Never Again and Again
and Again and Again

click.jpg

Saturday, November 17, 2007

Filip DeWinter Addresses The Concern Over His Relationship With Jean-Marie Le Pen


The one thing that has most stuck in my craw, about the recent controversy over the Center for Vigilant Freedom's Counter-Jihad Conference being sponsored by the Vlaams Belang, is that VB's leader, Filip DeWinter, seems to have a special affection for French National Front Leader, Jean-Marie Le Pen. Indeed, DeWinter has a photofraph of himself, with Le Pen, which is prominently displayed on his bookshelf in his very own living room.
The prominent essayist Fjordman is also none too happy about DeWinter's affiliation with Le Pen, and thereby, Fjordman questions the wisdom of CVF associating themselves with DeWinter.

Today, I noticed that Christine at Center for Vigilant Freedom has posted an interview wherein DeWinter addresses this issue. Check it out:


Q: You are said to have on your desk two pictures in which you are shaking hands with Le Pen and Haider. Why display those two photos? What does it say about you that you have selected those two pictures to highlight on your desk?

A: Such photo’s exist of course. But they are not on display in my office.

We have contacts with Haiders en Le Pens parties. On issues as immigration, we even have common ground. But we don’t like Haiders kowtowing for dictators as Saddam Hoessein or Khadaffi.

We don’t like Le Pens typically French views of centralisation, we don’t like his anti-Americanism and we absolutely don’t like his anti-Jewish provocations. Just as almost all French politicians, he has this disastrous illusion that it’s France’s destiny to have a special, privileged relation with the Islamic world.

This explains the French’s biased political position against Israel. This explains their alliance with Saddam Hoessein, their support of Khomeini when he was preparing to topple the shah.

Le Pen shares this views, and we don’t like that at all. He is not the monster the leftists say he is. But I am not identifying with him. We are certainly no holocaust deniers. In Belgian parliament we supported the law who punishes holocaust denial. Recently we even published an article in our party magazine about Raoul Wallenberg, who saved ten of thousands of Hungarian Jews.

In our party magazine, we repeatedly denounced arsons against synagogues and violence and racist insults against Jewish people, even when most of the mainstream press kept silent about this, because the perpetrators were Muslim youths.

That’s an indication too: our party is very strong in Antwerp. We have more than 100,000 voters there. There were many attacks against Jews in Antwerp: a car bomb, a grenade attack on a school bus with Jewish children, some murders and attempted murders, and many, many cases of harassing, insult and intimidation. But the perpetrators were invariably Muslim youths or foreign Muslim terrorists.

In thirty years, not one of our militants ever committed even one anti-Semitic act. These are not empty words. These are facts. You can check them. Ask the Jews in Antwerp. This is at least a strong indication that we are no anti-Semites.

Mr. Marinower says we are evil guys, just pretending to be decent right-wingers. People can play a misleading role for some years. But is it possible that tens of thousands of people play a misleading role for almost thirty years?


Ok, he certainly makes good points. However, his answer that,

"Such photo’s exist of course. But they are not on display in my office..."

is an obfuscation. True, the photo is not in his office. Instead, the fact is, the photo is displayed, as I said, prominently in his living room. Here, watch this video:






If he has nothing to hide, then why the obfuscation?

Now, I would like nothing better than to believe that the Vlaams Belang is a party full of Freedom-loving counter-Jihadis like all us perfect people here at IBA.

;-)

But, you know what? I don't have any pictures of myself with David Duke sitting on my mantle.
At the very least, one would think that, as a prominent politician in a major Western country, DeWinter would have the sophitication to understand that he must distance himself from the likes of Haider and Le Pen. But, DeWinter possesses no such sophisitication.
Therefore, one must wonder why it is that the Center for Vigilant Freedom would believe this man to be a worthy ally?

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 6 Comments

Those Pesky Fascists

Counterjihad Brussels 2007

I spent the months of July through October preparing for and attending Counterjihad Brussels 2007. I’ve spent the last three weeks coping with the crisis brought on — as a result of the Brussels conference — by the unreasonable and unfounded allegations against Vlaams Belang and Sverigedemokraterna.

To make a long story short: I’ve been busy, and haven’t been paying much attention to the Infidel Bloggers Alliance for a while.

Now I come to find out that there is plenty of antagonism against Vlaams Belang and Sverigedemokraterna here. I find an animus against the two most courageous European political parties, parties that are striving vigorously against the political currents in their countries to engage in a true praxis of Counterjihad, instead of simply the blah-blah-blah that we all take part in here. They get arrested and assaulted for what they do. Some of them could have been arrested solely for what they were saying in that meeting room of the European Parliament. Paul Belien, although not a member of any political party, has been detained by the Belgian police several times for his political views.

I talk the talk, but they walk the walk.

I don’t want to try to refute specific allegations here. The chance having any effect would be slim There are already extensive refutations at the CVF blog for anyone who cares to scroll down and look. None of the refuting information — the proofs of disinformation, the demonstration of biased sources, the fact that guilt by association is being alleged — has been acknowledged by those who throw out these charges.

So… I might as well be yelling into a closet, but here goes.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

I’m going to concentrate on Vlaams Belang, since I recently spent a lot of time visiting with them in Antwerp and Brussels, particularly in their party offices in the Flemish Parliament.

VB are a popular party, the largest single party in the Flemish Parliament. Their primary mission is the independence of Flanders, but they also take strong stands on civil liberties, shrinking the size of government, and free markets. Their record in Belgium and the EU Parliament is vigorous and consistent on these issues.

So styling them as “fascist” is a bit of a stretch. Fascists, after all — assuming the word has any meaning — are syndicalists, whose political philosophy envisions a partnership between the state and business. A fascist polity involves massive state control of business and private affairs as well as the suppression of free speech, and all for the good of Il Popolo. Envision a kind of upscale Mafia controlling the affairs of the country, and you’ve got the fascistic ideal. Since it relies on intense corporate nationalism, and involves a heavily controlled state on behalf of the common people, it’s rightfully called — surprise! — National Socialism.

It’s difficult to shoehorn Vlaams Belang into any kind of “fascist” container, since their publicly-declared and oft-repeated positions are diametrically opposed to those of fascism. They are on the “far right” by European standards — but fascist?

However, let’s be honest — when VB are tarred with the “fascist” brush, it’s not the traditional, dictionary definition of “fascist” that the wielders of the brush mean to imply.

What they really mean is “racist”. Vlaams Belang are supposedly racists — everybody knows that — hence they are “fascists”.

It’s the same reason why I’m called a fascist.

I’m a conservative with a strong leaning towards libertarianism. I believe that we live under a regime that has abrogated the Constitution; that the power of the federal government is constitutionally limited to national defense, protecting the borders, maintaining the currency, and regulating interstate commerce; and that all other federal functions are a usurpation of the rights of the people as guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment.

I believe in the legalization of all drugs. I believe that homosexuals should be left alone by the state.

And yet I’m a fascist. It’s a funny old world, isn’t it?

But what’s really meant is that I’m a racist. I’m an Islamophobe, therefore a xenophobe, therefore a racist, therefore a fascist. Q.E.D.

And if the racist tendencies can be specifically “proven” to include anti-Semitism, the accused party moves from “fascist” to “neo-Nazi”.

That’s what has happened to Vlaams Belang. In Europe, any party that is conservative is going to be styled a “neo-Nazi” party. It’s unavoidable; if you’re not a welfare-state multicultural socialist of the acceptable kind, then you’re a neo-Nazi. There are no other categories available, unless you want to be a Green.

There are still a fair number of people in Europe who hate Jews, most of them either Muslims or Leftists (or both). The vast majority anti-Semitic incidents in Europe are perpetrated by Muslims or the extreme Left.

But even so, if you’re a European right-winger, you are bound to have run into, talked to, or been in the same room with someone who hates Jews. A patriotic anti-Semite will inevitably gravitate towards the right, because that will be the closest to his comfort zone. If he possibly can, he will find a party made up entirely of fellow Jew-haters, but, if not, he will stay close to other varieties of conservatives.

And here’s where the allegations against Vlaams Belang simply don’t make sense: there are actual, avowed anti-Semitic parties in Flanders. They are marginal and ludicrous from a mainstream point of view, but they exist. Why would any self-respecting anti-Semite take up with a Jew-lover like Filip Dewinter when he can have a worthy heir of Adolf Hitler instead?

Remember, Vlaams Belang is the only pro-Israel party in Flanders. They openly seek and gain support of the Orthodox community in Antwerp. They repeatedly go on the record with these positions.

How could any self-respecting Jew-hater ever vote for them?

I was in the their party offices for a long time when I was in Brussels. I had to cool my heels for a couple of hours, so I spent a while looking at their posters, pamphlets, and other campaign literature. I did my best to make sense of the Dutch, and when I couldn’t, I asked for help from Paul or Bart or one of the secretaries.

The party’s positions include a patriotic separatism, a vigorous opposition to mass immigration, and the demand that immigrants in Flanders assimilate to their host country’s culture. If there is an anti-Semitic agenda, it is well-concealed.

The anti-immigrant position is all that’s required to gain you the “fascist” and “neo-Nazi” labels; the anti-Semitic allegations have then to be based on old photos, guilt-by-association charges, and similar tenuous connections.

“Ah, Baron,” you say, “but these Jew-hating Vlaams Belang guys are simply very, very clever at hiding their real intentions from everyone until they gain power. Then the pretense will be over!”

So let me see if I’ve got this straight…

Vlaams Belang have fooled me. They’ve fooled hundreds of thousands of Flemish voters. They’ve fooled the Jews of Antwerp.

And yet somehow a handful of Americans — who by their own admission remain largely ignorant of affairs in Flanders and most of the rest of Europe — have managed to pierce the veil with their canny eyesight and perceive the Truth!

I’m sorry, but that just doesn’t cut it.

In fact, the only thing that will cut it is Occam’s razor.

In order to avoid needlessly multiplying entities, I must assume:

  • That most anti-Semites would not involve themselves with Vlaams Belang, since there are other parties that more closely meet their needs;
  • That the people of Flanders vote for Vlaams Belang not because they are racists or hate Jews, but because they are devoted to their traditional culture and long for an independent Flanders;
  • That there may be people in Vlaams Belang who have at one time or another been associated or sympathized with anti-Semitism, but that they have been purged, changed their views with the passage of time, or now find other issues more important, and thus have pragmatically revised their positions;
  • That many of the Jews of Flanders support Vlaams Belang because they share VB’s concern with unlimited Muslim immigration, and believe that the most dangerous anti-Semites in their country are Muslims; and
  • That the European left has so demonized Vlaams Belang and propagated so much disinformation about it that it is almost impossible to avoid the “neo-Nazi” allegations, even though the number of verified instances of such things is laughably small, much smaller than the huge number of incidents openly committed by leftists and Muslims.

There is an overwhelming need to find reliable democratic allies in the struggle against the Islamists, and the window of opportunity for taking action will close soon. The triviality of the accusations leveled at Vlaams Belang argues against shunning them. Occam’s razor leads me to the inevitable conclusion that a working relationship with Vlaams Belang as a partner in the Counterjihad is not only a practical necessity, but also morally sound.

The “neo-Nazi” and “Fascist” charges are absurd. The vast majority of Europeans do not take the neo-Nazis seriously; they regard them as ludicrous and silly. No neo-Nazi party is going to come to power via the ballot box.

The only way fascists will take control is if the EU and the Muslims working in tandem conspire to put them there.

These fears are phantoms. People who are obsessed with them are chasing their own shadows.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Baron Bodissey at permanent link# 2 Comments

Separatist Muslim "Homeland" in the Philippines



So, it has come to this:
The Philippines government says it has reached an agreement with the country's main Islamic separatist group on boundaries for a Muslim homeland.

Government negotiator Rodolfo Garcia said "demarcation" was agreed after two days of talks in Malaysia with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF).

Officials say the deal in Kuala Lumpur could pave the way for a final peace deal between the two sides next year.

MILF has been fighting for decades over land in the southern Mindanao region.

Negotiators are hopeful that a permanent peace agreement can be sealed by the middle of next year.
Yeah, good luck with that peace agreement.
The two sides did not disclose the shape of the new agreed borders, but the talks' Malaysian hosts said the territory would be greater than the present autonomous region in Mindanao.

Mr Garcia said the borders agreement was a "significant breakthrough".

MILF chief negotiator Mohagher Iqbal told the AFP news agency his side hoped "to find closure to the centuries-old problem in Mindanao which various regimes in Manila have not solved".

Formal talks began in 2003 after MILF, which is thought to have around 12,000 members, signed a fragile truce with President Gloria Arroyo's government.

It is the largest of several Muslim separatist groups battling the government in the predominantly Catholic country.

Analysts say the Philippine and US governments hope a peace settlement with MILF could stop the Mindanao region becoming a base for militants linked to al-Qaeda.
Since when has any such surrender to militant Muslims resulted in any form of peace other than that which forces dhimmitude upon non-Muslims?

Call this agreement what you like. I see it as surrender. Maybe I'm wrong?

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch at permanent link# 0 Comments

Massive explosion at Iranian missile site

That's what they get for manufacturing weapons of death:
On Tuesday, a series of explosions rocked the Parchin military complex, 30 km. south of Tehran, where missiles, including cruise missiles, are manufactured. The report, which came from an Iranian resistance website, said that several military personnel at the site were injured. The explosions reportedly started in the missile industries section of the complex. Shrapnel from the explosions hit other sections, and eight warehouses were engulfed in flames.
That's good news, as those death builders are asking for it, but this doesn't mean that danger has been averted. The military facility where these were being built may not be the only place where missile manufacturing is done, and they could very easily stand even the destroyed parts erect again. That's exactly why an assault needs to be carried out.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Avi Green at permanent link# 0 Comments

The Nuisance Of Islam Is Nothing Compared To Immigration Itself


The above headline is a quote from a commenter at Brussels Journal.

Now, certainly, a commenter at Brussels Journal does not necessarily reflect any opinion held by BJ or any or its editors, or contributors.

So why, then, do I use it as a title? Because, this comment, from a guy who calls himself Anti-Europeanism, is a prime example of what I am criticizing when I criticize European Ethnic Nationalism.

Not only does this guy believe that immigration is the real issue which is plaguing Europe, but he believes Islam is a mere "nuisance."

In fact, he is in complete denial. Look at what he writes in his next sentence:


... muslim immigrants are not out to destroy us, immigration enthusiasts are.


This is willful ignorance taken to the extreme of the complete denial of one's true enemy.
If European immigration enthusiasts are anything like those in America, then there are a combination of forces at work; big business, naiive altruistic tendencies, a desire on the part of politicians for more voters in their pockets, etc.

But, few immigration enthusiasts are actually "out to destroy us." Or, if they are, they are keeping it a secret.

Muslims, on the other hand, make no secret of the fact that they do, indeed, want to destroy us. They call for the institution of Sharia law in the West. They call for Jihad against the West. They support Osama Bin Laden, and other terrorists. Etc. Etc. Etc.

The problem with Europe Ethnic Nationalism is that it seems to pop up whenever Europeans are under pressure. I will give three examples:

1) The Crusades: The reason for the Crusades was that Muslims had conquered Jersusalem. Pope Innocent called for Christian warriors to drive into Jerusalem and take the city back. They did so, but once they were there, they went about killing the inhabitants of the Holy City, whether they be Muslim or Jew, if they did not convert.

2) The Expulsion of the Moors (which culminated in 1492) - Europe had been under pressure from Islam since the 700's. However, when they got fed up, they really got fed up. The culmination of the Expulsion of the Moors occurred concurrently with two other major events; the Expulsion of the Jews, and the Spanish Inquisition. All three events reached their peak in 1492, and the result was not only a lot of Muslims vanquished, but also a lot of dead Jews and "Christian heretics."

3) Germany 1920's-1945 - the German people were left in ruins after WWII. The runaway inflation of the 1920's made things even worse. The Germans felt demoralized and deflated, as if their own birthright had been stolen from them. Hitler restored the confidence of German citizens using hatred as one of the main mechanisms. Jews, Gypsies, retarded people, and others were made to pay for the Germans own sense of weakness.

Similarly, what we find today is a Europe once again under massive pressure from Islam. But, are Europeans reacting to this pressure by recognizing their enemy and going after him, and him only? No, we are seeing two things occurring;

1) The Left are blaming the Israel lobby

2) The Right are blaming immigration

I have family in Europe and, to tell the truth, they blame both.
No one with a powerful voice is consistently putting the fault exactly where it lies: Islam.

So, given the history of Europe, and the way events are taking shape now, what do you think is going to happen?

Will Europe recognize that it's problems emanate from the radical Muslims in their midst? Will they, then, take the steps necessary to remove those Muslims from their population? Or, will Europe use the bizarre shotgun approach which they have consistently used throughout their history? Will, somehow, Jews and immigrants be caught up in the violence as well?
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 4 Comments

French National Anthem Booed By French "Youths"


The message to those of us who live in the West is they really do hate us. How many times do they have to boo our natioal anthem, curse our religion, blow up our trains, planes and buildings, before we will understand?

This report is from the French blog No Pasaran:


Last night at the Stade de France, France's showcase stadium in Saint Denis (the notorious Nine-Three), France and Morocco played a 2-2 tie. Before the match, the French national anthem was widely booed by the French youths in attendance. French defender William Gallas, commenting the total absence of French flags in a sea of waving Moroccan flags, stated "I thought I was in Morocco."



Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 3 Comments

Storm Track Infiltration: Disgruntled Muslim Prisoners Fed Up with Islamic Indoctrination

It’s well know that the Saudi money supported Wahhabi sect has a monopoly on Muslim chaplaincies behind bars and little is being done about it by us. So moderate Muslim prisoners are taking matters into their own hands.

Now that’s a switch.

Read the rest at The Gathering Storm.

Bookmark and Share
posted by WC at permanent link# 0 Comments

Has America Offered Israel A Land For War Deal?


From Ted Belman (with thanks to Michael):



The internet magazine, Insight, has reported that the U.S. has offered Israel a "A Land For War" deal.

It seems that Rice, acting with the approval of Bush, has informed Olmert that if Israel cedes Judea and Samaria and most of Jerusalem, the US will launch a military strike against Iran.

This reminded me about a post on September 26/07 Are Palestine and Iran linked? Dov Weisglass reported they were. Read the post and comments.

Just today I had a conversation with Jerry Gordon on the likelihood of the US bombing Iran rather than living with the bomb. We used to expect the former but now suspect the latter.

The question arises can Israel's willingness to create Palestine be the tipping point that commits the US to bomb Iran?

I never thought that the creation of the coalition of the losers that Rice talks about to confront Iran was of any moment. To suggest it, was merely to apply pressure on Israel. But the US is not worried about bombing Iran. It doesn't need a coalition for that. An agreement beforehand with this coalition though, might help in reducing the blowback all over the world that the US and EU are so worried about.

Can it be that Palestine really is the tipping point?

Would it really help the US to deal with the fallout.

Can it be that a majority of Jewish Israelis would accept the Saudi Plan, as horrendous as it is, as preferable to having to deal with an Iranian bomb?

Or
is it more likely that the acceptance of this lopsided deal in which Israel gives everything for a hudna only, is the price Iran is demanding for abandonning nuclear weapons and a price that the US is willing to force Israel to pay?

THUS IT IS REALLY A "PALESTINE FOR THE BOMB" DEAL.

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 0 Comments

FIrst Law of Russian Foreign Policy Strikes Again

I have held forth on this before.
The First Law of Russian Foreign Policy:
Anything which hurts the USA and its people -
is good for Russia
in the big zero sum great game that doesn't exist.
EVEN IF that means a nuclear detonation in Israel
or the USA
since they have judged
that a full scale nuclear war will not break out.


Report: Secret high tech torpedo from Russia transferred to Iran

A U.S. government report revealed last week that Russia provided Iran with secret high-technology related to a high-speed, rocket powered torpedo that Iran recently demonstrated.

The Shkval rocket powered torpedo was developed by Russian weapons researchers at facilities in Kyrgyzstan, or Kazakhstan and the technology was transferred with the knowledge of Moscow and those governments, said the unclassified report by the U.S. Open Source Center, an intelligence unit that analyzes foreign news media.

Shkval high-speed torpedo
The government-owned facilities connected to the Shkval development program had continuing contacts with Iran, and likely cooperated with illicit arms dealers to transfer the weapon or its documentation, the report said.

The report stated that published reports revealed that an international consulting firm called FarWest provided Iran with Shkval documents.

Iran’s navy in April 2006 conducted a test of a high-speed torpedo capable of moving underwater at speeds up to 100 meters per second.

The torpedo was assessed to be an Iranian version of the Shkval-E. Video of the test was widely reported in the West and the Pentagon discounted the development as Iranian propaganda.

shkval_deployment_w0004768.jpg

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 0 Comments

A Momentary End to the Complication

I’m a little weary of all the uproar, as I’m sure you are, so… for no particular reason…

Virginia fall

We finally got some rain, and the colors came out a little bit. This is what our side yard looked like a couple of days ago, before the wind came in and plucked all the leaves off the trees.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The Lack of Repose
by Wallace Stevens


A young man seated at his table
Holds in his hand a book you have never written
Staring at the secretions of the words as
They reveal themselves.

It is not midnight. It is mid-day,
The young man is well-disclosed, one of the gang,
Andrew Jackson Something. But this book
Is a cloud in which a voice mumbles.

It is a ghost that inhabits a cloud,
But a ghost for Andrew, not lean, catarrhal
And pallid. It is the grandfather he liked,
With an understanding compounded by death

And the associations beyond death, even if only
Time. What a thing it is to believe that
One understands, in the intense disclosures
Of a parent in the French sense.

And not yet to have written a book in which
One is already a grandfather and to have put there
A few sounds of meaning, a momentary end
To the complication, is good, is a good.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Baron Bodissey at permanent link# 0 Comments

Nazi or Communist?

As most readers already know, ever since the Counterjihad conference in Brussels ended last month, there has been a non-stop Whac-a-Mole game of accusations against the Flemish separatist party Vlaams Belang. Every time a new “neo-Nazi” mole of allegation pops up, it gets whacked back down. But instantly another one takes its place, and the old one is forgotten.

One of the remaining unwhacked moles has been a photo taken in 1992 showing a current EU Parliament MEP from Vlaams Belang named Koenraad Dillen with the 84-year-old ex-Nazi officer Léon Degrelle. Christine of CVF was able to locate Mr. Dillen today and ask him about the photo. Here is his response:

Yes I met LD on 11th of July 1992. I was 27 years old at the time.

I finished my studies in 1987 with a paper on the French writer Robert Brasillach. The director of my thesis was a left wing professor of literature, named George Adé. He died in 1992. I got “maxima cum laude” with my thesis.

Before the war, Robert Brasillach published a book on “Léon Degrelle et l’avenir de Rex”. Since my paper deals a lot with Brasillach and Belgium, I took a genuine interest in Degrelle and wrote about him. He was an important figure in prewar politics and played a major role during the war years. After the war, in exile, he continued his life in Spain as a writer.

Soldier on the eastern front, Degrelle was convicted, in absentia, for high treason. But he was never charged with war crimes.

I had neither sympathy, nor animosity for Degrelle in 1992. He was 84 years old at the time. He interested me as a person who played a historical role. No more, no less. I had no political functions at the time.

In May 1992, I started a weekly column on French intellectual life and politics in the newspaper ‘t’ Pallieterke. I still write my article every week. So I have a partly job as a journalist.

Degrelle talked to me. He explained me for example, why Franco did extradite Pierre Laval, the prime minister of collaborating France who was executed by De Gaulle and not him, the SS-general. (“Because I was Catholic, and Laval not”.) It was an interesting testimony, never published in any book. Why should I be blamed? I had a few drinks on his terrace. Fifty years after the war, it was not up to me to act as an attorney general ! He signed some books and photos. Did I have to refuse? I met the former Bolshevik commissar Lew Kopelev in 1987. He signed his memories for me. Does it make me a communist?

I published a book on [corrected] European Commissioner Louis Michel and on the accession to European Union of Turkey. A major book on François Mitterrand — on which I work since three years — will follow in some months. I had interviewed and toasted with many French socialists — e.g. the former minister of Foreign Affairs Roland Dumas. It doesn’t make me a socialist.

As we all know, Mr. Dillen could claim to be a Communist and wear Lenin pins and hammer-and-sickle insignia as much as he liked, and no one would mind except for a few fascists like us. A taint of Bolshevism does no harm to a politician or a journalist; in fact, it confers upon him that cachet of self-righteous and high-minded social justice that is so dear to the Left. Never mind the hundred million corpses left behind by Communism: if you want to make an omelet, you have to etc blah yak.

But don’t get within a mile of anyone who even knew a Nazi — then you’re dead meat.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

It’s unfortunate that we have to endure all this folderol about VB, because it’s heartening to read about what they’re doing in the European Parliament. Christine has collected some recent examples of Mr. Dillen’s speeches as an MEP; some excerpts are included below:

In terms of human rights, democracy and good governance, this forum is a faithful reflection of official EU policy and utterly fails to send out a powerful signal. A signal that demonstrates to the relevant countries that a refusal to respect human rights and apply democratic principles should be reciprocated with a reduction, or even scrapping, of all forms of development aid.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

In recent years, we have seen some striking examples of the deliberate deafness of official Europe. In France and the Netherlands, in democratic referendums, the people said ‘no’ to the European super state. Despite this, the German Presidency simply carries on down the path already chosen. For Angela Merkel, and I am afraid for you as a Member of the European Council, the will of the people does not count. All opinion polls show that whilst the Europeans want to be on friendly terms with the Turks, they do not want a non-European and Islamic country to join our Union. Again, the pre-determined path is simply followed.

I should like to finish off by saying to Mr Prodi that the government of my country brought itself into disrepute last week by refusing, for commercial reasons, to allow the Dalai Lama to visit Belgium. Nobody wants to offend China. It is very unfortunate that the rule in these situations seems to be that of Erst das Fressen und dann die Moral . I therefore hope that, within the European Council, you will speak up to focus on the attitude of your government which, although it likes to wax lyrical about human rights, when the chips are down, lets its own economic interests prevail, and also to denounce Belgium in this matter. If Europe is serious about defending human rights, it should also have the courage to denounce the hypocrisy of some Member States.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The sanctimonious line is that a mutually acceptable solution must be found for Tibet’s future. To say that is to make victim and executioner equal partners in dialogue. It became once again evident on whose side the EU is when in November 2005, the Chinese President, Hu Jintao, was received with much pomp and circumstance across Europe, yet it had, in fact, been he who perpetrated serious human rights violations when he was Secretary of Tibet’s Communist Party between December 1988 and March 1992.

The Tibet issue once again demonstrates that European rhetoric all too often amounts to nothing but moral wrapping paper and that in reality, only economic interests matter. We must continue to have the courage to denounce the cowardice and sanctimoniousness of this Europe, of this mercantile Europe that chooses to side with the oppressors to the detriment of innocent peoples.

Does this sound like someone we should shun? An unreconstructed neo-Nazi racist white supremacist?

Christine has more quotes over at the CVF blog.

Judge for yourself.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Baron Bodissey at permanent link# 13 Comments

Friday, November 16, 2007

Iran wants Western "apology" after IAEA report


Thumbnail image for kiss_my.jpg
TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran called on its Western foes on Friday to apologize to the Islamic Republic after the release of a U.N. nuclear agency report which Tehran said showed it had been telling the truth about its atomic plans, according to state media.

whoopsi.....

The International Atomic Energy Agency also said restrictions the Iranians put on U.N. inspectors two years ago mean it still cannot rule out that Iran has a secret weapons program, as suspected by Washington and its allies.

An Iranian envoy denounced the idea of further U.N. Security Council sanctions, saying the IAEA assessment shows it is cooperating.

The United States and Britain noted the report confirmed that Iran continues to ignore the Security Council's demands that it suspend uranium enrichment until questions about the nuclear program's intent are resolved.

Whoopsi....

the_precious2.jpg

VIENNA, Austria — Iran has met a key demand of the U.N. nuclear agency, handing over long-sought blueprints showing how to mold uranium metal into the shape of warheads, diplomats said Tuesday.

Iran's decision to release the documents, which were seen by U.N. inspectors two years ago, was seen as a concession designed to head off the threat of new U.N. sanctions.

But the diplomats said Tehran has failed to meet other requests made by the International Atomic Energy Agency in its attempts to end nearly two decades of nuclear secrecy on the part of Iran.The agency has been seeking possession of the blueprints since 2005, when it stumbled upon them among a batch of other documents during its examination of suspect Iranian nuclear activities. While agency inspectors had been allowed to examine them in the country, Tehran had up to now refused to let the IAEA have a copy for closer perusal.

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 0 Comments

"Shut Up" vs. "Shut Up"

Guest Commentary by Edward Cline:

An interesting thing happened in Chile last week: the king of Spain asked a dictator to “shut up.”

According to an Associated Press item of November 12, “Spain’s king backed on ‘shut up’ comments,” Hugo Chavez, the Bœotian tyrant of Venezuela, kept interrupting Spain’s current prime minister, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, during his remarks at the Ibero-American summit in Santiago. When Zapatero tried to give him a lesson in manners, Chavez kept talking off-microphone.

At which point, King Juan Carlos, seated next to Zapatero, leaned forward and asked, for the whole audience to hear, “Por que no te callas?” (Why don’t you shut up?) Then the monarch rose and left the room.

That is what the British used to call “showing one’s back,” or expressing contempt. The snub and lesson in manners, however, were lost on Chavez. What he refused to stop talking about was his allegation that both Juan Carlos and former prime minister Jose Maria Aznar somehow backed the coup in 2002 that briefly removed Chavez from power in Caracas. (Aznar, a pro-American who sent troops to join the U.S. in Iraq and Afghanistan, lost office in the elections following the Madrid train bombing in March 2004. Spanish troops were subsequently withdrawn by the leftist government in a craven act of submission to Islamists.)

“Chavez repeatedly called Aznar a ‘fascist’ in an address at the summit of leaders from Latin America, Spain and Portugal.” It was Aznar that Zapatero was attempting to defend during Chavez’s goonish behavior.

“During the two-day coup in April 2002, Aznar called interim president Pedro Carmona, and the Spanish ambassador to Venezuela met with Carmona. Chavez was restored to power after massive street protests.

“Aznar later told the Spanish Parliament he had discussed with Carmona arrangements for Chavez to go to Cuba. Aznar’s party had insisted, however, that the conservative government then in power did not back the coup.

“But Spain’s current Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos charged in December 2004 that Aznar had in fact given the putsch his diplomatic blessing. Moratinos cited diplomatic cables from the period and other government documents.”

Of course, giving a “blessing” to the ouster of a dictator must be distinguished from giving the project active backing. It would have been to Spain’s everlasting credit had Aznar and the king proclaimed for everyone to hear, “Throw the bum out!” (The U.S., with private oil interests in Venezuela, didn’t lift a finger to help the opposition, and is paying the price for such “neutral” non-interference.)

And Juan Carlos, instead of asking the bum to shut his offending trap, should have engaged Chavez in polite repartee: “Señor Chavez, please define for us ‘fascist,’ and descant why we should not insult you with the appellation. Tu haber aquél estilo.” (You suit the style.)

Meanwhile, back in the U.S., the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) found another talk show to target for silencing, Michael Savage’s nationally syndicated radio program, which CAIR wishes to shut up.

The Cybercast News Service on November 9 reported that:

“On November 1, CAIR urged ‘radio listeners of all faiths’ to contact companies that advertise on ‘The Savage Nation’ to complain about an ‘anti-Muslim tirade’ on Savage’s Oct. 29 program. (CAIR periodically issues ‘incitement alerts,’ urging its members to contact various media outlets to express their concerns about ‘Islamophobic attitudes.’)”

“On Nov. 2, CAIR’s Minnesota chapter announced that three companies in that state had pulled their advertisements from ‘The Savage Nation.’” One of them was Citrix Systems, a computer systems application company. Another company, however, Swiss America, increased its ads.”

CAIR Communications Coordinator Amina Rubin announced Citrix’s submission together with this statement:

“We urge other local and national companies running ads on Savage’s program to follow Citrix’s example in support of religious tolerance.”

The question to ask is: What has “religious tolerance” to do with Michael Savage’s First Amendment free speech right? Savage cannot “tolerate” Islam. Ergo, he has a right to speak against it. He has not taken any physical action to express his “intolerance,” such as blowing up mosques, kidnapping imams, or ambushing Muslims with a hunting rifle as they do their full-body genuflections to Allah. Those kinds of actions lately have been the exclusive modus operendi of Muslim “extremists” in their own campaign of “religious tolerance.”

“Free speech is a precious right that we fully support and strive to protect,” said Rubin in his release. “We are not seeking to curb Mr. Savage’s freedom of speech, but to demonstrate that Americans and American companies will not tolerate hatred and bigotry.”

So, the best way to not “tolerate” hatred or bigotry in speech or in print is not to listen to it or read it. But the “package deal” is the implication that Savage’s commentaries on Islam constitute “hatred” and “bigotry.” Considering the nature of Islam and the subservient psychological adherence to it demanded of Muslims, Savage is right to be concerned – indeed, angry enough to occasionally rant against it – that it is an alien presence in a nation that values independence of thought and the freedom of anyone to listen to anyone’s opinions or views without hindrance or censor.

Regardless of the rationality or its lack in Savage’s or anyone else’s public commentaries, CAIR and its companion Muslim organizations fear any level of criticism of Islam, particularly criticism that correctly identifies it as a barbarous creed of conquest and intolerance, a creed whose inherent political nature has not been emasculated by a separation of state and religious belief. This has happened to other religious beliefs. Do the Presbyterians or Methodists have an organization that campaigns to silence men who question or mock their specific religious tenets? No.

(Although that separation is crumbling as both the Christian right and the socialist left have regularly invoked God and are actually beginning to become indistinguishable. Observe the current campaign for the White House. Do any of the candidates differ in any fundamental way? No. They are all for sustaining the welfare state or expanding it, and call for sacrifices and selflessness as political virtues. If there is any difference between the candidates, it is in the degree of blatant advocacy and shrillness.)

What CAIR’s thought police wish is for American non-Muslims to remain ignorant of Islam and the political ambitions of its shady proponents while they inveigle their way into the political process and the culture. It is rational criticism of Islam that CAIR’s publicists and “intellectual cops” wish to suppress.

Have Savage’s radio commentaries “incited” his listeners to act Ku Klux Klan-style against Muslims? Or Rush Limbaugh’s? Or Michael Graham’s? If such incidents ever occurred, one can be sure that our liberal, pro-Islam news media would broadcast them immediately. That such incidents have not been reported, speaks for their non-occurrence. No one is trying to obstruct the freedom of speech of Muslims, though Muslims certainly have a record of obstructing that of anyone who attempts to practice it on radio or at universities.

What CAIR’s campaign amounts to is what Ayn Rand called the “smear,” in this instance labeling any critic of Islam, especially its most articulate critics, such as Daniel Pipes and Steve Emerson, a “xenophobe,” “racist,” “fascist,” or “bigot.” In this campaign the Islamists have an invaluable weapon, irrational, rights-negating “hate speech” laws, which are founded not on any actual criminal fact or intent, but on sheer emotion. To risk offending someone’s religious sensibilities, or hurt his “feelings,” is to court fines or imprisonment or both. The enforcement of these insidious laws has been sketchy in the U.S., but in Europe their application is de rigueur, which partly accounts for the decline of Europe and its gradual Islamification.

For a revealing article on how much the Islamists have borrowed from their old friends the Nazis in the way of waging war on the West, aside from their political tactics, see Paul Belien’s Washington Times article of November 7, “Nazis and Islamists.” His opening sentence is: “During the Second World War, the Nazis worked on plans to build the ‘Amerikabomber,’ an airplane specially devised to fly suicide missions into Manhattan’s skyscrapers.” Sound familiar? Hitler thought of it first, not Osama bin Laden or Mohammed Atta. The source of this information is no less than the diary of Albert Speer, Hitler’s armaments chief.

Finally, an example of successful suppression of the freedom of speech can be found in Mainland China, whose 30,000 Internet cops are assisted by American companies such as Yahoo, Cisco, Skype, and Microsoft, whose technologies enable the government to ban “pro-democracy” ideas from circulation and to detect, imprison, and permanently shut up those who circulate them.

A Los Angeles Times article of November 8, “Yahoo isn’t the only villain,” reports that:

“Cisco is hardly alone in helping China keep the jackboot to the neck of its people. Skype, an EBay Inc. subsidiary, helps the Chinese government monitor and censor text messaging. Microsoft Corp. likewise is a willing conscript in China’s Internet policing army, as Bill Gates’ minions regularly cleanse the Chinese blogosphere. Google Inc.’s brainiacs, meanwhile, have built a special Chinese version of their powerful search engine to filter out things as diverse as the BBC, freeing Tibet and that four-letter word in China – democracy.”

Peter Navarro, author of the Times article, blames U.S. business schools for the amoral behavior of these companies. Fundamentally, he should have blamed, first, arch-pragmatist John Dewey, and then Immanuel Kant, whose philosophies underpin whatever “ethics” are taught in those business schools. As a measure of those “ethics,” note that these same morally clueless companies are at each others’ throats over the “rights” to software and operating systems, with them all ganging up on Microsoft, the giant that has caved in to American and European antitrust suits.

Commenting on the venality of the companies, whom he says claim they are advancing freedom of speech in China, instead of helping to punish it, Navarro wrote:

“What’s missing from the American corporate perspective is this bigger picture. The collaborative tools that U.S. corporations provide to spy on, and silence, the Chinese people are far more likely to help prop up a totalitarian regime than topple it.”

The “picture” is bigger than Navarro suspects. It is philosophical, and what is missing from it is reason.

Crossposted at The Dougout
Bookmark and Share
posted by Grant Jones at permanent link# 2 Comments

Oil And Dhimmitude

Interesting excerpt from this commentary over at The Daily Jot, the mission statement of which includes reporting and analyzing current events from a Biblical perspective:
The Saudi Arabian oil minister said there will be no discussion of increased oil production by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries at their upcoming meeting, meaning that OPEC will stand by and watch record oil prices drain the pocketbooks of American industry and citizens. Increased oil production by OPEC would bring relief to oil prices, which, in turn, would bring gasoline prices down. Instead, a 20-30 cent per gallon increase in gas prices can now be expected at pumps across the United States. This means that not only will prices go up at gas stations, but also the costs of goods transported, produced, and sold with the help of oil products will also rise substantially. Record oil prices be a reflection of an overall strategy of Islam to bring the United States into submission during jihad.

[...]

Dhimmitude is the Islamic system of governing populations conquered by jihad wars, encompassing all of the demographic, ethnic, and religious aspects of the political system. The word "dhimmitude" as a historical concept, was coined in 1983 to describe the legal and social conditions of Jews and Christians subjected to Islamic rule. Dhimmi was the name applied by the Arab-Muslim conquerors of indigenous non-Muslim populations who surrendered by a treaty, called a dhimma, to Muslim domination. All who are in submission to Islam are subject to Sharia law—the radical law of Islam.

Contemporary Islamists believe through dhimmi that when they have been given authority over something, that all of which they have been given is subject to them. For example, Islam receives permission to have a mosque in a town, then the entire town is under Islamic authority. If they have been given control over oil, then those who use the oil are subject to them....
Now, I don't regularly visit The Daily Jot. In fact, I found the above essay via a Google alert for "dhimmitude." Therefore, I don't know if I agree with all the interpretations espoused there. However, part of the last paragraph in the essay jumped out at me; therefore, I want to bring it to our attention here:
Contemporary Islamists believe through dhimmi that when they have been given authority over something, that all of which they have been given is subject to them....If they have been given control over oil, then those who use the oil are subject to them.
When I received my exorbitant heating bill, payment due in a few weeks (almost $800 for less than half a fill!), I certainly felt subject to blackmail, if not specifically pushed into a state of economic dhimmitude. Harvesting and burning my patch of woods in my living-room fireplace go only so far.

In the long run, my personal economic condition is of no importance. However, the global economy is now at the mercy of the oil sheikhs. According to this article in the Washington Post, the financial squeeze is on:
The biggest jump in gasoline prices in five months contributed to another elevated reading on consumer prices in October. With pump prices surging still, inflation is expected to be even worse in November.

The Labor Department reported Thursday that its Consumer Price Index rose by 0.3 percent last month. It was the second straight month at that level after prices had fallen by 0.1 percent in August and risen by 0.1 percent in July.

Economists said consumers should brace for a worse performance in November, given an even bigger increase in gasoline prices so far this month.

Labor Department economist Patrick Jackman said gasoline alone could add four-tenths of a percentage point to overall inflation in November.

[...]

Economists are concerned that rising energy prices will leave consumers with less money to spend on other items and will depress their spending, which accounts for two-thirds of economic activity. That would add to the list of problems already facing a slowing economy.

"Consumers are getting squeezed between falling house prices, rising mortgage payments and now rising oil prices," said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor's in New York....
Today, the following photo appeared above the fold in the business section of the Washington Post:


Caption:
Delegates pass a portrait of the late King Saud at OPEC's third summit in its 47 years, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
The twenty-first-century sword of Islam is control of the oil market. The following excerpt from this article accompanying the above picture bears out my contention:
Friday, November 16, 2007

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia -- In September 1960, after the mighty Standard Oil of New Jersey dictated a cut in the price it was willing to pay for Middle Eastern oil, an angry group of leaders from the region and Venezuela got together and founded the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries.

No one paid much attention.
Two months later, a 43-page CIA report on "Middle East Oil" devoted only four lines to the new group, according to Daniel Yergin's history "The Prize."

Few would dismiss OPEC with such brevity today. Its often-squabbling members have wrested control of their oil fields from the big oil companies. In the 1970s, they administered two price shocks to the world economy. And now, a decade after oil prices collapsed during a financial crisis in Asia, unrefined crude is hovering around its all-time inflation-adjusted peak, channeling as much as $700 billion a year to exporting nations and threatening to slow even the world's strongest economies.

That's why this weekend, when the heads of state from the 13-member group gather here for OPEC's third summit, it should be a celebration. Yet the summit's Saudi hosts worry that the meeting could turn into a political embarrassment.

Concerned about their image abroad, the Saudis do not want to be seen as the villains behind the new oil shock and are pointing fingers at speculators, institutional investors and traders. And they fret that feisty leaders such as Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez and Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad could turn the summit into an anti-American political circus rather than a sober reflection on OPEC's future.

[...]

There is a paradox about OPEC on the eve of its summit. Decades after its founding, higher prices are still central to the group's purpose. Yet OPEC's bland slogan for this meeting is "providing petroleum, promoting prosperity, protecting the planet."

OPEC Secretary General Abdullah bin Salem al-Badri insists that the organization doesn't have a target price and that it simply wants to stabilize the volatile oil market for consumers, producers and investors.

[...]

Ultimately, power in OPEC is wielded largely by Saudi Arabia, which holds the overwhelming majority of the cartel's spare production capacity. That, plus its willingness to trim production to boost prices, makes Saudi Arabia the group's swing producer.

"OPEC is an organization that is supposed to have a big say on the market," said a Saudi government strategist who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak for the government. "Instead, it is an organizational front for the policy of one country while giving a lot of publicity to countries that wouldn't get as much attention otherwise."

Other OPEC nations are producing near maximum capacity. War-torn Iraq is far short of its production peak. Its oil minister yesterday said production was up to 2.5 million barrels a day. About a third of Nigeria's production has been shut down by an insurgency. Venezuela's disputes with foreign oil companies and its own oil-patch professionals has led to sagging output. And Iran, due to its stubborn bargaining and international economic sanctions, has been unable to lure foreign expertise and investment to fully exploit its big oil and gas reserves.

Altogether, these developments have sliced at least 2.5 million barrels a day, or about 8 percent, from OPEC output without any organizational decision to restrict production.

The Saudi kingdom, however, is in the middle of boosting its production capacity to 12.5 million barrels a day by 2009, up from 11.3 million. Saudi oil minister Ali al-Naimi says that ample inventories indicate that there is no need to pump more oil now, though some Saudi officials say the kingdom will do that next month anyway to force down prices.

But if OPEC forecasts are wrong and consumption outpaces production, then OPEC could become no different from non-OPEC producers, simply pumping as fast as possible while the price finds a balancing point.

Economists say it is difficult for any cartel to survive for long. Artificially high prices tend to bring suppliers into a market or drive customers to substitute other materials. But in the oil industry, those alternative paths are lengthy ones. New oil supplies take years to find and develop, and they tend to be in more and more difficult places....
Thanks to lack of foresight (Something else?) on the part of our leaders, the West is being held hostage by oil. Loosing those shackles will take time. Meanwhile, our economy is in a squeeze, whether or not each of us yet feels that squeeze.

How much more belt-tightening is possible with OPEC in control? Another 9/11 isn't necessary. Economic jihad is in full play, and the West is about to pay a terrible price for its addiction to oil.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch at permanent link# 4 Comments

UN's IAEA Is Losing Track Of Iran's Nuclear Program


Gee, who woulda thunk that Mohammed El-Baradei would have trouble monitoring the Iranian nuclear program?


A report from International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei, said that while Iran has cooperated in several areas -- by providing access to declared nuclear material, documents and facilities -- it is withholding in others.

"It should be noted that, since early 2006, the agency has not received the type of information that Iran had previously been providing," the report said.

"As a result, the agency's knowledge about Iran's current nuclear program is diminishing."
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 3 Comments

Storm Track Disinformation: Who’s Really Fueling Muslim Tensions?

I’m getting sick and tired of the blatant disinformation that the Islamists are allowed to spew unchallenged in the Western media. It’s high time each and very one of these attempt at 'taqiyya' be challenged with the truth.

Case in point, the news that the Muslim Council of Britain warns that how Britain tackles terrorism and treats Islamic culture is recreating a society reminiscent of Nazi Germany and claiming that ‘negativity’ on Islam “fuels tension”.

Nowhere is it said in this or any other articles that quote the concerns of the Muslim Council of Britain it’s response to events that actually fuels the tensions against Islam that they speak of.

Here are just a few.

Read the rest at The Gathering Storm.

Bookmark and Share
posted by WC at permanent link# 2 Comments

Adolf Hitler on Islam

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
Photo of Adolph Hitler courtesy of Google Images

“Hitler had been much impressed by a scrap of history he had learned from a delegation of distinguished Arabs. When the Mohammedans attempted to penetrate beyons France into Central Europe during the eighth century, his visitors had told him, they had been driven back at the Battle of Tour. Had the Arabs won the battle, the world would be Mohammedan today. For theirs was a religion that believed in spreading the faith by the sword and subjugating all nations to that faith. The Germanic peoples would have become heirs to that religion. Such a creed was perfectly suited to the Germanic temperament. Hitler said that the conquering Arabs, because of their racial inferiority, would in the long run have been unable to contend with the harsher climate and conditions of the country. They could not have kept down the more vigorous natives, so that ultimately not Arabs but Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of this Mohammedan empire.

Hitler usually concluded this historical speculation by remarking: ‘You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?’ It is remarkable that even before the war he sometimes went on: “Today the Siberians, the White Russians, and the people of the steppes live extremely healthy lives. For this reason they are better equipped for development and in the long run biologically superior to the Germans.’ This was an idea he was destined to repeat in far more drastic tones during the last months of the war.” [ Source: Albert Speer: Inside the Third Reich]

Mark Alexander

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Mark at permanent link# 8 Comments

Google Censors Tom Tancredo Ad




"The video content site YouTube has flagged a new campaign ad by Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo, warning of its content and requiring viewers to verify they are 18 or older.


The 30-second spot airing on Iowa cable stations this week links the country's illegal immigration problem to terrorism, depicting an attack on an American mall.

"There are consequences to open borders beyond the 20 million aliens who have come to take our jobs," the narrator says. "Islamic terrorists now freely roam U.S. soil. Jihadists, who froth with hate, here to do what they have in London, Spain, and Russia." ...

YouTube is trying to make sure young viewers don't have access to the ad.

"This video or group may contain content that is inappropriate for some users, as flagged by YouTube's user community," says its warning. "To view this video or group, please verify you are 18 or older by logging in or signing up."










Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 5 Comments

Update on the Hizballah plant in the FBI/CIA


This does not sound especially like this cretin was a double agent being managed by us.

By Andrea Mitchell and Robert Windrem
NBC News
updated 6:21 p.m. ET, Thurs., Nov. 15, 2007nasrallah_better.jpgThere’s new information about the young Lebanese woman who pleaded guilty Tuesday to charges she lied about her background to get jobs at the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Central Intelligence Agency.

Current and former intelligence officials tell NBC News that Nada Nadim Prouty had a much bigger role than officials at the FBI and CIA first acknowledged. In fact, Prouty was assigned to the CIA’s most sensitive post, Baghdad, and participated in the debriefings of high-ranking al-Qaida detainees.

A former colleague called Prouty “among the best and the brightest” CIA officers at the government's most sensitive post - Baghdad. A second colleague added she was "quite highly thought of: and had received some prime assignments.


Yeah, and I'm really a secret agent.

Among them: the investigation of the USS Cole bombing in Yemen and the investigation of war crimes in Rwanda, the East African nation racked by genocide.

So exceptional was her work, agree officials of both agencies, the CIA recruited her from the FBI to work for the agency’s clandestine service at Langley, Va., in June 2003. She then went to Iraq for the agency to work with the U.S. military on the debriefings.

“Early on, she was an active agent in the debriefings,” said one former intelligence official. “It was more than translation.”

We don't have to worry about Hizballah coming over the Mexican or Canadian Borders, we are taking Hizballah into the FBI and CIA, AND PAYING THEM.

nasral_us.jpg
On Tuesday, she pleaded guilty to conspiracy to illegally search FBI computers for classified information about Hezbollah and to naturalization fraud — a sham marriage to a former husband just to become a U.S. citizen.

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 0 Comments

For Ron Paul, all it required was a short .."Please get the hell off my side", but STORMFRONT remains there, another Vlaams Belang controversy


The rise of the right within various political movements worldwide CANNOT be denied, and must be opposed ALONG WITH IT'S PARALLEL and equally intolerant ISLAMOFASCIST AGGRESSIONS AND MASS MURDERS.

Ron Paul has been in clear knowledge of his support, endorsement, and contributions from the scum of this planet, STORMFRONT, Don Black, et al, and yet will not reject this.
celtic cross stormfront.jpgWHY?
This blog has already commented on the kind words Paul had, and has for the John "Fluoride in the water is a commie plot in this WASP nation" Birch Society.

Now this...as well.If you follow all the links we have a mirror image here of the obfuscations, chains of excuses, weaseling explanations and wink, wink nod nod, don't piss on my back and tell me it's raining.

Stormfront's object is (with the Vlaams dancing around the jewish question for their own immigrant reasoning) exactly what Filip Dewinter has called for (he claims it's a bit of poetry, a metaphor). And now in the full light of day, with the most execrable character and organizations imaginable supporting , endorsing , and publicly inking to and donating to a Republican candidate, that candidate and his organization will not even issue a please get away from me.

This man and his racist supporters have no business in the republican party race.
I call on the other candidates to EXCORIATE HIM PUBLICLY
at every single opportunity
especially at every single debate.


The question from the mouth of every other republican candidate
at every single debate should be :
"Dr. Paul why haven't you yet repudiated
and rejected
all support and money from Stormfront and their racist cohorts?"

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 8 Comments

Thursday, November 15, 2007

What Muslims Believe About Peace


In the West we have people who identify themselves as Pacifists. Many of these Pacifists subscribe to a form of extremist Pacifism which believes that War in an absolute evil, which should never even be pondered, especially by powerful Western nations.

That's an interesting, if not lovely, belief. But, it is a recipe for suicide when one has enemies who want them dead.

Speaking of which, what do Muslims believe about Peace?

From Freedom's Cost:


US, Israel ignore leading scholar’s insights about Muslim attitude to peace deals

Policy makers in Israel and the United States are premising the Annapolis Conference on foundations that have led to a series of bloody collapses in Oslo, Cairo, Hebron, Wye, Sharm el-Sheikh, Camp David 2, and the disengagement. They are formulating the conference on the assumption that Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas has adopted a mentality of peace, thus granting yet another victory to the simplistic world of delusions in the Mideast’s complex reality.

Professor Majid Khadduri, may he rest in peace, from Johns Hopkins University in the US was the world’s leading authority on Arab definitions of peace and war, and he noted that they view peace as a tactical means for achieving their strategic objective – defeating the enemy. Peace constitutes a temporary break in the ongoing war against the enemy and/or infidel.

Khadduri’s book, War and Peace in the Law of Islam, clarifies the meaning of the amazing 1,400-year sequence – since the 7th century - of wars, terrorism, and the violent violation of agreements, alliances, and conventions between Arabs, between Muslims, and between Arabs and non-Arabs.

The insights in the book include the following: “If a catastrophe had befallen the Muslims, (they) might come to terms with the enemy…provided that the Muslims should resume the Jihad after the expiration of the treaty…treaties must be of temporary duration, for in Muslim legal theory the normal relations between Muslim and non-Muslim territories are not peaceful, but warlike…If the (leader) entered a treaty which he was incapable of fulfilling, the treaty was regarded as void…the Prophet Muhammad has set the classic example by concluding a (628 A.D.) treaty with the Makkans, known as the Hudayabiya Treaty (whereby) a peace treaty with the enemy is a valid instrument if it serves Muslim interests…the Prophet and his successors always reserved their right to repudiate any treaty or arrangement which they considered as harmful…Muslim authorities might come to terms with (the enemy), provided it was only for a temporary period…a temporary peace with the enemy is not inconsistent with Islam’s interests….”

Meanwhile, Mahmoud Abbas’ textbooks, religious clerics, newspapers, and official TV and radio stations resonate with Khadduri’s theories day and night while preaching for the “liberation” of Jerusalem, the Galilee, Jaffa, Ashdod, and the Negev desert, the destruction of the Jewish State, glorification of suicide bombers, and Jihad. The Palestinian educational system, which promotes deep hatred, supports the main conclusion from Professor Khadduri’s book: The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not over the size, but rather, is about the existence of a Jewish State located in a region defined as an “Islamic estate” by the Arabs.


Go read the whole thing.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 3 Comments

Robert Spencer On The Current Controversy


Yesterday, Fjordman posted an essay at Gates of Vienna which gave his perspective on whether the current rift in the blogosphere (between Gates of Vienna/Atlas Shrugs on one side and LGF/IBA, etc. on the other side.
Fjordman's essay was well-reasoned, and I think it is worth reading. I note with satisfaction that Fjordman agrees with me on the one matter which has really stuck in my craw this whole time; that Filip DeWinter, the leader of Vlaams Belang is, apparently, enamored of Jean-Marie Le Pen:


... of all the information published by LGF, a lot of which is nonsense
or outdated or both, the one piece of information that I disliked the most was
VB’s connection to Jean-Marie Le Pen from the FN in France through the Identity,
Tradition, Sovereignty group at the European Parliament. I don’t like Le Pen at
all and consider it to be poor judgment by the VB to have even a formal link to
that party.
They should seriously consider cutting that link in the future. It’s
not helpful.



Now, Fjordman doesn't go any further than that. There is no call for action, no request that DeWinter immediately recscind his tacit, if not outright, support for Le Pen. And, maybe Fjordman has his reasons. I'm guessing he believes the rest of the points he makes in his essay are reason enough.
Ok, fine.

Anyway, it seems that everyone is quoting Robert Spencer's essay on the controversy today. What's funny is everyone is pulling quotes from the essay to make it look as if the essay supports their point of view. Both Pamela at Atlas Shrugs and Charles from Little Green Footballs have used this tact without being completely forthright about the fact that the essay is more nuanced than being a simple support of either side.

That being said, I think I'll tell you outright, I'm pulling the quote which most supports my position. And, if you are interested, you ought to click on the link above and read the whole thing.

Here's my favorite quote from Spencer's essay:


The neofascist character of the anti-jihad parties in Europe also keeps
many decent people from joining the counterjihad movement, when they otherwise would. This is the great weakness of the argument that, well, there is no one
else fighting this fight
, so we have to join forces with people we would
otherwise regard with distaste: some people simply will not and will never do
that, and it limits the power of the movement and its ability to
grow.


So then we come to Vlaams Belang and the Sweden Democrats. The
controversy has revolved around the sincerity of their break with the past:
their supporters maintain that they have broken with Nazi links in their pasts,
and they are undeniably pro-Israel. The counterjihad conference that touched all
this controversy off -- since VB and SD reps attended it -- was openly
pro-Israel, featuring an address by Andrew Bostom on antisemitism and another by
the decidedly non-dhimmi Israeli politician Aryeh Eldad. There was nothing white
supremacist or neo-Nazi about it, and in fact it seemed to herald a new phase of
cooperation between European and American anti-jihadists, although its genuine
work has been completely overwhelmed by the ensuing controversy. In any case,
did VB and SD reps meet with Bat Ye'or, Bostom, Eldad and others in order to
deceive people as to their true intentions, or did they do so in order to herald
a clean break with their pasts?


If it was a clean break, it needs to be a completely clean break.
The VB in particular has many clear-eyed and sensible supporters in the U.S.,
including many people I respect very highly. But much has come to light since
the conference -- much of which I was unaware before I went, and of which I
think most people in the U.S. were unaware. Charles' points in his post on
Fjordman's piece yesterday are well taken: "Nothing" -- that is, in Fjordman's
article -- "about the White Power symbols in the Vlaams Belang youth magazine,
nothing about the connections between unrepentant Nazi collaborator Leon
Degrelle and top Vlaams Belang officials, nothing about the top VB leaders who
fought with police in order to lay flowers on the graves of SS soldiers, nothing
about the White Power symbol on Filip DeWinter’s bookshelf, nothing about
DeWinter’s calls for a 'white Europe.'"

... I am just watching and waiting for what VB and SD will do now, and I hope that tempers will cool on both sides and we can all continue to work together against the jihad and Islamic supremacism. There are few enough of us as it is.




Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 19 Comments

Abu Hamza "can be extradited" to USA to be judged on terrorism charges

Financial Times.

A UK court ruled on Thursday that Abu Hamza al-Masri, the radical Muslim cleric, could be extradited to the US to face terrorism-related and race-hate charges.

The Egyptian-born cleric, who worked as a bouncer in a London club to fund his university studies when he moved to Britain in the 1980s, is currently serving a seven-year jail term in the UK for inciting his followers to murder non-Muslims.

Judge Timothy Workman said there was enough evidence for the US to seek Mr Hamza’s extradition and that “extradition would be compatible with the defendant’s” rights under the Human Rights Convention. However, he added that any evidence that a prisoner might face long periods of solitary confinement in the US would be enough to block an extradition on human rights grounds. (hein???)

Mr Hamza, distinctive-looking for his missing eye and a hook to replace a missing hand – is wanted by the US authorities on 11 charges.

The US wants to prosecute the London preacher for alleged attempts to set up a training camp for the terrorist group al-Qaeda in Oregon in 1999-2000. Apart from accusing him of providing logistical support to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, the US also believes he was involved in the 1998 kidnapping of 16 westerners in Yemen.

So he is not going to be extradited if he can face long periods of solitary confinement. And this is the guy who said:

“Killing a kuffar (unbeliever) who is fighting you is OK. Killing a kuffar for any reason, you can say it is OK even if there is no reason for it”.

He also rejected the guy who was washing him (after two years) because he was homosexual. Of course, he was nicknamed Queenie. Appearently it took two years for Abu Hamza to realize that.

He justifies the 9/11 attacks saying that "it was necessary to make the Americans understand that the Muslims are fed up of Palestine mistreatment and of the Islamists' prosecution". He added that Al-Qaeda didn't want to assasinate all those people, that "unluckily they were there".

His elder son is a rap singer. Err, well, he is a JIHADI rap singer:"I was born to be a soldier/ with the kalashnikov on my shoulder/ peace to Hamas and Hizbollah/ this is the path of our Lord Allah/ we are in a holy war/ and I defend my religion with the holy sword". He has even sung those songs to thousands of people in UK's Wembley Stadium (how he was allowed to do that, is something that is beyond my knowledge).

He is nicknamed MC Hamza, and he is the son of the first wife of the imam, Valerie Fleming, a Catholic British woman with Spanish origins (wonder if she was in good health, I mean in good mental health). He says he is not afraid as "Jihad is very clear: we have to combat the ones who fight us, whether they are Muslims or not".

He is also studying Business Administration, is renting a flat at Wembley (near the stadium, not to spend too much on transport) and is paid an unemployment subsidy of 44,5 pounds a week.

That last thing is priceless, isn't it?

Abu Hamza "podrá ser extraditado" a EEUU para ser juzgado por terrorismo.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Nora (LV) at permanent link# 1 Comments

The Blog Wars: More Sowing The Wind


UPDATE: Dag suggested we move this to the top for a few days, so I have done so.
Atlas Shrugs/Gates of Vienna vs. Little Green Footballs.

Atlas and Gates are fighting for the right of European Nationalism. Little Green Footbals (and us, to a lesser extent) believes that when you scratch the surface of almost any Euopean Nationalist party, you will find an Ethnic Nationalism crawling out from underneath the shiny, modern facade.

From Vanishing America (with thanks to Always on Watch):




I suspect rather too much attention and bandwidth has been devoted to the
individual who instigated the 'blog wars' and this ongoing vendetta against
'fascists' among the Western right. But there are still some valid issues to be
considered, which go beyond personalities. So, here are two more good responses.

First, James Fulford's piece at VDare, in which he makes several good
points.Fulford mentions the fact that Bruce Bawer, the writer who exiled himself
to Europe for fear of the Christian right in this country, also denounced the
Brussels Journal and Vlaams Belang:

Another critic of the Vlaams Belang and Brussels Journal is Bruce
Bawer. Bruce Bawer left the US in 1998, apparently out of fear of Christian
homophobia. He's now noticed that that Muslims, who are taking over Europe, are
much more homophobic than Christians, and has written a book called While Europe
Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within.


But he's still afraid of the Christian Right. He has condemned Belien
and the Brussels Journal as a "bunch of little Euro-fascists" because Belien
came out in favor of "traditional Judeo-Christian morality"—which is, of course,
anathema to Bawer, as it is to professional gay publicist Andrew
Sullivan.''


Exactly; when many conservatives hailed Bawer's book as a brave expose of
Islamo'fascism' and the conquest of Europe by Islam, my feeling was that he was
at best only a partial ally. True to form, it seems he views conservatives in
our country and the West as just as bad as Islam.


Many of these sometime allies who oppose Islam for their own personal reasons (such as their 'lifestyle') are really not friends to conservatives, but merely the enemy of our enemy -- up to a point. When forced to choose, can we be sure that they will prefer our side over the Moslems? Or do they view us as morally equivalent to, or worse than, the Moslems?


Ayaan Hirsi Ali is another such individual, who is the object of adulation by many liberals (right and left) in the counterjihad camp. But it should be remembered that Hirsi Ali is not a conservative, not a Westerner (except in that she prefers the social libertinism the West offers) and opposes Islam for reasons of her own, not because she cares about the West per se. We might remember that she opposed a Christian political party in the Netherlands, and wanted to ban all religious schools there.

So at best she is an uneasy ally, merely being the enemy of our enemy.



That's a very good point.

Go read the whole thing.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 90 Comments


Older Posts Newer Posts