worker/amnesty plan on the table in Washington. The image of the American flag subsumed by another and turned upside down on American soil is already spreading on Internet forums and via e-mail.
The battle for borders and immigration laws that actually mean something, however, hasn't even begun. "
I hope she is right.
By the way, Rush Limbaugh said, yesterday, that the Immigration Demonstrations are being organized with the help of the communist organization International ANSWER.
I have a hunch, and I am going to do some research to see if I can dig up evidence to support it. I believe the French employment riots are also organized by International ANSWER. And, I believe that we will soon see them working in conjunction with the Islamofascists in Europe. And, I believe this will spread as the spring sets in on Europe.
Cat Emerges From
Bowels Of Hell,
Lewis, the malevolent six-toed feline has emerged from the gaping mouth of hell to terrorize Connecticute citizenry:
FAIRFIELD, Conn. (AP) - Residents of the neighborhood of Sunset Circle say they have been terrorized by a crazy cat named Lewis. Lewis for his part has been uniquely cited, personally issued a restraining order by the town's animal control officer.
"He looks like Felix the Cat and has six toes on each foot, each with a long claw," Janet Kettman, a neighbor said Monday. "They are formidable weapons."
The neighbors said those weapons, along with catlike stealth, have allowed Lewis to attack at least a half dozen people and ambush the Avon lady as she was getting out of her car.
Some of those who were bitten and scratched ended up seeking treatment at area hospitals.
Animal Control Officer Rachel Solveira placed a restraining order on him. It was the first time such an action was taken against a cat in Fairfield.
In effect, Lewis is under house arrest, forbidden to leave his home.
Solveira also arrested the cat's owner, Ruth Cisero, charging her with failing to comply with the restraining order and reckless endangerment.
Note the six toes on each foot, the Hitler mustache, the intense stare. This cat is, clearly, on a demonic mission. Somebody, quick, get the silver bullets.
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
Europe is gone. Decisions that should have been made in the past few years, in the aftermath of 9/11, 3/11, 7/11, and Beslan, have not even been discussed. I have held out hope that Europe would awaken and join us in the fight, help us increase the momentum, and the power of our couter-Jihad, but alas, other than Sarkozy, there has been little on the horizon on which we can focus and find hope.
The sad thing is,we need Europe, whether we want to admit it to ourselves or not. It has never been an easy relationship. She is mad, jealous, unfaithful, and addicted to a gaudy lifestyle of affectation and artifice, which we have never been compfortable with, but we must admit it to ourselves, before we let her go, we love her.
Read here, about how she grasps onto her pathetic poesies, even as the breath of her life and history escapes from her fainting soul:
Europe’s botched civilization, perverted by socialism and lost faith, seems to have lost the will, the passion to sustain itself. If it continues to practice today’s multiculturalist leftism, Europe’s demographic doom will be sealed. Some harbingers:
In Brussels, Belgium, the most popular name for baby boys is now Mohammad. Sustaining the population of a nation requires that on average each couple gives birth to 2.1 children. The average European couple now has fewer than 1.4 babies, compared to 3.6 babies born to the average Muslim immigrant couple in Europe. Across Western Europe 16 to 20 percent of babies are being born into Muslim families.
In France at least 12 percent of the population is already Muslim, the fruits mostly of immigrants from former French colonies in North Africa. If present birth trends continue, by 2030 a quarter of France’s people will be Muslim, more than enough to determine who controls the national parliament and executive. As this columnist recently noted, the nuclear-armed French military is already 15 percent Muslim.
Adjacent Switzerland is now 20 percent Muslim.The German newspaper Deutsche Welle days ago reported that Germany’s birth rate in 2005 fell to a level lower than at the end of World War II, to a “historic low,” more than fifty percent lower than those of France and Great Britain. But at a meeting this week in Berlin that brought together the interior ministers of six European nations, Germany’s leftwing Social Democrats continued to oppose the application of any test or standard that would restrict who could migrate into Germany.
The burgeoning Muslim population within Europe is not evenly spread. It is largely concentrated in and around big cities, whose local politicians feel its pressure acutely and often bend to that pressure. In the Netherlands the cities of Amsterdam and Rotterdam nearly have Muslim majorities now.
These Islamic enclaves are already taking on the character of conquered provinces that no longer belong to the European countries around them. As FrontPage Magazine recently quoted from the new book While Europe Slept by liberal American expatriate Bruce Bawer:
In France, a public official met with an imam at the edge of Roubaix’s Muslim district out of respect for his declaration of the neighborhood as Islamic territory to which she had no right of access. In Britain, imams have pressed the government to officially designate certain areas of Bradford as being under Muslim, not British, law. In Denmark, Muslim leaders have sought the same kind of control over parts of Copenhagen. And in Belgium, Muslims living in the Brussels neighborhood of Sint-Jans-Molenbeek already view it not as part of Belgium but as an area under Islamic jurisdiction in which Belgians are not welcome.
If Europe continues as it is now, the rising Muslim tide will, one at a time, transform the members of the European Union into Islamic Republics under Islamic Shari’a law as Muslims become the majority population.
Who will save Europe? What Superman will come and proclaim her gods dead? Who will give them the will to sponge away the entire horizon of socialism and illusion to which they cling? Is not the night sky starless? Do they not already rotate gently in the icy breath of nothingness?
Europe is dead and we have killed her.
In the coming decades, we shall see wars unlike any man has ever known.
Monday, March 27, 2006
The Tipping Point
The Revelations Of
Even though we don't hear about it in the news, the translations of the Saddam regime documents are showing, beyond a reasonable doubt, that we were right about Saddam all the time:
These documents – though only 2% or so are translated and available – substantiate without doubt the following allegations: Saddam Hussein and bin Laden, the Baathist regime and al Qaeda had extensive, wide reaching ties. Saddam was, at a minimum, a supporter of the 911 attacks if not a sponsor of them. Saddam’s intelligence services trained more than 8,000 al Qaeda terrorists, primarily from Somalia and Sudan, at camps such as Salman Pak and Ansar al-Islam within Iraq. And Saddam helped finance al Qaeda and similar terrorist groups.
Further, the documents substantiate a broad, on-going program Iraq had to develop nuclear weapons. Indeed, Saddam had instructed his minions to begin preparing to re-energize the program after UN sanctions were lifted, a hope he had reinforced by French, Russian, and German diplomats, and traitors like British Parliamentarian George Galloway, all of whom convinced him that delay and obfuscation of the UN would get him off the hook.
We also know, thanks to the work of former Iraqi Air Force General Georges Sada, that Saddam had several civilian aircraft – one Boeing 747 and a “group” of 727s - stripped of passenger equipment and converted into cargo planes. The aircraft flew 56 sorties between Iraq and Syria, delivering drums of the chemical weapon Sarin along with other chemical and biological weapons. The deal with concocted on Saddam’s orders by “Chemical Ali” his general in charge of special weapons, and Bashar Assad’s cousin, General Abu Ali. It was a rare occasion for cooperation between the rival Baathist states, but as Sada notes, “there was complete agreement between them.”
Up to 20 tons of these chemical agents were intended for use by al Qaeda terrorists in attacking three targets in Amman, Jordan in 2004 – the Jordanian Ministry of Defense and Intelligence Service buildings, and the American Embassy. These were to be simultaneous truck bomb attacks that were thwarted by good counter-intelligence work. The trucks were large 15-ton capacity powerful vehicles that could power through barriers and obstacles to crash into the buildings. At that time the homicide drivers would detonate the ammonium nitrate load triggered by plastic explosives – probably C-4. Resting atop the explosive load were Saddam’s chemicals, sufficient to kill upwards to 100,000 people in downtown Amman, by conservative.
I believe the Bush Administration carefully timed the release of these documents to coincide with two upcoming events;
1) the 2006 elections
2) the destruction of the Iranian regime
In the coming months, we will see the case begin to be made for the fact that the Bush Administration and the Republicans had been correct from the beginning, and that the Iraq War was absolutely justified.
Sunday, March 26, 2006
British Member of Parliament, John Mann, has agreed to chair the bipartisan
Parliamentary group against anti-Semitism. Here is a link to an article from The Guarian where he explains the his concerns about the rise of the new anti-Semitism:
As chair of the all party parliamentary group against anti-semitism, I am delighted to see a group of cross-party MPs taking the time to examine anti-semitism in Britain.
Having attended only one of the sessions of this inquiry, David Clark rushed into print to judge an inquiry which is still proceeding and whose evidence he has not read (Accusations of anti-semitic chic are poisonous intellectual thuggery, March 6).
It is clear from evidence presented to the inquiry that anti-semitism has not gone away and that its nature is now more varied. Traditional anti-semitism still exists, with fascist leaflets as crude as in the 1930s distributed on the streets of the UK. Attacks on Jews continue.
Clark skirted round this issue and failed to differentiate between hostility to Israel, and aggression against Jewish institutions and people. What other community has to spend over £5m annually defending itself because its places of worship, schools and community buildings have been seen as legitimate targets worldwide?
Undoubtedly there are strong views on Israel and on the Palestinians, but those views can cloud debate and hide racism. When I visited Tel Aviv and Ramallah 20 years ago, I was vilified by some for even talking to the Israeli government. For some on the left, the mere recognition of Israel's right to exist has become a defining issue.
I have not spoken in parliament on the Middle East, yet I receive hate mail inaccurately addressed to "Jewish bastard Mann" and relating my views on anti-semitism to my supposed support for the actions of Israel. Clark may describe this as "plain obnoxious", but he fails to grasp the mindset of someone who would take time to send such stuff.
One aspect that is particularly frightening and unacceptable is the incipient growth of anti-semitism on the left under the cloak of anti-Zionism. Clark is clear that dismissing anti-Israel sentiment and anti-Zionism as anti-semitism "cheapens the term". However, he does not draw a line beyond which legitimate debate becomes illegitimate, and where hostile becomes offensive. It is a crucial line to draw if language itself is not to become an actor rather than a descriptor.
The imagery and some of the language is familiar. A cabal of Jewish conspirators, well funded, close to or in power, working to their own agenda. It is not just the MP Tam Dalyell who expressed such thoughts, others have done so in private and, increasingly, in public.
When I commissioned this inquiry, one MP commented with surprise: "I didn't realise you were Jewish." Neither did I. Anti-semitism is like all other racism: unacceptable without qualification. I hope that this inquiry will recommend some practical conclusions that can help redraw that line.
Articles Of Faith:
In Our War
One of the best blogs on the internet is Anti-Chomsky, by Benjamin Kerstein. Here, Mr. Kerstein points us to an article by French Philsopher Andre Glucksman, a leader in the 1968 Socialist movement in France, who later broke with his colleaguesover the issue of Soviet Totalitarianism.
Here Mr. Glucksman discusses the new totalitarianism and its stace on Mohammed Cartoons, and Holocaust denial:
[N]ow [radical Islam] has all of Europe in its sights, which it accuses of having a double standard. The European Union allows the Prophet to be denigrated with impunity, but it forbids and condemns other "opinions" like Nazism and denial of the Holocaust. Why are jokes about Muhammad permitted, but not those about the genocide of the Jews? This was the rallying call of fundamentalists before they initiated a competition for Auschwitz cartoons.
Fair's fair: either everything should be allowed in the name of the freedom of expression, or we should censor that which shocks both parties. Many people who defend the right to caricature feel trapped. Will they publish drawings about the gas chambers in the name of freedom of expression? Offence for offence? Infringement for infringement? Can the negation of Auschwitz be put on a par with the desecration of Muhammad?
This is where two philosophies clash.
The one says yes, these are equivalent "beliefs" which have been equally scorned. There is no difference between factual truth and professed faith; the conviction that the genocide took place and the certitude that Muhammad was illuminated by Archangel Gabriel are on a par.
The others say no, the reality of the death camps is a matter of historical fact, whereas the sacredness of the prophets is a matter of personal belief.(…)
When the Islamist fanatic affirms that Europeans practise the "religion of the Shoah" while he practises that of Muhammad, he abolishes the distinction between fact and belief. For him there are only beliefs, and so it follows that Europe will favour its own.
Civilised discourse analyses and defines scientific truths, historic truths and matters of fact relating to knowledge, not to faith. And it does this irrespective of race or confession. We may believe these facts are profane or undignified, yet they remain distinct from religious truths.
Our planet is not in the grips of a clash of civilisations or cultures. It is the battleground of a decisive struggle between two ways of thinking. There are those who declare that there are no facts, but only interpretations - so many acts of faith. These either tend toward fanaticism ("I am the truth") or they fall into nihilism ("nothing is true, nothing is false"). Opposing them are those who advocate free discussion with a view to distinguishing between true and false, those for whom political and scientific matters – or simple judgement – can be settled on the basis of worldly facts, independently of arbitrary pre-established opinions.
Refusing to face the cruellest historical facts, on the other hand, heralds the return of cruelty. Whether the Islamists - who are far from representing all Muslims – like it or not, there is no common measure between negating known facts and criticising any one of the beliefs which every European has the right to practice or poke fun at.(…)
What is at stake here is not only the freedom of the press, but also the permission to call a spade a spade and a gas chamber an abomination, regardless of our beliefs. What is at stake is the basis of all morality: here on earth the respect due to each individual starts with the recognition and rejection of the most flagrant examples of inhumanity.
Benjamin Kerstein says this reminds him of Noam Chomsky's technique of obliterating distinctions and turning the whole world into one big conflated totem of totalitarian idiocy:
This extraordinary essay cuts to the essence of one of the issues which caused me to start this blog: the absolute importance of distinctions. The Chomskyite phenomenon is most horrifying in its negation of distinctions, its annihilation of the possibility of thought. No utterance of the good professor represents this better than this one on the subject of Holocaust Denial, which represents precisely the horror of which Glucksmann speaks:
"I'm saying that if you believe in freedom of speech then you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like, I mean Goebbels was in favour of freedom of speech for views he liked, right, so was Stalin. If you're in favour of freedom of speech that means you're in favour of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise, otherwise you're not in favour of freedom of speech."
This is an obliteration of distinction, because Chomsky fails to see the difference between an article of faith and a fact of history.
As an American I would say that a person has the right to deny the Holocaust, and even to publish books doing such, but there is no right for such ideas to be taught in public schools, or on public airwaves, because there the Holocaust is a historical event, and we can not as a society permit lies to be taught as truth.
Jason Pappas, of Liberty and Culture, has some thoughts in an excellent essay comparing the Enlightenment vs. the Judeo-Christian critiques of Islam.
Here's a money quote:
Islam requires extreme blind faith and obedience because of the extent that its teachings are at odds with living a full life in a free society. If Islam is to be practiced in full, and not merely perfunctory or selectively practiced, it will lead to continued impoverishment, oppression, war, and death. It is interesting that the post-modern left, to retain its dream of socialism after all the evidence of its failure and capitalism’s success, needs to maintain the epistemologically nihilistic doctrine of postmodernism that denounces the very concept of truth. Both flee from reality to hold on to cherish dogma. And they are united by a common enemy: America.
Chomsky, the Postmodernists, and the Islamofascists are all interested in destroying the tenets of Western Culture. However, the Islamofascists, unlike the other two, do believe in absolute truth. They simply use our nihilistic philosophies as a weapon against us. It's interesting ponder whether the postmodernists do, in fact, believe there is objective truth, or whether, perhaps, they have invented the idea as a way to destroy the West.
From Little Green Footballs:
The “Palestine” lovers are so concerned with a right to a state for a completely new and unprecedented nationality, whereas for some reason the right to self-determination for the world’s oldest nationality— one which has acted, by any moral barometer, with infinitely more compassion, civilization, and care for human life than the new-fangled murderous one he is championing—seems to be extremely limited if it exists at all.
That is the classic definition of anti-Semitism: one standard for everyone else, and then an impossible one for the Jews.
I guess he's not an "apostate" after all:
KABUL, Afghanistan - An Afghan court on Sunday dismissed a case against a man who converted from Islam to Christianity because of a lack of evidence, and he will be released soon, an official said.
The official told The Associated Press that the case had been returned to the prosecutors for more investigation, but that in the meantime, Abdul Rahman would be released.
"The court dismissed today the case against Abdul Rahman for a lack of information and a lot of legal gaps in the case," the official said Sunday, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter.
"The decision about his release will be taken possibly tomorrow," he added.
Honestly, while I am happy that he is being released, this sounds like bullshit to me. They dropped the case because of legal gaps in the case?
I think we can surmise that means they do not agree that they were doing anything wrong, which, of course, means this will happen again.
Consider Afghanistan a Fear Society, not a Free Society. People in Afghanistan live under threat of physical intimidation, and death, for disagreeing with the government.
According to writings of Natan Sharansky, author of The Case For Democracy, one of George Bush's favorite books, Afghanistan is not a free country.
We need to be clear with ourselves about that, because if we are not we will sit back, instead of continuing to apply the intense pressure that will be needed to drag them kicking and screaming into the modern world.
By the way, it sounds to me like some international force had better be there to protect this guy when he is released.
Here is another paragraph from the AP article:
Earlier Sunday he was moved to a notorious maximum-security prison outside Kabul that is also home to hundreds of Taliban and al-Qaida militants. The move to Policharki Prison came after detainees threatened his life at an overcrowded police holding facility in central Kabul, a court official said on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to the media.
This guys life is still in danger.