start your own blog now!
 
Read other blogs...

scaramouche

...born with the gift of laughter and a sense that the world was mad.

Wednesday, 28 February 2007

Jihad a la carte: I must be tired because I read this headline from the New York Sun—Taliban Resurgent—as Taliban Restaurant. And right then and there I started to hear old Arlo singing in my head:

You can’t get anything you want

At Taliban Restaurant.

You can’t get anything you want

At Taliban Restaurant.

Bow and scrape

‘Else they’ll decapitate.

Sharia is the law that they appreciate.

You can’t get anything you want

At Taliban Restaurant.

posted by: scaramouche at 23:00 | link | comments (2) |

Learning curve: The U.S.’s  top intelligence official says that Iran—you know, the country that is supposed to sit down and talk things over with Great Satan at an upcoming conference—is instructing Shias in Iraq in the niceties of using armor-piercing ammo. From Reuters:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Iran is training anti-American Iraqi Shi'ites at sites inside Iran and Lebanon in the use of armor-piercing munitions blamed for the deaths of 170 U.S. troops in Iraq, a top U.S. intelligence official said on Tuesday.

In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, newly installed U.S. intelligence chief Mike McConnell said it was "probable" that Iranian leaders including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei were aware that weapons known as explosively formed penetrators, or EFPs, had been supplied to Iraqi Shi'ites.

But he and other senior intelligence officials told a hearing on threats to the United States that al Qaeda remained the greatest threat facing the United States and had reestablished itself in Pakistan since being driven out of Afghanistan after the September 11 attacks.

"We inflicted a major blow. They retreated to another area. And they are going through a process to reestablish and rebuild, adapting to the seams, or the weak spots," McConnell said in his first congressional testimony as the U.S. director of national intelligence.

McConnell, a retired Navy admiral and career military intelligence officer, took over the intelligence chief's job a week ago, replacing John Negroponte who was sworn in on Tuesday as the new deputy secretary of state.

In describing Iran's role in Iraq, he stopped short of he stopped short of saying the Islamic Republic was directing EFP attacks on U.S. forces… 

But, hey, I’m sure Condi can convince them to quit with the armour piercing and help restore calm in Iraq.

posted by: scaramouche at 21:33 | link | comments |

Ban’s blunder: The UN’s new Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, has been trying to foster warmer relations between his organization and the city which acts as it’s host—but he’s chosen a decidedly bizarre way of going about it. From the New York Sun:

UNITED NATIONS — Secretary-General Ban met yesterday with local dignitaries at the landmark 21 Club in a bid to improve the uneasy relationship between the United Nations and its host city.

Mr. Ban's host, Roy Goodman, a former state senator who now leads a corporation charged with renovating the U.N. headquarters, brought together a star-studded group of former and current officials and businessmen for what was billed as a welcome luncheon for the new U.N. boss.

Mayor Koch, Governor Pataki, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, Edward Cardinal Egan, and some high-profile ambassadors to the United Nations, among others, voiced hope for improved relations between the world body and the city.

Even a meeting last week in Austria between Mr. Ban and a U.N. secretary-general between 1972 and 1981, Kurt Waldheim — who later became a pariah in New York when his service as a Nazi storm trooper in World War II was disclosed — appeared to elicit no outrage from yesterday's attendees.

"I have no problem with people going to see the elderly, as long as he knows he was a Nazi," Mr. Koch told The New York Sun

 

You gotta love Ed Koch, a man who refuses to mince words.

 

Way to endear yourself there, Ban. Who are you planning to visit next—Ernst Zundel?

posted by: scaramouche at 20:21 | link | comments (2) |

Jurisprudence in Egypt: It resembles a large marsupial that has a pouch and a wicked hop. From the Ceeb:

The trial of a 31-year-old Egyptian-Canadian charged with spying for Israel resumed in Cairo Wednesday amid a fractious courtroom scene where media and the accused shouted at the judge.

CBC's Peter Armstrong, who's covering the trial of Mohammed Essam Ghoneium al-Attar, said dozens of journalists and television crews disrupted proceedings by shouting questions at the judge. Al-Attar also shouted, trying to get the attention of Judge Sayyad al-Gohari to press claims that he was tortured by the Egyptian police to confess to being an Israeli spy.

"He was bellowing out his innocence, saying that the police beat him and made him drink his own urine" Armstrong said.

Al-Attar also said he wanted Prime Minister Stephen Harper to intervene in his case. Consular officials from the Canadian embassy in Cairo were in the courtroom Wednesday but did not comment when questioned by journalists.

Al-Attar was arrested in Cairo at the beginning of this year when he was in Egypt visiting his family.  

Prosecution documents allege al-Attar was recruited by Israeli intelligence in Turkey to spy on Egyptian nationals living abroad. The Egyptian authorities said al-Attar came to Canada in 2003 and provided information to Israel on a number of Arabs living here. Israel denies the allegations.  

In an earlier court appearance, al-Attar said he had been held in solitary confinement and tortured for four weeks before confessing to crimes he didn't commit…

Al-Attar is gay, an apostate and was supposedly spying for Israel—in Islamic terms, that’s a trifecta of infamy. This sham of a trial makes a mockery of the judicial process and reminds us that, dollar for dollar, the billions that the U.S. has paid out to Egypt since the Camp David Accords is quite possibly the biggest waste of money in American history.

 

Moreover, I’ll wager that no one has been handing the prisoner the Christian holy book to offer him solace while in jail, nor donning protective latex gloves before daring to touch it.

posted by: scaramouche at 19:58 | link | comments |

Impending treason: So what if Moo and the boys go through with plans to nuke the Jews? No biggie. At least, that’s the feeling of some top military brass, who say they’ll resign en masse should the President ever decide he's reached the point of no return with Iran. From the Times Online:

SOME of America’s most senior military commanders are prepared to resign if the White House orders a military strike against Iran, according to highly placed defence and intelligence sources.

Tension in the Gulf region has raised fears that an attack on Iran is becoming increasingly likely before President George Bush leaves office. The Sunday Times has learnt that up to five generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack.

“There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran,” a source with close ties to British intelligence said. “There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible.”

A British defence source confirmed that there were deep misgivings inside the Pentagon about a military strike. “All the generals are perfectly clear that they don’t have the military capacity to take Iran on in any meaningful fashion. Nobody wants to do it and it would be a matter of conscience for them.

 “There are enough people who feel this would be an error of judgment too far for there to be resignations.”

A generals’ revolt on such a scale would be unprecedented. “American generals usually stay and fight until they get fired,” said a Pentagon source. Robert Gates, the defence secretary, has repeatedly warned against striking Iran and is believed to represent the view of his senior commanders...

The Jews stand alone, the Jews stand alone. Heigh ho the merry-o, the Jews stand alone.

posted by: scaramouche at 19:36 | link | comments (1) |

They’re reviewing the situation: Even as the U.S. is preparing to prostrate itself in front of the mullahs, it sounds like the idea of holding a confab holds much more appeal for Washington, currently reeling under the influence of the ISB report, than it is does for the mullahs. From AP via the Houston Chronicle:

Ali Larijani, the head of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, said earlier that Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari contacted Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki to discuss the conference. "We are reviewing the proposal," Larijani said, quoted by the state TV Web site.

"We support solving problems of Iraq by all means and we will attend the conference if it is expedient," Larijani said. "We believe Iraq's security is related to all its neighboring countries, and they have to help settle the situation."

Larijani suggested the U.S. presence was not a problem for Iran. Asked by reporters if Iran was running a risk by attending the conference alongside the Americans, he replied, "One should not commit suicide because one is afraid of death" — meaning Iran should not hurt itself just to avoid possible negative results…

So there’s no problemo attending a face-to-facer with Great Satan, per se, save for the fact that it could be akin to committing suicide.

 

Makes sense to me.

 

I think it’s a fairly safe bet that this conference will never take place.

posted by: scaramouche at 19:25 | link | comments |

Liberal lunacy: “Kudos” (that’s mirthless sarcasm, in case you were wondering) to the Liberal Party of Canada and its leader Stephane “My Doggy’s Name is Kyoto” Dion. They have been of inestimable assistance to those who want to murder Canadians in the name of their true beliefs. You’ll be happy to know, however, that if and when the terrorists blow us up, every last one of our “human rights” as set out in Pierre Trudeau’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms will remain intact, even if, sadly, our bodies do not.

I was going to do an in-depth analysis of the infamy, but the Canadian Coalition for Democracies has spared me the effort. Here’s how their press release lays it all out:

 

Ottawa, Canada - Today, the Liberal opposition lead by Stéphane Dion joined with the other Opposition parties to kill two provisions of Canada Anti-Terrorism Act that were passed into law by the Liberal government of Jean Chrétien in 2002. With all the hyperbole generated by these provisions, it is essential that Canadians understand their implications and judge for themselves if today's vote was a win for human rights or for those plotting acts of terror in Canada.

 

The "preventative arrest" provision is an appropriate and constitutional response to today's mass-casualty terrorist threat. This provision allows police to detain persons whom they believe "on reasonable grounds" to be about to commit an act of terror. Within one day, or as soon as constitutionally possible, the detainee must be brought before a judge to validate the detention.

 

The other provision authorizes the use of "investigative hearings" to require a person who has material knowledge of a terrorist act to be examined by a judge with regard to information that may prevent a planned attack or help identify the perpetrators of a past attack. Again, the law requires "reasonable grounds" to proceed. Moreover, it allows the person in question to have counsel, and prohibits the use of information drawn from the person to be used against that individual in any later criminal proceedings, save for reasonable exceptions relating to perjury and associated offences.

 

CSIS has identified over 50 terrorist groups  operating on Canadian soil and over $256 million have been identified by FINTRAC in 2005/2006 as having possible links to terrorism. Today, Canadians lost vital tools needed to stop a massacre before it happens and to compel those with knowledge of terrorist activity to disclose such vital information to a judge.

 

CCD notes with deep concern the record of the Liberal Party in relation to several terrorism issues. These issues include its opposition for thirteen years while in government to proposals for a judicial inquiry into the Air India bombing, its refusal to ban Hezbollah until finally being forced to do so by court action, and its refusal to list the notorious Tamil Tigers as a terrorist organization. And now in Opposition, the Liberals are further weakening our ability to break up terrorist cells and prevent the kind of massacres of civilians that have occurred in London, Madrid, New York, Amsterdam, and countless other cities. Along with other elements of the public record, these matters raise grave questions about whether the Liberal leadership is pandering to radical religious and ethno-cultural voting blocks at the expense of Canadians' safety and security.

 

"For over a decade, the Liberals ignored pleas from victims' families for an inquiry into the Air India bombing," said David Harris, Senior Fellow for National Security for CCD. "Today's vote ordered by Stéphane Dion may have effectively killed the ongoing police investigation by making it impossible to compel testimony from material witnesses. One must question the determination of the Liberals to leave unexamined the worst act of airline terror in history and its bungled 20-year prosecution, and to abandon those whose lives were shattered by this atrocity."

 

"Liberal leaders' continuing disregard for the innocent terror victims of Canada, Sri Lanka, Lebanon, Israel and India triggers disturbing concerns about the price politicians are willing to pay for votes," said Alastair Gordon, President of CCD. "By opposing extension of their own Party's anti-terrorism provisions at a time when Canada is specifically targeted by bin Laden and Islamic extremism, Liberals owe Canadians an explanation. Is the risk to Canadians' safety and security to be regarded as just another reasonable trade-off in the struggle for political power?"

 

All I can say is: God help us all.

posted by: scaramouche at 14:59 | link | comments (1) |

In the grip of the ISG: More confirmation that the Bush administration is falling in line with the recommendations of the Iran Study Group—ISG co-chairman Lee Hamilton gives his thumbs-up to Condi’s announcement that the U.S. is planning to “engage” Syria and Iran in diplomatic discussions and ask for their help in restoring calm to the region.

In the annals of bad ideas, that one ranks even lower than the one where they brought a terrorist warlord out of exile, gave him lots of guns and money, and told him he was responsible for preventing his people from blowing up Jews.

 

And once again it looks like the Jews are expendable.

posted by: scaramouche at 14:37 | link | comments |

Tuesday, 27 February 2007

Vitamins are bad for your health: Some of ‘em, anyway.

posted by: scaramouche at 22:09 | link | comments (2) |

A “new” tack: Taking a page from the odious ISG report, the Bush administration has decided to try elicit Iran and Syria’s help in making the region more peaceful and stable.

Trouble is they’re the ones causing most of the unrest and instability. But for the new realists in Washington, that’s just a niggling detail.  From the New York Times:

WASHINGTON, Feb. 27 — The United States will join other nations in high-level talks with Iran and Syria over the situation in Iraq this spring, in the first such engagement between the Bush administration and those two countries in three years.

The announcement today that the United States will take part in two sets of talks between Iraq and its neighbors, including Iran and Syria, represents a major shift in President Bush’s foreign policy, which has eschewed direct, high-level contact between Washington, Damascus and Tehran.

While these talks are to focus on stabilizing Iraq, they crack open a door to a diplomatic channel, which has long been sought by administration critics who say that Washington should do more to engage Iran and Syria to help stem the violence in Iraq.

“I would note that the Iraqi government has invited Syria and Iran to attend both of these regional meetings,” Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said today, in announcing the talks, which will also include the Britain, Russia and a host of international organizations and Middle East countries. “We hope that all governments seize this opportunity to improve their relations with Iraq — and to work for peace and stability in the region.”…

The only thing the mullahs plan to seize is the opportunity to nuke the Jews. But don’t tell Condi. She sounds so goshdarned optimistic that it would be cruel to make her face reality.

posted by: scaramouche at 22:05 | link | comments |

Another ‘inconvienient truth’: Al Gore is an energy hog.

posted by: scaramouche at 20:35 | link | comments (1) |

Saudi one-liners: MEMRI has a translation of a “poem” that reads like a Saudi version of Southern fried comedian Jeff Foxworthy’s “you might be a Redneck” shtick. Or would, if it were funny:

"When you cannot find a single garden in your city, but there is a mosque on every corner - you know that you are in an Arab country…

"When you see people living in the past with all the trappings of modernity - do not be surprised, you are in an Arab country.

"When religion has control over science - you can be sure that you are in an Arab country.

"When clerics are referred to as 'scholars' - don't be astonished, you are in an Arab country.

"When you see the ruler transformed into a demigod who never dies or relinquishes his power, and whom nobody is permitted to criticize - do not be too upset, you are in an Arab country.

"When you find that the large majority of people oppose freedom and find joy in slavery - do not be too distressed, you are in an Arab country.

"When you hear the clerics saying that democracy is heresy, but [see them] seizing every opportunity provided by democracy to grab high positions [in the government] - do not be surprised, you are in an Arab country…

"When monarchies turn into theocracies, and republics into hybrids of monarchy and republic - do not be taken aback, you are in an Arab country.

"When you find that the members of parliament are nominated [by the ruler], or else that half of them are nominated and the other half have bought their seats through bribery… - you are in an Arab country…

"When you discover that a woman is worth half of what a man is worth, or less - do not be surprised, you are in an Arab country…

"When you see that the authorities chop off a man's hand for stealing a loaf of bread or a penny, but praise and glorify those who steal billions - do not be too surprised, you are in an Arab country…

"When you are forced to worship the Creator in school and your teachers grade you for it - you can be sure that you are in an Arab country…

"When young women students are publicly flogged merely for exposing their eyes - you are in an Arab country…

"When a boy learns about menstruation and childbirth but not about his own [body] and [the changes] it undergoes in puberty - roll out your prayer mat and beseech Allah to help you deal with your crisis, for you are in an Arab country…

"When land is more important than human beings - you are in an Arab country…

"When covering the woman's head is more important than financial and administrative corruption, embezzlement, and betrayal of the homeland - do not be astonished, you are in an Arab country…

"When minorities are persecuted and oppressed, and if they demand their rights, are accused of being a fifth column or a Trojan horse - be upset, you are in an Arab country…

"When women are [seen as] house ornaments which can be replaced at any time - bemoan your fate, you are in an Arab country.

"When birth control and family planning are perceived as a Western plot - place your trust in Allah, you are in an Arab country…

"When at any time, there can be a knock on your door and you will be dragged off and buried in a dark prison - you are in an Arab country…

"When fear constantly lives in the eyes of the people - you can be certain that you are in an Arab country."

posted by: scaramouche at 20:29 | link | comments (1) |

Why do they hate Hirsi Ali?: Ann Applebaum of the Washington Post tries to account for the Continental loathing of Ayaan Hirsi Ali:

…Curiously, what seems to rankle Europeans most is the enthusiasm with which Hirsi Ali has adopted their own secularism and the fervor with which she has embraced their own Western values. Though this continent's intellectuals routinely disparage the pope as an irrelevant dinosaur, Hirsi Ali's rejection of religion in favor of reason, intellect and emancipation seems to make everyone nervous. Typical is the British feminist who complained that not only does Hirsi Ali paint "the whole of the Islamic world with one black brush," she also "paints the whole of the Western world with rosy tints," which is, of course, far more objectionable.

Others have compared her unfavorably to the Islamic scholar Tariq Ramadan, who argues that Islam can be made compatible with modern European democracy. He, it is said, offers a way forward for millions of pious European Muslims. By contrast, Hirsi Ali's rejection of religion in favor of Western secularism is said to be a form of integration that works for no one but herself.

I suppose this latter charge might be true. On the other hand, it might not be: Maybe "Infidel" will inspire a generation of Muslim teenagers to study, work hard, join the mainstream -- and then say what they think and spoil the political consensus. Either way, I'm not sure that the impulse to dismiss Hirsi Ali for her lack of utilitarian value reflects well on those who do it. Nor does the underlying assumption: that religious faith must be respected and defended on behalf of the dark-skinned immigrants who live among us, even though we natives no longer seem to require it.

But perhaps it is just a question of time. In America, the phenomenon of the flag-waving first-generation immigrant is familiar. In Europe, such a thing is unknown. Maybe once Europeans get used to the idea -- a Muslim immigrant who embraces Western culture with the excitement of the convert! -- they'll like Hirsi Ali better. And if they're lucky, others will follow in her footsteps.

I think Applebaum is way off base here. The real reason Hirsi Ali seems to “rankle Europeans most” is because she dares to speak the inconvenient truth (to borrow a phrase)—something Eurabians (and not only Eurabians) are extremely reluctant to hear no matter who’s doing the talking. The final paragraph is the tip off that, while she’s not unkind toward Hirsi Ali, Applebaum simply doesn’t get it. If she did, she would know that at this stage Europeans would be thrilled to find Muslim immigrants embracing Western culture with the excitement of the convert. As it is, largely due to the Euro-policy of multiculturalism and the Muslim policy of Islamic primacy, significant numbers of immigrants are embracing the jihad with the excitement of a convert, er, revert, er, whatever.

posted by: scaramouche at 20:15 | link | comments (1) |

The awful truth: What happens when people fight back and try to get the truth out? Other people who prefer the lies or who are afraid to rock the boat try to silence them. From Islam Online:

CAIRO — Incendiary, intimidating, seriously flawed and unproductive were the terms used by American rabbis, professors and Muslims to describe a documentary screened on campus showing Muslims urging attacks on the US and Europe.

 

"(It is) a way to transfer the Middle East conflict to the campus, to promote hostility," Rabbi Chaim Seidler-Feller, director of the Hill Jewish advocacy group at the University of California, told the New York Times on Monday, February 26.

 

"Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West," which was screened recently in UCLA, features scenes like the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Muslim children being encouraged to become bombers.

 

The images are interspersed with those of Nazi rallies in an attempt to force a linkage or association.

 

Norah Sarsour, a Palestinian-American student at UCLA, said it was disheartening to see "a film like this that takes the people who have hijacked the religion and focuses on them."

Adam Osman, president of Stony Brook’s Muslim Students’ Association, echoed the same sentiments.

 

"The movie was so well crafted and emotion manipulating that I felt myself thinking poorly of some aspects of Islam."

The documentary has become the latest flashpoint in the bitter campus debate over the Middle East.

 

"The situation in the Middle East has been a major issue on campus for decades, but the heat has noticeably turned up lately," said Greg Lukianoff, the president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

 

At San Francisco State University, for example, College Republicans stomped on copies of the Hamas and Hizbullah flags last October at an "antiterrorism" rally.

 

At the University of California, Irvine, the Muslim Student Union drew criticism last year for a "Holocaust in the Holy Land" program about Israel

 

The above makes the whole thing sound like it’s an even-steven thing—although right-wingers stomping on Hezbollah flags sounds somewhat more alarming than Muslim students studying the Holocaust in Israel. (The Holocaust? Or Holocaust denial? Or that chimerical Palestinian "Holocaust"--a.k.a. the naqba?) In fact, the balance on campus is so strongly skewed in favour of the leftist/Islamist anti-Western agenda being pushed by most academics that pro-democracy voices have been virtually silenced. Hence the outrage when something like Obsession shows up and challenges the prevailing dogma.

posted by: scaramouche at 14:51 | link | comments |

Stuck in reverse: Der Speigel has an interview with Mina Abadi, an Iranian-born human rights activist and the founder of Germany’s “Council of Ex-Muslims.” Abadi, who has received death threats because of her views and now has to live under police protection, says the idea that Islam can be “modernized” is a non-starter.

SPIEGEL: Together with 29 other immigrants from Muslim countries you have declared that you have renounced Islam. The campaign is similar to one launched in the 1970s by women who declared publicly that they had had abortions. What is your purpose?

Ahadi: I haven't been a Muslim for 30 years. I'm also critical of Islam in Germany and of the way the German government deals with the issue of Islam. Many Muslim organisations like the Central Council of Muslims in Germany (ZMD) or Milli Görüs engage in politics or interfere in people's everyday lives. They were invited to the conference on Islam (hosted by the government in Berlin last year). But their aims are hostile to women and to people in general."

SPIEGEL: Why?

Ahadi: They want to force women to wear the headscarf. They promote a climate in which girls aren't allowed to have boyfriends or go to discos and in which homosexuality is demonized. I know Islam and for me it means death and pain.

SPIEGEL: What will your organization do?

Ahadi: One example: One representative of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany said that a carnival procession float (during the recent carnival in Germany) showing Islamists with explosive belts had offended Muslims. But there was no evidence of that. The associations pretend that they represent everyone and to some extent are acknowledged as such by the German side. That's bad. We have to give a signal against that and say: Not in our name. We are secular humanists. We want to give these people a voice. Someone has to make a start. We're advocating human rights.

SPIEGEL: Some of your members are also active in communist organizations in their home countries.

Ahadi: Yes, many were active in left-wing groups. We have received more than 100 membership applications in recent days. We want to create a new movement, in other European countries too. We hope that soon there will be 10,000 of us representing many more people.

SPIEGEL: Won't your campaign just harden the battle lines?

Ahadi: I don't think it's possible to modernize Islam. We want to form a counterweight to the Muslim organisations. The fact that we're doing this under police protection shows how necessary our initiative is.

She’s right. How can you update something that is considered to be “perfect” as is?

posted by: scaramouche at 14:23 | link | comments (1) |

He’s hatin’ it: The Islam-loving heir to the U.K.rabian throne is visiting one of his favourite spots in the Arab world, and has lashed out at one of most despised symbols of American hegemony. From the Times Online:

The Prince of Wales told a nutritionist in Abu Dhabi today that the “key” to people eating healthily was to ban McDonald’s fast food restaurants.

Prince Charles was attending the launch of a public health awareness campaign aimed at fighting diabetes in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

He visited the Imperial College London Diabetes Centre and watched as a group of children chose from a selection of “good” and “bad” snacks for their school packed lunches.

Talking to Nadine Tayara, a nutritionist from the centre who had put the children through their paces, he asked her: “Have you got anywhere with McDonald’s? Have you tried getting it banned? That’s the key.”

A McDonald’s spokeswoman said that Charles’s remark was “disappointing”.

Other members of his family had visited the fast-food chain, she said, and “have probably got a more up-to-date picture of us.”

The spokeswoman added: “This appears to be an off-the-cuff remark, in our opinion. It does not reflect our menu or where we are as a business.”

Charles was clearly unaware of some of the moves the company has made, she said, such as improved labelling, supporting sustainable agriculture and nutritional changes with choice and variety…

Chuckles? Unaware? Now there's a shocker.

posted by: scaramouche at 13:57 | link | comments |

Apartheid murders: There is a racist apartheid state in a Middle East, a place where members of the prevailing religion are given preferential treatment, while everyone else is considered a lesser creature. That country, of course, is Saudi Arabia, where the other day three such lesser creatures were killed when they accidentally ventured into a believers-only zone. A story worthy of at least a good quarter page in a quality daily paper, wouldn’t you say? Well, the Toronto Star thinks it's worth all of two paragraphs tucked inside a column of other international news briefs. Here’s the entire report:

3 French expats killed in Muslim-only area

 

Three Frenchmen who lived in Saudi Arabia were killed by gunmen yesterday as they were resting on the side of a desert road leading to the holy city of Medina in an area restricted to Muslims only. A fourth Frenchman was seriously wounded.

 

Maj.-Gen. Mansour al-Turki of the Interior Ministry said it was too early to determine if the attacks were terror-related.

 

Terror-related, huh? Why must it be terror-related? More likely it’s about some true believers insenced that infidels veered off the apartheid road and defiled holy Islamic turf with their bestial cooties.

 

No doubt Patrick “Sid” Ryan and Jason Kunin are even now preparing to launch a boycott and education program to protest such heinous Afrikaner-like bigoty. (Just jesting, of course. They’re probably far too busy with all their anti-Zionism activities.)

posted by: scaramouche at 13:13 | link | comments (1) |

Monday, 26 February 2007

A pox on Blix: The former chief UN nuclear watchkitty who, if you can believe it, was even more feckless than the current one—and who has certainly shown himself on many occasions to be far more dangerous—says he thinks he has a handle on what’s really going on in Iran. According to Hans Blix (remember him?) it’s all about the mullahs feeling “insecure” and “humiliated.” From the National Post:

NEW YORK — Hans Blix, the former head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog, said Monday the world's approach to Iran's nuclear ambitions humiliated Tehran by insisting it stop research without giving any security guarantees.

Blix, who was chief U.N. inspector for Iraq after 16 years as head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said Tehran feared for its government's safety, with U.S. troops in neighbouring Iraq and in Afghanistan.

"People have their own pride whether you like them or don't," Blix told reporters. "We haven't heard anything about offers on guarantees for security in case they will go along with a renunciation of enrichment.

"It's the United States that can deliver assurances about security. It's U.S. that can deliver recognition or normalization of relations."

Blix was briefing reporters at the start of a conference on international security, organized by The Century Foundation, a Washington-based research institute.

The United States, Germany, France and Britain are considering imposing additional U.N. sanctions against Iran because Tehran has failed to meet Security Council deadlines to stop uranium enrichment, which can produce fuel for nuclear power plants or bombs.

The Bush administration and some Western nations believe Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of peaceful research while Tehran insists its nuclear program is for power generation only.

Blix said the United States and other western nations should engage in direct talks with Iran, rather than simply ordering Tehran to suspend research first.

"This is in a way like telling a child, first you will behave and thereafter you will be given your rewards," Blix said. "This, I think, is humiliating."

He said it was like a poker player tossing "away his trump card before he sits down at the table."


The Europeans had given
Iran a list of incentives, which the United States eventually supported last year.

Blix said he did not know what stage of development Iran had reached in its nuclear research, begun after Iraq had invaded its territory. But he said Saddam Hussein had had a far more developed nuclear program in the early 1990s than Iran seemed to have after nearly two decades of research.

Contrasting the Iran situation with the six-party negotiations on North Korea's nuclear program, Blix noted that security concerns as well as Pyongyang's relations with the United States were being addressed. But he said a deal with North Korea could have been concluded "much earlier" and prevented the country from conducting a nuclear test last year…

There’s only one thing to do when an “expert” like Blix shows himself to be so completely clueless about a crucial international issue: give the man a Nobel Peace Prize.

posted by: scaramouche at 23:13 | link | comments |

Fair weather “friend”: U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney is in Pakistan, laying down the law with America’s “ally,” President Musharraf. From The Hindu:

ISLAMABAD: United States Vice-President Dick Cheney made an unannounced visit here for a few hours for talks with President Pervez Musharraf on Monday.

 

The Pakistani Foreign Ministry said the talks covered "our bilateral relations, Afghanistan, and counter-terrorism co-operation".

 

The spokesperson said she had no other details about the talks.

 

The New York Times reported from Washington hours after the visit that Mr. Cheney delivered an "unusually tough message" to Gen. Musharraf, with the warning that the new Democratic Congress would cut aid to Pakistan unless he showed results in hunting down the Al-Qaeda from suspected safe havens on the border with Afghanistan.

 

A day earlier, the same newspaper reported that the White House had concluded that Gen. Musharraf was not living up to earlier commitments that Pakistan's peace agreements with tribal militants in North and South Waziristan were not at the cost of the military efforts against Al-Qaeda.

 

U.S intelligence officials now assess that terrorist infrastructure in these tribal areas on Pakistan's north-west is being rebuilt, the newspaper reported.

 

You’ll be interested to know that our old friend Harpoon Siddiqui, the Toronto Star’s resident shill for Islamism, has been visiting the region and has a somewhat different take on the subject. Here’s what he had to say in his most recent column:

 

PESHAWAR–Those who invaded Iraq claiming it had weapons of mass destruction and have been blaming Iran and Syria for the murderous mess in Iraq, are also the same people now blaming Pakistan for the mess in Afghanistan.

 

They say