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

Cry “hammock!” and let loose the dog days of summer: It’s that time of year again—my annual final week of August vacance. I’m signing off for the rest of the month, and hope to be back on Labour Day or shortly thereafter (depending on how quickly I can get my act in gear). See y’all then.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:36 | link | comments

Amanpour’s shameless apologia for Islam: Phyllis Chessler demolishes Christiane "Useful Idiot" Amanpour’s appalling exercise in moral equivalence and insult to our intelligence--her three part CNN documentary about religious extremism:

 In her three part series, Amanpour is far more combative and confrontational with both Jewish and Christian religious leaders than she is with Muslim leaders. She is warmer, softer, more "at home," with even the most extreme of Islamist leaders, perhaps even more respectful, than she is with their allegedly Jewish or Christian counterparts.

 Amanpour completely fails to make the distinction between Islamists who teach hatred of infidels and women and who blow infidel and Muslim civilians up (as well as honor-murder their own women); Israelis who are under perpetual terrorist seige and who are trying to defend themselves against Islamist attacks; and conservative Christians who are trying to moblize votes, change laws, or win hearts and minds with words, not bombs (although she certainly has lots of footage of the bloody bombings at abortion clinics--bombings I personally abhor and mourn--as do many Christians).

  Amanpour wants us to like Muslims--even the most extremist among them. They are human, prick them will they not bleed? But she does not want us to like Christians or Jews, especially those who are Zionists.

 Amanpour does not seem to show the same respect towards conservative Christians who wish to dress modestly, remain chaste until marriage, and avoid a secular culture of rampant pornography and rape as she shows their far more extremist counterparts in the Islamist world or than she shows, at great length, one well-spoken Muslim-American woman who decides to "cover."

 In one instance, Amanpour accuses Ron Luce, a Christian leader of teenagers, as being like the Taliban. He actually answers Amanpour in a rather charming, disarming way. She will not be moved. Amanpour herself takes no stand on what Luce says about an American secular and popular culture which allows virgin teenager America to be raped on the sidewalk as we pass by without stopping or caring.

  Perhaps Amanpour can't forgive these "radical" Christians their support for Israel, their "Zionism." She presents Pastor John Hagee (together with the late Jerry Fallwell) as Doctor Strangeloves. Hagee, by the way, sees Iran as a threat to America and Israel. As he speaks of his Christian love of Zion, Amanpour cuts to a presumed Israeli air attack againt innocent civilians, replete with weeping, civilian Arab women.

  Amanpour again returns to former President Jimmy Carter--this time to have him tell us that he had to break with evangelical Baptists over their sexist position on women in the church. Carter who believes that Israel is an "apartheid" state and whose library has been hugely funded by the Saudis is the new feminist in town.

 Amanpour has a definite political agenda--no less so than the Christian conservatives whom she attacks for daring to conduct "stealth politics, under the radar" when they engage in Christian voter drives. Amanpour wants to put a Democrat in the White House. She wants someone there who will move against the so-called Israel Lobby and who will finally stop funding Israel. She wants our next Commander in Chief to engage in nicey-nice diplomacy with Iran. She wants Americans to stop fearing that every Muslim might be a terrorist and to start accepting a parallel Islamic/Islamist universe right here on our own soil.

  Yes, our ethnically super-trendy, British-accented war correspondent really wants exactly this. And she wants us to see that such right-wing Christians are no different than Islamists, including Bin Laden, who want a world Caliphate. (We are all the same, all cultures are equal, remove the mote from your own eye before you judge anyone else, etc.)

 To accomplish her goal, Amanpour presents Christian conservatives as truly scary, as mounting a Crusader-like Army against liberal secular America--but not necessarily a violent war against terrorist Islamism. Amanpour exploits America's hottest domestic issues (abortion and gay marriage) in order to accomplish her own foreign policy aims.

 By the end of her third and final segment we are meant to fear and loathe the Christian conservative right far more than we are meant to fear or loathe Amanpour's Amadinejad whom --incredibly--she never accuses of funding Hezbollah's terrorist work abroad. What she mainly shows us in Iran are Shi'a Muslims at prayer, engaged in theatrical-religious rituals. We do not see them funding and masterminding Hezbollah as it takes down civilian (and Christian) Lebanon, lays seige to Israel, blows up the Jewish Community Center in Argentina. She shows us the child-martyrs (one estimate has 850,000 dying in the Iran-Iraq war) as themselves true believers as opposed to victims of sadistic adult handlers.

 Her third segment is one long running advertisement for a Democratic candidate for the next Presidency. She is electioneering as hard as she accuses the Christians of doing.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:52 | link | comments

The mullahs tighten the noose: Word is that the lit’ler Hitler and the mully-bullies are so despised on their home turf that any moment now the fed-up, put-upon populace is about to rise up and throw the blackguards out.

Faint hope, I’d say. It’s awfully hard to rise up when the merest peep of dissent can land you an appointment with the Shia hangman, one of the busiest chaps in the land. From the Telegraph (which, amusingly, refers to the pint-sized Shia-Nazi as “Mr” Ahmadinejad):

 

Stonings, hangings, floggings, purges. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad might claim that United Nations sanctions can't hurt his country, but that is not how it feels for Iran's long-suffering population which now finds itself on the receiving end of one of the most brutal purges witnessed since the 1979 Islamic revolution.

 

The most visible manifestation of the new oppression sweeping Iran has been the wave of public executions and floggings carried out in Teheran and provincial capitals over recent weeks in a blatant attempt by the regime to intimidate political opponents. The official government line is that the punishments are part of its "Plan to Enforce Moral Behaviour".

 

It's the same kind of argument that was used immediately after Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini took control to purge the country of its prosperous, secular middle class and secure his hold on power. Now Mr Ahmadinejad is adopting similar tactics in a desperate attempt to keep his embattled regime in power.

 

Although Iran has one of the world's highest execution rates, until recently most of the sentences were carried out within the confines of prisons such a Teheran's notorious Evin complex. But this month diplomats at the Japanese and Australian embassies in the capital were alarmed to find the bodies of two convicted criminals hanging from cranes stationed directly outside their office windows.

 

The location of the cranes, at a busy thoroughfare surrounded by office blocks, was chosen as much to remind the diplomatic community that Mr Ahmadinejad's hardline regime was still very much in charge as to send a message to ordinary citizens.

 

For these public executions, together with the estimated 30 others that have taken place in other parts of the country, are nothing more than a brutal exercise in political, as opposed to religious, persecution. There have also been several public floggings carried out on men and women accused of flouting the strict morality laws. Many of the executions were shown live on Iranian television. The message the government wants to get across is clear: mess with us and this is what will happen to you.

 

However much the authorities insist the sentences relate only to their campaign to improve public morals, Western diplomats in Teheran believe many of the victims have been singled out for their participation in the anti-government fuel riots that erupted in late June.

 

Those disturbances, in which an estimated third of the country's petrol stations were destroyed by protesters angry at the introduction of fuel rationing (Iran, remember, boasts the world's second largest oil reserves), can be seen as a direct consequence of the sanctions imposed by the United Nations over Iran's controversial nuclear programme…

 

So much for the oppressed Iranians being the agents of regime change, at least for the time being.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:05 | link | comments

The siren call of jihad: David Horovitz writes about The Islamist, a book written by someone who was well down the road to martyrdom but who, fortunately, managed to take a detour. The same can not be said of friend, the young Brit who strapped on a bomb for Allah and blew up a Tel Aviv beach bar. From the Jerusalem Post:

On April 30, 2003, Asif Hanif, 21, achieved the notorious feat of becoming Britain's first suicide bomber, killing Ran Baron, Dominique Hass and Yanai Weiss and wounding 60 others when he detonated his explosives to murderously shatter the mellow peace of Mike's Place, the Tel Aviv beachfront blues bar.

Ed Husain knew Hanif, and remembers him as "a teddy bear of a character: generous, kind, selfless and committed."

Both men had been studying Arabic in Damascus not long before the bombing. But while Husain was in the process of reeducating himself and rejecting Islamic extremism, Hanif was plunging ever deeper into violent radicalism.

"The Asif I knew did not believe in killing innocent civilians in Britain or any other country, but Islamist rhetoric had convinced him that Israelis, without exception, were not innocent but occupiers of the Palestinian homeland," Husain writes in his frankly horrifying book The Islamist. "Asif's recruitment to suicide bombing came about against a backdrop of increasingly radicalized young Muslims in communities across Britain," the author notes. "The qualities that made Asif a great Muslim host - selflessness and commitment - were the same traits that, when corrupted, transformed him into a suicide bomber."

Had Husain not so starkly changed course, he might have wound up as murderously transformed as Hanif. For Husain had traveled along the same route to indoctrination. He too had been well on the way to persuasion, over years of deepening immersion in the prevalent victim-aggressor culture of perverted Islam, that it was God's will, Allah's will, for his soldiers to kill the infidels - Jews, Christians, even nonextreme Muslims - to establish an all-powerful Islamist state.

Husain's book, recently published in the UK and yet to appear in the US, is horrifying precisely because it documents so candidly the smoothness with which Husain was recruited to such misguided ruthlessness. He was gradually drawn into ever more intolerant circles, and became prominent within them - helping to galvanize the process by which the racist, misogynist and thuggish ideology came to dominate various colleges in East London a decade or so ago.

Husain himself was thus instrumental in the trend that saw Islamist separation politics rise and thrive; hatreds inculcated among thousands of recruits against nonbelievers and against Britain; the adoption of Islamic clothing by female students on campuses, open confrontation with utterly overwhelmed and impotent college authorities and, in what was for Husain a climactic, epiphanic incident, a murder just outside the grounds of his own Newham College for which he holds himself partially, indirectly responsible. "It was we who had encouraged Muslim fervor," he writes, "a sense of separation from others, a belief that Muslims were worthier than other humans."…

I think Ed is being too hard on himself. The Muslim fervor and sense of superiority he speaks of isn’t something he, his late friend and other impressionable young lads came up with on their own. It’s all there, chapter and verse, in the perfect, uncreated word of God as text messaged to the Islam’s founder, the world’s first—and still most influential—jihadi.

Posted by: scaramouche at 15:55 | link | comments (1)

Backlash on campus: Queens University head Karen Hitchcock isn’t the only one feeling the heat after signing a strongly-worded public statement condemning British academe’s boycott of Israel. Ryerson’s Sheldon Levy is also feeling the sting of the anti-Zionists and their clueless but humanitarian-minded helpers. From the Jewish Tribune:

TORONTO – Ryerson University President Sheldon Levy has already denounced the proposed boycott of Israeli Academics by the British Universities and Colleges Union (UCU) but newly elected Ryerson Students’ Union (RSU) executives drafted a motion calling for a retraction of Levy’s statement on the basis of academic freedom – ironically, the very same principal Levy said the boycott undermines. Heather Kere, the new RSU vice president of education, drafted the motion along with RSU Academic Council Director Saron Ghebressellassie on July 19, a day after Kere attended a meeting sponsored by Student’s Against Israeli Apartheid  (SAIA) held in the boardroom of Ryerson’s Continuing Education Student’s Union and promoted by the Canadian Arab Federation.

“The main thrust of the meeting was strategizing ways they could get the university president to rescind his statement and get back at him through some sort of popular movement [for making his statement]. They seemed quite comfortable with using RSU resources and staff for this pro-Palestinian movement,” said a Canadian Federation of Jewish Students’ official who attended, who asked to remain anonymous.

“It’s like you know exactly what happened, like you talked to someone at the meeting,” Kere said, when asked to confirm whether the idea for the motion came from this meeting.

Kere, although she wouldn’t confirm or deny it, is alleged to be an active member of Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights (SPHR), but insists she is not anti-Israel and that the motion was drafted because Levy did not consult students before speaking for the university on such a large issue.

However, she did not consult students to find out what they thought before drafting the resolution either.

“There was no consultation needed for such a motion because we weren’t pushing a position we were simply asking that before any statement be made, consultation happen. There are certain decisions I am entrusted with as an elected official and I think student’s need to be asked [what they think by the university] before a statement is made.”

However, there is one member of the Ryerson community who wishes they were consulted about the motion. An anonymous letter to the Jewish Tribune reads: “I don’t think that my students’ union has the right to take this sort of position on behalf of the students of Ryerson – many of whom are Jewish – the majority of which would be offended to have their students’ union support antisemitism. I think that this decision is motivated by bigotry and arrogance and will create a chill on campus so that Jewish students don’t feel welcome. It will be very divisive and we don’t want what happens at York to happen at Ryerson too.”

RSU President Nora Loretto agrees that students should have been told about the motion.

“I think it’s kind of bizarre that we don’t get direction from the membership on this and this issue is so big that we definitely need it,” she said.

She added that this year’s executive is more divided than in previous years.

The motion was not tabled at the last board meeting due to a lack of a quorum, but it was expected to be tabled again at the next meeting on Aug.  22.

 

It’s nice to see that RSU Academic Council Director Saron Ghebressallassie is continuing her career of activism on behalf of progressive causes—and has now turned an eye toward what Canadian Arabs have isolated as a crucial global challenge. During her previous incarnation, as education and campaigns co-ordinator for the Ryerson Women's Centre, the highly motivated Ms. Ghebressallassie tended to concern herself with local controversies—like the woeful condition of tampon dispensers in Rye High’s chick washrooms.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:15 | link | comments

Pilger—the man and the verb: Pernicious anti-Zionist John Pilger—who, like all pernicious anti-Zionists, exists in an alternate reality wherein Jews are Nazis, Palestinians are innocent, victimized Yids and there’s no discernable jihad—is ecstatic that the world has finally come to its senses (in reality, lost its marbles) and signed on to the boycott of Israel. From hard left U.K. mag the New Statesman:

From a limestone hill rising above Qalandia refugee camp you can see Jerusalem. I watched a lone figure standing there in the rain, his son holding the tail of his long tattered coat. He extended his hand and did not let go. "I am Ahmed Hamzeh, street entertainer," he said in measured English. "Over there, I played many musical instruments; I sang in Arabic, English and Hebrew, and because I was rather poor, my very small son would chew gum while the monkey did its tricks. When we lost our country, we lost respect. One day a rich Kuwaiti stopped his car in front of us. He shouted at my son, "Show me how a Palestinian picks up his food rations!" So I made the monkey appear to scavenge on the ground, in the gutter. And my son scavenged with him. The Kuwaiti threw coins and my son crawled on his knees to pick them up. This was not right; I was an artist, not a beggar . . . I am not even a peasant now."

"How do you feel about all that?" I asked him.
"Do you expect me to feel hatred? What is that to a Palestinian? I never hated the Jews and their Israel . . . yes, I suppose I hate them now, or maybe I pity them for their stupidity. They can't win. Because we Palestinians are the Jews now and, like the Jews, we will never allow them or the Arabs or you to forget. The youth will guarantee us that, and the youth after them . . .".

That was 40 years ago. On my last trip back to the West Bank, I recognised little of Qalandia, now announced by a vast Israeli checkpoint, a zigzag of sandbags, oil drums and breeze blocks, with conga lines of people, waiting, swatting flies with precious papers. Inside the camp, the tents had been replaced by sturdy hovels, although the queues at single taps were as long, I was assured, and the dust still ran to caramel in the rain. At the United Nations office I asked about Ahmed Hamzeh, the street entertainer. Records were consulted, heads shaken. Someone thought he had been "taken away . . . very ill". No one knew about his son, whose trachoma was surely blindness now. Outside, another generation kicked a punctured football in the dust.

And yet, what Nelson Mandela has called "the greatest moral issue of the age" refuses to be buried in the dust. For every BBC voice that strains to equate occupier with occupied, thief with victim, for every swarm of emails from the fanatics of Zion to those who invert the lies and describe the Israeli state's commitment to the destruction of Palestine, the truth is more powerful now than ever. Documentation of the violent expulsion of Palestinians in 1948 is voluminous. Re-examination of the historical record has put paid to the fable of heroic David in the Six Day War, when Ahmed Hamzeh and his family were driven from their home. The alleged threat of Arab leaders to "throw the Jews into the sea", used to justify the 1967 Israeli onslaught and since repeated relentlessly, is highly questionable. In 2005, the spectacle of wailing Old Testament zealots leaving Gaza was a fraud. The building of their "settlements" has accelerated on the West Bank, along with the illegal Berlin-style wall dividing farmers from their crops, children from their schools, families from each other. We now know that Israel's destruction of much of Lebanon last year was pre-planned. As the former CIA analyst Kathleen Christison has written, the recent "civil war" in Gaza was actually a coup against the elected Hamas-led government, engineered by Elliott Abrams, the Zionist who runs US policy on Israel and a convicted felon from the Iran-Contra era.

The ethnic cleansing of Palestine is as much America's crusade as Israel's. On 16 August, the Bush administration announced an unprecedented $30bn military "aid package" for Israel, the world's fourth biggest military power, an air power greater than Britain, a nuclear power greater than France. No other country on earth enjoys such immunity, allowing it to act without sanction, as Israel. No other country has such a record of lawlessness: not one of the world's tyrannies comes close. International treaties, such as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, ratified by Iran, are ignored by Israel. There is nothing like it in UN history.

But something is changing. Perhaps last summer's panoramic horror beamed from Lebanon on to the world's TV screens provided the catalyst. Or perhaps cynicism of Bush and Blair and the incessant use of the inanity, "terror", together with the day-by-day dissemination of a fabricated insecurity in all our lives, has finally brought the attention of the international community outside the rogue states, Britain and the US, back to one of its principal sources, Israel…

The greatest moral issue of the age, huh? I thought the greatest moral issue of our age was whether the West had gumption enough to stand up to the Islamic supremacists. But then, I’m not a sagacious Elder, like old Nelson; nor am I a useful idiot determined to pilger (i.e. to pillory, smear, delegitimate) the one democracy—and the one bright spot—in the entire Islamo-loopy Middle East.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:34 | link | comments

Read between the lines (and the lyin'): The countdown to Iran’s nuclear capability continues, as the world continues to dally and dither and do nothing of real substance to dissuade the religious zanies from their plans. Meanwhile, we can read stories like this in one the Tehran Times. The text deals with how the mully-bullies are supposedly “co-operating” with the UN nuclear watchkitty; the subtext confirms that the IAEA is as clueless and toothless as ever, and it’s all systems go for blastoff:

TEHRAN – After two days of talks in Tehran between senior officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency and Iranian nuclear negotiators, the two sides said on Tuesday that they had reached an agreement on a “timetable” for Iran to answer the remaining questions about its nuclear activities.

Iran and the IAEA previously agreed that the remaining questions about Tehran’s peaceful nuclear program would be answered within the framework of a 60-day modality plan.

""We have in front of us… a work plan. We agreed on modalities on how to implement it. We have a timeline for the implementation,"" IAEA deputy director Olli Heinonen said after the talks, which he said were ""good, constructive.""

""I think this was an important milestone,"" he told a press conference. ""But this process will take its time.""

Heinonen said work would start swiftly on implementing Tuesday's agreement, with activities later this month as well as in September and October. Details of the deal would be included in a report for the IAEA board by early September.

Javad Vaeedi, the head of the Iranian negotiating team, also said the two sides agreed on a framework to resolve the ambiguities.

""The talks produced very great results and constructive progress,"" he added.

""We came up with a working plan on how to address the remaining issues,"" AFP quoted Vaeedi as saying.

In the modality plan, each subject will be investigated by a particular date, he explained.

Iran and the agency are currently in agreement on the methods for investigating the issues, Vaeedi added.

“Our desire to answer the remaining questions is serious.”

Iran has no intention of wasting time and this is why Iran has succeeded in reaching an agreement with the agency on a timeline, he observed.

On the details of the modality plan, he said issues such as inspection of the Arak heavy water facility and the drafting of a plan for the inspection of the Natanz enrichment facility have been included in the agreement.

Iran and the IAEA also met in July and earlier this month.

The two previous rounds of talks, in Vienna and Tehran earlier this summer, appeared to have improved relations between Iran and the UN agency.

Well, as long as the mully-bullies and the IAEA are getting along better—that’s all that really counts.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:16 | link | comments

A tale of two women: Not long ago the Canadian Islamic Congress went ballistic over the news that historian Bat Ye-or would be speaking at a conference sponsored by the Fraser Institute. And no wonder. Bat Ye’or has arguably done more than anyone else to shed light on a dark corner of history—Islam’s jihad against infidels and its ignominious treatment of dhimmis, conquered Christians and Jews. To add insult to injury (in CIC eyes, anyway), in her book Eurabia she documented the EU elites’ wholesale sell-out of Western civilization to the Arab world.

The CIC doesn’t like Bat Ye-or; not one little bit. But there is a wench who is far more to their taste: Yvonne Ridley, a British journalist who “reverted” to Islam when she was kidnapped by some ardent true believers, and a key member of George Galloway’s Islamo-Fascist Respect Party. The CIC is so thrilled to have the lovely and talented Yvonne in the fold that it is featuring her at some upcoming fund-raisers, and is promoting the events on its website:

 

How many times have we heard; "Where were you on 9/11?" Yvonne Ridley is certainly no stranger to one of the most loaded questions of our time. And in large measure, she chose to answer it not with the expected blow-by-blow reportage of a veteran journalist but with Ticket to Paradise, a debut novel combining love, tragedy and impeccably researched factual foundations.

The immediate logical approach would say that you can't properly analyze a historical event -- especially one of this magnitude -- by portraying the interwoven lives of fictional people. But after reading Ticket to Paradise and finding myself scarcely able to put it down between chapters, I think Ridley has found just the right formula to draw us into the unimaginable and give it a truly human face.

For each of us, the day that changed our world forever is etched into our minds by the image of World Trade Centre twin towers burning like ghastly torches over the ravaged skyline of Manhattan. But alongside that shared nightmare vision are very personal recollections of our own from that fateful Tuesday morning; decisions made and altered, viewpoints radically examined, dreams and aspirations deferred. Anyone who can say that he or she continued about their business as if nothing had happened is simply not telling the truth.

As a journalist, Yvonne Ridley was profoundly affected -- both personally and professionally -- by 9/11 and its fear-driven global aftermath. She became oddly famous not long after, getting herself captured by the Taliban while trying to work under cover (literally ... in a burka) in Afghanistan. Her first book, In the Hands of the Taliban, is a veteran reporter's factual account of the experience and is a must-read for anyone who wants to cut through the media misperceptions surrounding the incident.

But 9/11 itself was the ignition and momentum for her rather clumsy donkey ride into Taliban territory and subsequent international emergence as one of the most outspoken and proactive freed hostages of modern times (to the everlasting embarrassment of the British government!). During her days in captivity, in which she seriously dialogued with her keepers about the real truths of Islam, and the months following her media-splashed return to Britain, Ridley studied the people of the faith as intensely as the Qur'an itself, along with the tawdry international sub-politics of contrived warfare.

With her vast experience and ability at sifting mountains of raw news data to see the core of a story, she could have become a non-fiction expert and contributed yet another volume to the growing monument of "think tank literature" that will surely make 9/11 the most documented event of this century. But like such illustrious precursors as James Michener or Edwin Rutherford -- whose lengthy fiction odysseys have inspired many to study the factual events that inspired them -- Yvonne Ridley's shorter but no less insightful tale gives feet to real-world events and weaves a complex but accessible series of personalized responses around them.

I won't tell you the plot of how feisty London reporter, Judith Tempest, narrowly avoids marriage to an obscenely rich, charming and ethically empty New York lawyer; becomes romantically involved with a mysterious Muslim stranger; fights (and usually wins) battles with narrow-minded and self- absorbed editors; is followed by several sets of spying eyes; questions her faith and wrestles with the tensions between religion and culture; or how she is finally caught up in a surprising and shocking denouement.

What I've listed above are merely the ingredients. What Yvonne Ridley has accomplished in Ticket to Paradise is a tightly written narrative whose potent mixture of elements tells the truth behind the headlines through the realistic lives of imaginary people. This is fiction that often comes far closer to the heart of the 9/11 aftermath than most headline-driven news writing ever will. I know. I've been there.

GET "TICKET TO PARADISE" & DINE WITH YVONNE RIDLEY

-- AUTHOR WILL SIGN HER RECENT BOOK "TICKET TO PARADISE" AT CIC FUND RAISING DINNERS IN MONTREAL (FRIDAY SEPT.7), TORONTO (SAT SEPT.8) AND WATERLOO (SUN SEPT.9)

-- TICKETS: $40 regular, $20 reduced for students, seniors, etc , $100 for family

Fun for the whole mishpacha.

 

The Western Standard posts an open letter from some Quebec intellectuals who aren't too keen on Yvonne, and who deplore her upcoming Montreal appearance:

“Yvonne Ridley is coming to Montreal and Toronto this September at the invitation of the Islamic Congress of Canada. A British journalist captured by the Taliban in 2001, Yvonne Ridley converted to Islam and took up the faith and cause of her abductors. Her case is strangely evocative of ‘Stockholm Syndrome’.

“A commentator for Britain’s Islam Channel, where she is responsible for political issues, she is a founder and frequent candidate for the Respect Party, a deviant coalition of leftists, fundamentalist Muslims and Islamists. Yvonne Ridley supports, in its essence and entirety, the ideological program of radical Islam and defends even today the very Taliban against which the Canadian Forces is fighting a just and necessary combat.

“Ridley is also the London correspondent for a new television channel created by the Iranian regime of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called Press TV. The channel offers, according to Ridley, ‘…a different perspective from conventional media”. The Internet site of this channel has a section called “Analyses,” where one can find insinuations that the British government orchestrated the recent car bomb attacks on London and Glasgow in order to tarnish the image of Muslims in Great Britain. Ridley claims that she can say what she wants on Press TV.

“Why do the Iranian governmental authorities not stop her from lionizing Abu Hamza al-Masri, the openly Jihadist Imam at London’s Finsbury Park Mosque who Ridley called ‘quite sweet really’. Al-Masri is a fervent partisan of Al-Qaeda and has been detained by British police.

“Why do the Iranian authorities not reprimand her for calling on the British Muslim community to stop co-operating with the police in any security investigation? Why don’t they reproach her for having called Chechan Shamil Basayev, who perpetrated the horrific Beslan school massacre, a ‘martyr’?

“Why do the Iranians not oppose her eulogies to suicide bombers? Why are they not vexed that this ‘journalist’ expresses open sympathy for notorious terrorists, like Jordanian Abu Musad al-Zarqawi?

“Why? Because Yvonne Ridley plays the game for the enemies of the West and the friends of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad!

“We, the undersigned demand that the Islamic Congress of Canada publicly disassociate itself from Yvonne Ridley and manifest clearly to the Canadian and Quebec public its refusal to offer any form of support — direct or indirect — for Islamist terrorism." (The Suburban)

That Mo Elmasry sure can pick ‘em.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:34 | link | comments

Another cautionary tale: If you don’t pay attention to what’s happening under your very nose, pretty soon a humungous mosque will come to dominate the landscape. From Expatica:

Cologne, Germany (dpa) - Plans to reduce the height of a planned mosque in the cathedral city of Cologne were dropped on Wednesday after objections by the architects.

The Turkish mosque association Ditib said the mosque's two minarets would be 55 metres high, although some modifications would be made to the original design of the complex.

Architect Paul Boehm said reducing the height of the minarets would have left them out of proportion with the rest of the building and surrounding structures, such as a television tower and a high- rise block.

The Muslim minority has been facing vehement criticism in the city where there is a strong opposition to the 40-million-dollar (30- million-euro) mosque covering an area of 20,000 square metres.

The most widespread criticism has been that the proposed building would be too dominant. Plans call for it to have a 35-metre glass dome, space for 1,900 worshippers and a community centre with shops well as offices and a restaurant.

Boehm said the minarets would be more abstract and less traditional due to "organic changes in the dome-shaped construction of the mosque's prayer room."

Cologne Mayor Fritz Schramma had originally welcomed plans by Ditib to consider shortening the height of the minarets as a "first and an important step."

He said many city residents still had difficulty accepting the size of the mosque's domed roof in Cologne's Ehrenfeld inner-city area. Ditib said the mayor was happy with the latest compromise.

A recent survey of city residents by Omniquest pollsters showed 36 per cent favoured the original design, 31 per cent opposed the project and 27 per cent said they would accept a mosque on a smaller scale.

Ditib, backed by the Turkish ministry of religion, is a a major builder of mosques for ethnic Turkish Muslims in Germany.

Ralph Giordano, a novelist of Jewish origin with atheist views, has been one of the most vocal critics of the project. He said last month that mosques were "popping up like mushrooms and named after Ottoman conquerors."

He has also called on Muslims to learn secular values and integrate into German society.

Giordano received death threats for his criticism, but these were condemned by Ditib, which claims to represent a large section of the 3.2 million Muslims resident in Germany.

 

Why would Muslims want to learn secular values and integrate into German society when they can build immense palaces for Allah and remain exactly as they are?

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:37 | link | comments (1)

You get what you pay for: Ontario Conservative leader John Tory is running on an agenda of extending public funding to religious schools in the province; currently, Catholics are the only ones who have the tab for their schools picked up by the government. FrontPage Magazine offers a cautionary tale about what can happen when public coffers are opened and shared with an Islamic school—the public ends up financing an anti-social religious curriculum:

…The Khalil Gibran International Academy (KGIA), a publicly funded Arab language children’s school, is set to open its doors next month, on September 4, 2007. It’s a fact that has many in the community uneasy and upset, as the school has been found to have had numerous ties to Islamic extremism -- most notably through its Principal-designate, Debbie Almontaser, who recently resigned from her position after she defended t-shirts calling for a violent uprising (intifada) in New York City. Unfortunately, the radical behavior of KGIA extends much further than that of Miss Almontaser.

The KGIA Advisory Council is made up of a group of area leaders. One of the advisors is Talib Abdul-Rashid, the imam of the Mosque of Islamic Brotherhood (MIB), located in Harlem. From his infectious smile to his work with interfaith groups, one could easily get the false impression that this man is harmless, but viewing the institution he presides over, one sees an entirely different picture.

Allah is our goal
The Prophet Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah is our leader
The Qu’ran is our constitution
Jihad is our way
And death in the way of Allah is our promised end.

Reading the above passage, apart from its English translation, one would think that they were in Cairo, Egypt or Lahore, Pakistan, as it is straight out of the text of the Muslim Brotherhood founder’s, Hasan Al-Banna’s, treatise, ‘The Message of the Teachings.’ It is these exact words that have been the impetus for violence in the Muslim world for generations and the inspiration for scores of terrorists from Hamas, Al-Qaeda and the like. However, this author’s source for this is not Middle-Eastern or South Asian. No, it was written in the “About” section of the website for Abdul-Rashid’s mosque.

According to the site, the mosque, MIB, was founded in 1964, after Malcolm X departed from the Nation of Islam (NOI), the anti-Semitic hate group that is today run by Louis Farrakhan and his disciples. Abdul-Rashid became the imam of the center in 1989. Prior to that, he was receiving accolades for his leadership skills as a Cub Scout Master, and by the time he took over as imam, MIB’s Boy Scout program – Unit 357 – was well established. But what would seem to be a wholesome American pastime, when combined with Radical Islam, could be a recipe for disaster.

Unlike most Boy Scouts, MIB’s troop wore patches containing the Sword of Islam, a symbol of armed might. In time, the children got older, and MIB Boy Scout Troop 357 became Sea Explorer Ship 357, utilizing the SUNY Maritime Campus at Fort Schyler for meeting and training. This history is chronicled on the mosque’s website. Along with this are shown a series of pictures. Some are obviously old, photographed in black and white. However, some are in color and more recent. It’s the latter pictures that are disturbing, as a few of them portray older youths and adults in combat fatigues.

Was this just honest recreation or was/is it something more?

The MIB website was created in October of 2006. It was last worked on in December. This means that the material on it has been up for at least eight months, which encompasses more than the entire time that intentions of the new KGIA were announced to the public. When the founders of the school were picking an Advisory Council, one would think that they would have thoroughly researched the backgrounds of those they would soon entrust with their children’s well being. That is, unless those involved with the school had other intentions.

Even before Debbie Almontaser resigned, concerns about Khalil Gibran International Academy were understandable. Now that it has been revealed that one of its advisors heads a Muslim Brotherhood-oriented mosque with possible combat training, how can KGIA move forward? Unless they’re considering converting the school to an Islamist military academy, common sense would say it can’t…

Tell me, Mr. Tory: what safeguards will be in effect to prevent a Khalil Gibran-type school from sucking at the public teat in Ontario?

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:01 | link | comments (2)

Arrrrgh!: Jihad on the high seas.

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:43 | link | comments (1)

Flying chazer moment: A Ceeb report about Israel that isn't snide, scolding or in lockstep with hard Leftoid loathing for the Jewish state; a report that--be still my racing heart--is actually kind of positive.

Wonders never cease.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:09 | link | comments

The King sings: If Hizb ut-Tahir and the other Islamic supremacists have their way, the world will be presided over by a Muslim strongman—the caliph.

Here’s the caliph-to-be—whoever he is—proclaiming his caliphate to the tune of an old Roger Miller number. (All you dhimmis, start snapping your fingers now—or else):

 

Jihad has been the key—

That and the demography.

Our juggernaut’s been hailed.

Now ev’ry chick's been veiled.

Ya know, a caliph’s what I am.

Hey there, you, put down that ham.

I’m a man of laws with no flaws,

King of the world.

 

Third time we’ve gone all in.

Knew that it’s a cinch we'd win.

Allah, he sure came through

Just like Mo foretold he'd do.

We flog those who defy sharia.

Sometimes till they're red and raw.

I’m a man of laws with no flaws,

King of the world.

 

I know every dhimmi chief

In every land.

All of their children

Now heed my command.

And every kafir who’s not of “the book”

If they don’t fit and won’t submit

Well, their goose is cooked.

 

I sing, jihad has been the key—

That and lots of treachery.

Our juggernaut’s been hailed.

Now ev’ry chick's been veiled.

Ya know, a caliph’s what I am.

Hey there, you, put down that ham.

I’m a man of laws with no flaws,

King of the world.

Yes, I’m

King of the world.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:03 | link | comments

CAIR’s decline: Things had been going so well for CAIR. Its spokesman, “revert” Ibrahim Hooper, got plenty of airtime on mainstream media outlets like CNN. It had managed to downplay its supremacist agenda such that it was seen as a “moderate” advocacy group—the Muslim equivalent of the Jewish Anti-Defamation League. Folks down in Washington were feeling all warm ‘n’ fuzzy about it. Then—a naqba. CAIR was accused of helping siphon money to Hamas, and, so far, just hasn’t been able to get its groove back. From the Washington Times:

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) says it's suffering a decline in membership and fundraising and blames the Justice Department for listing it as an unindicted co-conspirator in a Texas case against a charity accused of ties to terrorists.

CAIR asked a U.S. District Court in Dallas to strike it from the list of more than 300 other Muslim groups named as unindicted co-conspirators in the government's case against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development. The case is being tried in Dallas.

"The public naming of CAIR as an unindicted co-conspirator has impeded its ability to collect donations as possible donors either do not want to give to them because they think they are a 'terrorist' organization or are too scared to give to them because of the possible legal ramifications of donating money to a 'terrorist' organization," CAIR said in an amicus curiae brief filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

The brief cites reporting by The Washington Times as evidence of the organization's declining membership. When this account of declining CAIR membership was published in The Times earlier this summer, CAIR denounced it as a "hit piece."

The Justice Department shut down the Holy Land Foundation and in 2004 indicted several of its top officers, who are accused of raising $36 million from 1995 through 2001 for the benefit of organizations and persons linked with Hamas, designated as a terrorist organization by the Clinton administration in 1995. The foundation raised $12.4 million after the designation that made such fundraising illegal, prosecutors say.

The 42-count federal indictment accuses the foundation's officers of conspiracy, providing support to terrorists, money-laundering and income-tax evasion.

On May 29, the Justice Department made public a list naming 307 unindicted co-conspirators — including CAIR — in the case now being tried before U.S. District Judge A. Joe Fish.

"The name of CAIR has been smeared by association with a criminal case that ostensibly involves the charitable funding of a 'terrorist' group," the brief, filed last week, sets out. The brief argues that federal prosecutors had no legitimate governmental interest in publicly releasing the names of CAIR and other unindicted co-conspirators. "Instead, the disclosure is the vindictive attempt of the government to smear a group which has been critical of the government's actions in aggressively and selectively prosecuting Muslim groups or persons," CAIR told the court.

Looks like Ibrahim and the brothers still have a lot of ‘splaining to do.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:23 | link | comments

Popular supremacists: The Globe and Mail’s Mark MacKinnon has an article about a so-called "alternative to Hamas":

KFAR AQAB, WEST BANK — The bearded young Muslims strode in silence until we reached the threshold of a nondescript mosque in this middle-class town on the edge of Ramallah. "Now we'll see if we can convert you," he said with a sudden smile.

He laughed, but it wasn't entirely a joke. There's nothing a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir takes more seriously than trying to convert others to their particular brand of Islam. The party's goal is the establishment of a worldwide Caliphate, a global Islamic empire. We're all welcome to join the umma, or Islamic nation, and become its subjects.

Founded in 1953, Hizb ut-Tahrir has for decades troubled governments from the United Kingdom to Uzbekistan with its calls for peaceful Islamic revolution and the establishment of strict sharia law. But it wasn't well known outside of intelligence circles until now.

In recent weeks, a newly assertive Hizb ut-Tahrir has been showing its strength across the Muslim world, most impressively by drawing 100,000 people to a soccer stadium in Indonesia earlier this month. They noisily called for a return to the time of the caliphs, a line of centuries of Islamic rulers that ended with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire more than 80 years ago.

Now the rapidly growing movement has been emerging from the shadows in the Palestinian territories as well, capitalizing on public unhappiness with the recent bloodshed between the mainstream Hamas and Fatah movements that has split the Palestinian cause in two. A recent rally in the West Bank drew a crowd estimated in the tens of thousands. Days later, the centre of Ramallah is still covered in dark red posters praising "The Caliphate: The Coming Force," and Palestinians are flocking to mosques to hear preachers with an angry message.

"Why are we watching infidels prosper in this world and not stopping them?" Sheik Abu Abdullah, a young-looking man sporting a black turban and a neat black beard, asked a silent crowd of 50 people gathered at the al-Faruq mosque in Kfar Aqab last night. The audience, all men, most middle-class professionals, sat in silence as a battery of ceiling fans sliced through the humid night air.

"Muslims in China, Indonesia, Pakistan and everywhere in their thousands are asking for God's government through the Caliphate. They demand the return of God's rule on Earth," the preacher continued. He acknowledged the road to a global Islamic empire would be a long one, but told the worshippers to "please be optimistic."

The scene at al-Faruq mosque was one that's now repeated nightly at mosques all around the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Hizb ut-Tahrir even offers such post-prayer "lessons" at Jerusalem's iconic al-Aqsa mosque, one of the holiest sites in Islam.

The message they're selling is one that resonates with Palestinians who feel betrayed by both the secular, corrupt Fatah movement of Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas and the often senseless violence perpetrated by Hamas, which recently seized military control of the Gaza Strip.

"Our numbers have increased and most importantly, the ones who are coming are the younger generation," Sheik Abdullah, who works as a health-care administrator during the day, said after the mosque had largely emptied. "People have tried other political parties and are fed up with them."

But Hizb ut-Tahrir won't try to capitalize on its new popularity in the next Palestinian elections. It teaches members that there should be no democracy, because democratic systems are a tool of Islam's chief enemy, the United States.

Nor does Hizb ut-Tahrir see value in Hamas's policy of using violence against Israel. Sending poorly armed Palestinians to fight the Israeli army is "fruitless," Sheik Abdullah said. The Jewish state and its occupation of Palestinian lands will be dealt with later by the combined armies of Islam.

"The solution is not to send 10,000 people from Gaza into Israel or to remove some military checkpoints," said Abu Abed, a 36-year-old physics teacher and senior Hizb ut-Tahrir member who attended last night's lesson.

"Even if a Palestinian state was established under the best conditions, what kind of country would it be? A country like Yemen or Jordan?" he continued, listing off two Arab regimes with repressive, secular, governments that Hizb ut-Tahrir wants to overthrow.

The movement also shrugs off Hamas's recent takeover of the Gaza Strip, charging that Hamas is not Islamic enough because it pursues the goal of a Palestinian state instead of a borderless caliphate. Other fundamentalists who seized power, such as Afghanistan's deposed Taliban, are also dismissed as not having gone far enough…

On the continuum of Islamic lunacy, I’m not sure anything can go farther than Hamas and the Taliban, but it sounds like HuT, an Islamic supremacist movement renowned for extremism, is willing to give it that old college try.

 

My ultra-succinct letter to the Globe:

 

So the “alternative” to Hamas, an Islamist organization which seeks to restore the caliphate—the world-wide rule of Islam—through violent means is Hizb ut-Tahir, an Islamist organization which seeks to restore the caliphate through less violent means?

 

Six of one, half a dozen of the other, I’d say.

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:43 | link | comments

Bewitched, bothered, black and blue: Count your blessings that you do not have to perform one of the most thankless—and potentially, one of the deadliest—jobs in the world: female domestic in Zam Zam land. From Arab News:

JEDDAH/RIYADH, 22 August 2007 — One of the Indonesian maids allegedly beaten up by her employers two weeks ago was taken into custody on Monday from hospital where she was being treated for her injuries.

The Indonesian Embassy was not informed beforehand of the transfer nor has it been allowed official access to the woman or her fellow maid, who was also beaten up by the employers and is still in hospital.

“Tari Tarsim, 27, has been taken away by police to an unknown destination, while Ruminih Surtim, 25, is still in the hospital recovering from her injuries,” Sukamto Javaladi, labor counselor at the Indonesian Embassy, told Arab News yesterday.

A vicious attack two weeks ago on four maids working for the same employers in Aflaj in the Riyadh region resulted in the death of Siti Tarwiyah Slamet, 32, and Susmiyati Abdul Fulan, 28. Tari and Ruminih were left severely injured in the incident. Seven members of the family that the maids were working for are also being held.

The Indonesian Embassy has not yet been officially notified of the incident and only found out about it through Indonesian nationals in Aflaj.

Tarsim and Surtim were admitted into intensive care at Aflaj General Hospital and then were transferred last week to the Riyadh Medical Complex where they have been placed under 24-hour police guard.

“Tari was transferred to police custody yesterday (Monday) but we don’t know why,” said Adi Dzul Fuat, vice consul at the Indonesian Embassy. “The policewoman guarding their room at the hospital told us that Tari has been transferred to jail,” he said.

The embassy has not yet been given a copy of the medical report or allowed access to pictures of the victims. According to doctors Ruminih would take at least seven more days to get recover. Tari came to the Kingdom in early January, while Ruminih has been in the Kingdom since October last year.

Tarsim spoke to Arab News about the attack when she was at Aflaj Hospital. She said that the 17-year-old son of her employer whipped her with his igal accusing her of practicing witchcraft…

I'm not even going to ask what his "igal" is.

 

All things considered, you would think that being adept at witchcraft would be seen as a plus in the maid game. Just think of all the housework that could be conjured à la Samantha Stevens with a twitch of the nose.

Posted by: scaramouche at 22:31 | link | comments

Oh, goody: The UN is planning to hold another of its anti-racism soirees. The last one was a dazzling fiesta of unapologetic Judenhass held in Durban, South Africa during what turned out to be the calm before the 9/11 storm. Can’t hardly wait to see what the Jew-hating internationalists have cooked up this time.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:02 | link | comments

But she draws the line at getting a clitorectomy: Gwen Stefani, now on tour promoting her latest batch of brainlessly infectious tunes, reportedly covered up for some "moderate" Muslim fans.

You know they're "moderates" because the real holy-rollers ain't going anywhere near a Gwen Stefani concert--unless it's to rage and seethe about what a decadent slut she is.

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

Packaged wisdom: I am constantly amused—and not in a good way—by the plethora of self-righteous marketers who consider the vendor-customer relationship to consist in large part of the vendor getting to feel good about selling the customer a bunch of half-baked ideas along with the product. A real package deal, if you will. For example, I received a birthday gift that came from lululemon, an upscale (and dare one say, overpriced) chain devoted to Yoga apparel. But not just to tight-fitting track suits with lots of give. Lululemon is committed to selling the Yoga lifestyle and all it supposedly entails: spirituality, self-reflection, social responsibility, a commitment to the environment, goodness, niceness, faith, hope and charity—the whole Yoga enchilada. The reusable bag in which my gift was tucked was emblazoned with two messages on which, no doubt, I was supposed to ruminate. On one side: “Friends are more important than money.” On the other side: “Jealousy works the opposite way you want it to.”

Wow. How mega-profound—and how tedious. Preachy uplift from a shopping sack.

 

Another company given to such preaching: Starbucks. Stopping for my usual hot beverage (a venti Earl Grey tea) at my favourite Starbucks, I had occasion to imbibe the message on the two paper cups handed to me by the Starbucks barista. (I always mean to remind them that I only need one cup, but only after they’ve put the way-too-hot tea in two cups plus a cardboard ring to keep the heat from my hand.) Starbucks has a running series of preachy uplift on its paper cups—drink for thought which it calls “The Way I See It.” I was confronted by “The Way I See It,"  nos. 247 and 248. Here’s #247, the reflection of someone named Bill Scheel, whose sole credential for offering this deep thought is that he is a “Starbucks customer”:

 

Why in moments of crisis do we ask God for strength and help? As cognitive beings, why would we ask something that may well be a figment of our imagination for guidance? Why not search inside ourselves for the power to overcome? After all, we are strong enough to cause most of the catastrophes we need to endure.

 

We are? What about those catastrophes that are the result of natural causes? The ones we generally refer to as—what’s that old-fashioned expression?—oh, yeah, “acts of God.” I don’t know about Bill, but I’m not ready to claim to be able to strong to enough to cause a tsunami, or an earthquake.

 

But while we’re on the subject of God and belief, by what right, divine or decaffeinated, does Starbucks think it can push an atheistic agenda on its coffee cups? Who are they, the Richard Dawkins of java? And isn’t one’s faith—or lack thereof—a strictly private matter that is none of anyone's—and least of all, Starbucks’—business?

 

The next “The Way I See It” is by Jimmy Wales, “Founder of Wikipedia.” Jimmy, too, wants us to consider the big, beautiful picture:

 

Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. Wikis give us a place where anyone who is kind, thoughtful, and intelligent can come and join us in building a better and more rational world.

 

Well, Kumbafrikkinya. As has been recently revealed, Wikis also give us a place where anyone with a political agenda or an axe to grind—someone who may or may not be kind, thoughtful, and intelligent—can add his or her cents worth, thereby helping to build a world that is neither better nor more rational, nor one in which Wikipedia can or should be trusted as an authoritative source of information.

 

Enough product profundity for one day. I am now going to tear open a bag of JELLY-BELLY jelly beans which, praise the Lord (or Gaia), is delightfully message-free.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:16 | link | comments

Membership has its privileges: How to account for the enduring appeal of the jihad? Islam’s founder, the world’s first and foremost jihadi (and a man who, first and foremost, was a jihadi) offered what for many has proven to be a nearly irresistible rewards program: booty in this world; booty in the world to come.

Sort of like Air Miles—only with a much bigger pay off.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:21 | link | comments

In a “charitable” frame of mind: Islam Online decries the way the U.S. has clamped down on humaniterrorism (my portmanteau, of course, not the Wahhabists’):

DEIR EL-BALAH, Gaza Strip — The US and the West Bank-based government of Salam Fayyad are trying to dry up the major charities in the impoverished and isolated Gaza Strip on accusations of being Hamas real power base.

"They (the banks) said they were sorry but that they had no choice," Abu Ahmed, an official at Al-Salah Association, one of the largest charities in the Strip and which had its bank accounts frozen by the government earlier their month, told Reuters.

Some 80 percent of the charity's annual budget, estimated at $5 million, comes from donors abroad using the banking system. Al-Salah, which is based in the Deir el-Balah refugee camp in Gaza also pays its beneficiaries by cheque.

The Faayad's decision came after the US government designated the charity a "key support node for Hamas."

Established in 1978, al-Salah runs two schools and four medical centers and provides support each month to the families of more than 10,000 Palestinian children who have lost their fathers.

Abu Ahmed, who declined to give his full name for fear he would be added to the US government blacklist, said the charity's services were open to all poor Palestinians, regardless of faction.

"Now all this will stop," Abu Ahmed said. "I don't know what I will tell them. I don't know what to say."

Abu Ahmed said the decision is politically motivated and driven by the Bush administration to help the Fayyad government.

The Islamic Charity, another large Gaza service provider, said it emptied out most its own bank accounts after receiving warnings that it could be targeted next.

The US government has already targeted Islamic charities in the USA, which the administration accused of being linked to Hamas.

Officials and financiers of the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, once America's biggest Muslim charity, are standing trial over links to Hamas, which Washington designates as a terrorist organization.

In 2003, the Bush administration froze the assets of five Islamic charities abroad, accusing them of funding Palestinian "terrorist" activities.

But a former FBI operative in the occupied Palestinian territories had told The Washington Post that Palestinian groups gave US money funneled to them under the guise of donations to charitable organizations and not used them for "terrorist activities."…

A former FBI operative, huh? I guess he doesn’t want to be named for fear of looking like A BLITHERING IDIOT.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:40 | link | comments

Neat trick: Using the Koran to try to persuade impressionable British lads who might be prone to “extremism” to settle down and become good citizens, that is. From the New York Times via the Toronto Star:

BRADFORD, England–At the Jamia Mosque on Victor St. in this racially and religiously tense town, Idris Watts, a teacher and convert to Islam, tackled a seemingly mundane subject with a dozen teenage boys: why it is better to have a job than to be unemployed.

"The Prophet said you should learn a trade," Watts told the students arrayed in a semicircle before him. "What do you think he means by that?"

"If you get a trade it's good because then you can pass it on," said Safraan Mahmood, 15.

"You feel better when you're standing on your own feet," offered Ossama Hussain, 14.

The back-and-forth represented something new in Britain's mosques: an effort to teach basic citizenship issues in a special curriculum designed to reach students who might be vulnerable to Islamic extremism.

Over the long haul, the British government hopes civics classes using the Qur'an to answer questions about daily life will replace often tedious, sometimes hardcore, religious lessons taught in many mosques, often by Pakistani-born imams with little contact to larger British society.

The curriculum, written by Bradford teacher Sajid Hussain, 34, who holds a degree from Oxford University, is being taught in some religious classes in a city increasingly segregated between South Asians and whites.

The effort is backed by the Labour government as part of a hearts-and-minds campaign to better integrate the country's roughly 2 million Muslims into British culture.

Since four British Muslim suicide bombers attacked the London transit system in July 2005, and two other major terrorist plots supposedly planned by British Muslims were alleged last year, officials have been struggling with how to isolate extremists.

Gordon Brown, the new prime minister, said at his first news conference last month he wanted to demonstrate the "importance we attach to non-violence, the importance we attach to the dignity of each individual.

"The question for us," he said, "is how we can separate those extremists from the moderate mainstream majority."

The Labour government has been particularly concerned because, in part through its involvement in the Iraq war, it lacks credibility with large swaths of British Muslims.

An estimated 100,000 school-age Muslim children attend religious classes at mosques in Britain daily, generally after regular school hours, said Jane Houghton, a spokesperson for the Department of Communities and Local Government. "The impact this teaching could have is quite considerable," she said…

One humungous fly in the ointment: all those post-Hejira passages, the ones that cancel out the earlier nicey-nicey “there’s no compulsion in religion” type passages—commanding the faithful to wage a jihad on the infidels until the world has been conquered for Islam. Kind of hard to ignore what’s writ—what’s holy writ—in black and white.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:16 | link | comments

Propoganda in the Globe: Apparently, we’re all supposed to feel really sorry for the poor Palestinians over in Gaza who, because of a Western fuel embargo, haven’t had any power for the past few days. (Surely their non-Western "friends"—the ones with all the oil—could help them out.) The Globe and Mail’s Mark MacKinnon, ever one to wax lachrymosely over the Palestinians’ plight, bemoans the results of what he calls “the international war of attrition against Hamas.” And to drive the point home, his article is adorned with a Reuters photo of a Gaza moppet, in the dark save for a small candle casting light on his adorable form. Indeed a poignant chiaroscuro, one bound to tug the pliant heartstrings of Globe readers.

Well, not all its readers:

As the Reuters photo of a small Palestinian boy clutching a candle in the midst of a Gaza power failure shows, it is always the children who suffer the most from the ill-considered decisions of their elders. In this child’s case, he is doubly in the dark. He is at the mercy of a rogue regime which takes its marching orders from Iran, and which remains intent on an implacable jihadist agenda. He has also been bombarded by messages of hate on Hamas TV, most sickeningly, perhaps, on a children’s show on which large talking animals implore the very young to become suicide bombers—martyrs for Allah.

 

The one obvious benefit of the current blackout: the toxic kiddie program is off the air. However, the children of Gaza had better hunker down for a long period of darkness—both literally and figuratively—because the lights can only come on once Hamas has been deposed.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:36 | link | comments

Barak’s “heresy”: Ehud Barak, formerly Israel’s Prime Minister, currently its defence minister, dares to ask a question no one seems to want to pose—what happens when, as now seems likely, Hamas is finally in charge of the whole Palestine shebang? From YNet News:

One shouldn't envy the head of the Labor Party. The "priests" of peace will not forgive him. Although he has not yet renounced the central tenet – a foreign state on the Land of Israel, Jerusalem to the Arabs, Jewish communities to be destroyed and expelled – but for Catholics, even a small sign of independent thought or doubt is enough to depose a person from the church of true believers, and from there the way is short to the stake.

Barak says that we cannot allow the establishment of a Palestinian state until we find a way to stop the Qassam rockets. He talks of a period of at least five years. And here's another proof of the dangers of allowing independent thinking: Is it only Qassams that are likely to be fired from Palestine?

After all, how many years will it take before we find an electronic defense against the bullets that will fly in Jerusalem from the Palestinian streets? And after we find a solution to the "flying objects", will we have to hold back on a Palestinian state until there's an answer to the tunnel that our pleasant neighbors will dig under the separation fence? 

And if Barak insists on first closing every possible hole – is there an electronic device against handgrenades thrown at Jewish vehicles from the other side of the wall? Against suicide bombers? Against terror planned by a sovereign Palestinian state, or supported from abroad, or from the "Revolutionary Guards" brought by Iran, or scores of thousands of "refugees" who will march in the direction of Lod and Ramle?

According to Barak's methodology, grass will grow on the cheeks of the peace camp, and the redemption of Palestine will not come to pass, until a miracle occurs in the hearts and minds of the Arabs, and they, of their own free will, will reeducate their children, from kindergarten to university, to a different, a more Western worldview.

Barak is also likely to think another step ahead, and arrive at the conclusion that there will never be, in response to Palestinian provocation, another chance to implement Operation Defensive Shield. The world will not allow us to go back into the cities of a sovereign Palestinian state to fight against terror.

At this point, we are only a few steps away from the greatest heresy of all – the conclusion that Jewish settlement, which sits in the heart of the lions' den, is a positive development because it prevents the establishment of a terror state that would turn the life of the Jewish state into hell.

And here's another heresy uttered by Barak: Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad are unable to implement anything in the "West Bank"….

 

Shocking! But only for those who haven’t been reading and heeding Ms. Caroline Glick, who’s been shouting it from the rooftops for lo these many months.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:37 | link | comments

How do you solve a problem like the mullahs?: Common sense seems to be in uncommonly short supply these days. It is thus refreshing to read something like this, from NRO:

Two reactions are appropriate to the Bush administration’s decision to place Iran’s Revolutionary Guard on the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations. First, one should cheer. Second, one should ask how much longer it will take the president to resolve the contradiction at the heart of his Iran policy.

One should cheer because the Revolutionary Guard is among the world’s most effective forces for barbarity and chaos. Separate from Iran’s regular military, it espouses the revolution-exporting ideology of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Ali Khamenei (the latter of whom possesses ultimate control of its actions). It has killed Americans gladly, as at the Khobar Towers. Its current specialty is killing American soldiers in Iraq, through Iraqi proxies, with armor-piercing bombs. These things alone do not make it a terrorist group in the precise sense of that term, but its arming and financing of Hezbollah certainly does. Likewise the massacres of civilians that its aid to Iraqi militants has made possible.

To designate the Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist entity, then, is to acknowledge reality. Yet there is something decidedly unrealistic in the idea that the Revolutionary Guard can be separated from the Iranian government as a whole. (The distinctions got even more jesuitical when it emerged that the State Department might not designate the entire Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, but simply its Quds Force, composed of special covert units.) There is no getting around the fact that the Revolutionary Guard — including the Quds Force — expresses the will of Iran’s highest rulers. If what it does counts as terrorism, they count as terrorists.

Given their history of working mayhem in the Middle East and beyond (recall, for example, their handiwork in Argentina in 1994), this is an obvious enough fact, and the State Department designation will do little to make it more obvious. It will also do little to hurt Iran — the designation would freeze any assets the Revolutionary Guard had in the U.S., but, as you might imagine, it prefers to bank elsewhere.

What the designation does do is lay bare the contradiction in President Bush’s Iran policy. After September 11, in a moment of great strategic clarity, Bush said that the U.S. would not distinguish between terrorists and the governments that harbored them. Yet his administration has approached Iran — the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism — as though it were a legitimate government, capable of being persuaded to adopt positions agreeable to liberal democracies.

On Iran’s nuclear program, Bush has deferred first to Europe and then to Condoleezza Rice’s State Department in allowing years of negotiating, followed by a few more years of negotiating, followed by (wait for it) more negotiating.

Worse than do nothing, this strategy created an illusion that the world was seriously confronting Iran when just the opposite was true. The two Security Council resolutions against the Islamic Republic were so weak as to be meaningless, except in distracting attention from alternative courses of action (e.g., effective sanctions or military force). Iran’s leaders have grown more brazen at every turn — kidnappings of foreign soldiers and proxy wars are now par for the course — yet the Bush administration has remained unable to forge a credible policy.

What one should hope now is that the administration, in its waning days, is making a course correction. The squeamishness with which much of Europe opposes the designation suggests that it fears just this. For a variety of reasons — economic interest, anti-Americanism, and reflexive pacifism chief among them — it would prefer to avoid any bad blood with the Islamic Republic. Most of the U.S. State Department feels likewise. But the simple truth is that, unless Iran’s regime gives up both its terrorist ideology and its weapons, we will never be safe. The president has taken an important — albeit partial and overdue — step toward facing that unpleasant reality.

 

Partial and overdue—but not nearly far enough to thwart the kooky nukers.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:36 | link | comments

Even-steven at CNN: Starting tomorrow there’s going to be yet another mainstream exercise in moral equivalence, this one courtesy the earnest folks over at CNN. Christiane Amanpour, adept at such legerdemain, hosts three one hour documentaries exploring extremism in the three Abrahamic faiths. Here’s the low down on what to expect, from the Toledo Blade:

Davoud Abdolhadi was 13 years old when the Iranian army sent him to the front lines to fight Iraq.

He came home alive — and today, more than two decades later, he remains disappointed by his survival.

“Martyrdom was my greatest wish, but for me it was not meant to be,” Abdolhadi says.

Yehuda Etzion of Israeli spent seven years in prison for plotting to blow up the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, an act that likely would have triggered a Jewish-Islamic bloodbath. The mosque, Islam’s third-holiest shrine, sits atop the ruins of Judaism’s Second Temple, and Etzion asserts that the Messiah cannot appear until the temple is rebuilt.

Ron Luce, founder of Teen Mania Ministries, says “virtue terrorists” are “raping virgin teenage Americans on the sidewalk and everybody is walking by and acting like everything is OK. It’s not OK.”

These examples of religious extremism have become increasingly common over the last three decades, but most of the time the media report the news without exploring the underlying factors that breed radicalism and terrorism.

God’s Warriors, a three-part television series to be broadcast Tuesday through Thursday at 9 p.m. on CNN, Buckeye CableSystem Channel 2, looks at the reasons why people of faith are willing to kill or be killed for their beliefs.

Christiane Amanpour, CNN’s chief international correspondent, spent eight months traveling the globe, interviewing dozens of religious leaders, scholars, and politicians for the program that will be broadcast in three two-hour segments — God’s Jewish Warriors, God’s Muslim Warriors, and God’s Christian Warriors.

For those who follow the news closely, there will be few major revelations in this series. Most of God’s Warriors centers on pivotal events of recent history that have religious connections — from the 1967 Six-Day War to the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin in 1995 to the London subway bombings of 2005 to the appointment of Justice Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court last year.

Around this historical framework, however, Amanpour and her crew expand on the events by interviewing extremists and their families and getting insights from political, cultural, and religious experts, seeking to understand the reasons behind the headlines…

 

Unbelievable. Six years on and clueless Christiane and her gormless employers still refuse to acknowledge that there’s something qualitatively different about the jihad.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:18 | link | comments

Political animal: Dr. Mohammed Elmasry, a mainstay of the Liberal Party and the head of the Canadian Islamic Congress, generously shares his wisdom with us in another of his insightful, erudite essays. In his most recent peroration, Mo slams the usual suspects—the Americans and the JOOOS—for being the font of all evil, with Arabs, as always, being their innocent, “peace”-minded victims:

It is a sad but common reality that domestic politics in any country are conducted on a lower moral plane than private sector institutions.

At the international level, where standards are often even lower, brave attempts have been made by such organizations as the League of Nations and its successor, the UN, to raise matters of governance to a somewhat higher standard.

But in a world which still operates largely according to the law of the jungle, the United States - as the only remaining global superpower -- gets what it wants, when it can, for the benefit of its citizens; or more accurately, for the benefit of its rich and powerful citizens.

This primacy of American goals leaves all other Western countries including Canada in the role of junior partners (or less), who must submit to U.S. bullying tactics. Other countries on the international stage are victimized because of their rich resources.

With such a badly skewed and uneven playing field, it is no wonder that the intelligent and honest application of politics in international affairs is painfully lacking. Western political leaders, more than any others throughout history, continue to be responsible for ongoing warfare that daily causes devastation, destruction, death and chronic human misery for millions. Just as tragically, these same leaders have also been originators of too many "bad peaces." Their wars have been heralded as necessary to preserve "civilization," to "make the world safe," to spread "democracy," to "destroy Communism," to fight "against terror," etc.

But the hard truth is that their wars were attacks upon peaceful nations. And their so-called diplomacy bypassed the core values of rule by reason and law, upheld by the UN in the hope of making future conflict impossible. That hope has been dashed countless times.

The American invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, the continuing occupation of Palestinian lands by Israel for more than 40 years, and current threats by the U.S. and Israel to attack Iran, are all classic examples of political evil made incarnate….

 

Look in the mirror, Mo, and behold the true image of political evil made incarnate—political Islam in all its preening glory.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:54 | link | comments

Beeb imbecility: The Beeb, ever sensitive to the sensitivities of a hyper-sensitive community, has decided not to film an episode of a popular drama series in which a terror attack would be perpetrated by radical Muslims. Instead, the perpetrators of the terror attack will be members of a radical animal rights group.

The powers-that-Beeb may think that, by taking this route, they’re safe from reprisals. In which case, I have two words for them: Pim Fortuyn.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:30 | link | comments

Last one out of Gaza, be sure to shut off the lights: Oh, wait—they’re already off. From China Daily:

GAZA CITY - Gaza hummed with the sound of generators on a fourth day of power cuts on Monday as the European Union reviewed whether to resume paying for fuel of the territory's sole power plant.

Candles disappeared from supermarket shelves as the coastal strip's residents stocked up on supplies in one of the world's most densely populated places where most people depend on outside aid for survival.

"Our life is becoming more and more difficult," said Umm Jaber, a 40-year-old mother of six in Gaza City. "They've closed the borders, they've cut jobs. Today they've cut the electricity, tomorrow they'll cut the air for us."

The power cuts were the latest blow to hit the territory that has been effectively sealed off by Israel since the Islamist Hamas movement seized control two months ago, sparking fears of a humanitarian crisis.

They also marked the latest point of contention between the Western-shunned Islamists and the Western-backed Palestinian government in the occupied West Bank, as the two sides blamed each other for the cuts.

"Everything in my refrigerators is rotting," said Abu Mohammed, a supermarket owner in Gaza City. "All of the ice cream stocks have been ruined. I'm losing a lot of money."

The power outages began late on Friday when Gaza's only power plant -- which according to the EU provides between 25 and 30 percent of the territory's power -- shut down all but one of its generators.

It did so because its diesel supplies had dwindled after Israel shut the fuel border crossing, citing security concerns.

Israel reopened the crossing on Sunday, but diesel for the plant was not delivered because the EU -- which finances the supplies -- suspended payments out of "security concerns," forcing the plant to close completely.

"We are still assessing the situation" and hope to resume supplies either later on Monday or Tuesday, an EU spokeswoman in Jerusalem said.

In Brussels, European Commission spokeswoman Antonia Mochan said however it would not resume paying for fuel unless it receives assurances that Hamas will not tax electricity in Gaza.

The EU's executive arm understands that Hamas "plans to introduce taxes on electricity bills in the Gaza Strip," Mochan said.

"As you can understand, this would not allow us to continue paying for fuel helping to produce the electricity," she said.

The EU blacklists Hamas as a terror group and refuses to have any dealings with the Islamists. If it provides fuel to a power plant, and Hamas earns money by introducing taxes on that plant's production, the bloc could be seen as indirectly financing the movement.

The power cuts have become a new source of tension between Hamas and president Mahmud Abbas's government in Ramallah.

"We warned for weeks that Gaza would fall into darkness if Hamas does not stop occupying the electricity company and does not stop holding on to millions of shekels that they collected from the people of Gaza," information minister Riyad al-Malki told reporters in Ramallah.

In Gaza, Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said: "The leaders in Ramallah bear complete responsibility for the power cuts in Gaza. They have incited Israel and the European Union to stop the delivery of fuel."

Hamas, which has been in the dark (or at least in the Dark Ages) from the beginning, is now sitting there literally.

I think that’s what you’d call “just desserts”.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:11 | link | comments

Hard truths: In keeping with its traditional fondness for masterful totalitarians, the hard left is currently infatuated with one of the most unlovable bunch of strongmen on the planet—Iran’s mully-bullies. Joseph Klein on the FrontPage Magazine site lambastes the useful idiots whose boundless adoration for the bad guys is exceeded only by their revulsion for the civilized world:

In the alternative universe inhabited by the radical Left, Iran’s mad mullahs want nothing more than peaceful co-existence with the United States and Israel. Vice President Cheney and Senator Lieberman are the war-mongers, we are told - egged on by the Zionists and the Jewish lobbyists who control the key power centers in Washington, D.C.

You can read an example of this kind of pro-Iranian propaganda in a blog, featured on the August 17^th edition of the Left-wing Huffington Post, entitled Cheney, Lieberman and Iran War Conspiracy.  The author, Dr. Gareth Porter, is described on his blog as an investigative historian, journalist on U.S. national security policy and frequent writer on Iran and Iraq.

Porter is one of the radical Left’s most prolific commentators who lash out against the Bush Administration’s policy toward the Islamic fanatics running Iran today. His articles appear regularly on Left-wing sites like Huffington Post, American Prospect, Antiwar.com, and TomPaine.com.

Gareth Porter, along with Noam Chomsky, are heroes of the radical Left movement for their long record of denouncing American policies in Southeast Asia and the Middle East, which they say are built on lies and reflect our country’s imperialistic designs to dominate the world with military force. Consistently on the wrong side of history as millions have been liberated from the yoke of oppressive regimes by the sacrifices of the American people, these Leftist idols plow on with their defense of the indefensible. Giving the benefit of the doubt to their own democratically elected leaders rather than some of the world’s worst tyrants is simply not part of their DNA.

Porter’s writings on Iran provide clues to this boneheaded ‘thinking’. For example, in one recent article, Porter claimed that “[D]espite the administration’s complaints that Iran is supporting the Shiite militias who are causing sectarian violence, the United States itself is the quartermaster of the forces of sectarian civil war.”

Our tireless attempts to foster a viable ruling coalition representing the Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds, operating in a constitutional framework within which they can settle their differences peacefully, floats completely over this radical apologist’s head…

 

Actually, it also floats completely over this unapologetically non-radical’s head. It’s hard to see how, operating in a constitutional framework predicated on sharia law, one inimical to democracy, the groups involved are going to be able to “settle” their age-old differences—especially with the mullahs doing their level best to ensure that chaos prevails, the framework for the return of their Messiah, which they see as imminent. Then again, it's hard to see Iraqis being able to come to a peaceful resolution even if their constitution were democratic.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:37 | link | comments

First and best: The masses have spoken and have decided that the opening line of Rick James’s song “Super Freak” is the best one that’s ever been penned. The line in question: “She’s a very kinky girl.” (Not surprisingly, it was written by someone who was a very kinky boy.)

Wow. How very Cole Porter.

 

I can think of lots of other openers that are far more compelling, including:

 

• You walked in to the party/Like you were walkin’ onto a yacht…

 

• Holly came from Miami, F-L-A…

 

• Well, it’s a marvellous night for a moondance/With the stars up above in your eyes…

 

• The screen door slams, Mary’s dress sways…

 

• Roxanne, you don’t have to put on the red light…

 

• On a dark desert highway, cool wind in my hair/Warm smell of colitas risin’ up through the air…

 

• Once upon a time you dressed so fine/You threw the bums a dime in your prime, didn't you?

And from an earlier era:

 

Some day, when I'm awfully low,
When the world is cold,
I will feel a glow just thinking of you
And the way you look tonight.

 

For my money, you can’t beat those Gershwins.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:54 | link | comments (2)

Sing out, Osama: The Globe and Mail has an amusing editorial cartoon. It shows three 7^th Century nostalgists—“the Taliban Glee Club"—performing a rollicking parody of a seasonal song:

Roll out those lazy, hazy, crazy days of jihad.

Those days of car bombs and martyrs and fear.

Roll out those lazy, hazy, crazy days of jihad

You’ll wish that jihad could always be here!

 

Not bad. Here’s my song parody, a nod to the first—and to my mind, the best—musical in which swastikas and Nazis were integral elements (so there, Mel Brooks). I imagine it being belted out by ObL, who, while claiming to revile our decadent, devilish way, knows a thing or two about showstoppers:

 

What good is living in Dar al Islam?

Life there it ain’t so great.

Let’s have a Caliphate, my friends.

We need a Caliphate.

Pick up a sabre, a bomb and a gun,

Fill up your hearts with hate.

Let’s have a Caliphate, my friends.

We need a Caliphate.

Come seethe and rage.

Come rant and whine.

Come take what’s yours

And act all vultural.

They won’t mind—

It’s multicultural!

Start by admitting

From cradle to tomb,

Is only when you’re sensate.

Let’s have a Caliphate, my friends.

We need a Caliphate.

And as for me,

And as for me,

I made my mind up back in Saudi

When I go

It’s gonna be gaudy!

Strap on some semtex

And blow yourself up.

Your body is just dead weight.

The afterlife is your fate, my friends.

And we need a Cal-

Iph-

Ate!

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:50 | link | comments

Dead Catholic Elder pulls the strings: The Catholic Church in France has never been noted for its warm ‘n’ fuzzy feelings toward the Jews, but according to an article on Islam Online, French bishops are supposedly resisting a rapprochement with Muslims because of—well, it’s obvious, isn’t it?

…Father Michel Le Long, the founder of the Muslim-Christian Dialogue Department, said the camp [at a just-ended week long forum organized by the department] opposing any rapprochement with the Muslim world is having the upper hand in the French Catholic Church.

"Those who don't want to reach out to Muslims are dominating the French Catholic Church," he told IOL.

"They believe that dialogue with Muslims is insignificant."

Le Long said bishops like himself who fervently call for a dialogue with Muslims and see them as partners remain "a minority" in the church.

He blamed this on a domineering "Christian-Jewish culture" inside the church, championed by Cardinal Jean Marie Lustiger, who passed away earlier this month.

"This cam [que ce-que c’est?—ed] is highly influential and politically motivated."

Le Long said Lustiger was known for his opposition to Muslim-Christian dialogue.

"Lustiger used to consecrate bishops, who share the viewpoint that Christianity is an amalgam of Christian and Jewish cultures, while Islam and other religions are meaningless."

Lustiger, he added, was a staunch opponent to the establishment of the French Council of the Muslim Faith (CFCM).

"His political stances were also biased towards Israel all along."

Le Long said the Catholic church's upcoming elections to choose a successor to Lustiger is highly important.

"The Jewish-Christian camp is serving the interests of Israel and the occupation, while it vigorously opposes Islamic culture and even does not recognize the Muslim faith as a new religious element in Europe."

Lustiger, born to Jewish parents, used to identify himself as Jewish-Christian and had asked that his funeral include both faiths.

He was an important symbol in France, a country that is historically Catholic.

President Nicolas Sarkozy — who was raised Catholic but whose maternal grandfather was Jewish — interrupted his US vacation to jet to Paris for the funeral.

Before his death, Lustiger asked that a commemorative plaque be placed inside Notre Dame reading: "I was born Jewish. I received my paternal grandfather's name, Aron, I became Christian by faith and baptism, and I remained Jewish like the Apostles did.

As the late Cardinal Lustiger—one of those infamous Jewish elders—might have said, oy vey!

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:34 | link | comments

VisionTV’s pathetic excuses: I wish I could have been a fly on the wall this week to hear the multi-religious task force struck by VisionTV to deal with the thorny issue of providing Islamic supremacists with a forum on Canadian TV. I’m sure Bill Roberts, VisionTV’s CEO, is delighted about having to revise his Code of Ethics to ensure that the likes of Dr. Israr Ahmad and Harun Yahya don’t get any more airtime courtesy Canada’s only multicultural, multi-faith channel. Let’s see what Roberts had to say on the subject a few weeks ago, following that nuptial-related “mix-up” with an Ahmad tape. From Canadian Christianity:

…Roberts said Vision has "the 'gold standard' of ethics policies." It has both a 'Code of Ethics and a 'Code on Violence.'

The code of ethics states: "Neither the content nor the tone of programming will incite people to commit violent acts or attacks on any other group or person. Violence will neither be glorified, nor exploited, nor used out of context to shock -- or for trivial reasons."

Roberts said all producers must sign on to these codes. He recalled one previous incident in which a US televangelist was accused of violating the code's provision that "programming must not . . . incite discrimination, hatred or violence against any individual or identifiable group" because of his teaching on homosexuality. Vision thought the program was "close" to violating the standards, but the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council ruled it had gone over the line; the televangelist agreed to abide by the ruling, and the issue never came up again.

Roberts said the July 21 program represented "an embarrassing failure of process". He told CC.com every program on Vision is screened by both the producer and by Vision staff. In this case, the producer was preoccupied with his daughter's wedding, and did not do a proper job of pre-screening the July 14 program.

Vision staff had also screened the program, but while they are well versed in Vision's Code of Ethics, they are not necessarily trained in all of the theological issues, said Roberts. In particular, they do not have the time or resources to do background checks on all guests on Vision programs, and they were unaware of Ahmed's other teachings.

Roberts said the examination of Vision's broadcast standards gets at some "deeply important issues." He noted that while he has been "a defender of human rights and free speech" as a member of Amnesty International, a broadcaster sometimes has to make a "wrenching judgment call" between Charter guarantees of free speech and laws against hate crimes.

Roberts said it is clear in this case that Ahmed is "a dangerous man" who should not be given air time, but a broadcaster might be on shaky ground if it starts to evaluate not just programming but also those who produce it.

"Are we going to do a background check on everyone who goes on air?" he asked. "Should we pull Mel Gibson's movies?" he added, referring to Gibson's comments about Jews during an arrest for drunken driving last year. Roberts also raised the question of whether the broadcaster should ban a televangelist who says derogatory things about homosexuals in public meetings in the U.S. even if he doesn't make them in his Canadian programming.

Roberts said the broadcaster also risks getting into difficult privacy issues. "Where do we draw the line? Should we do credit checks?" he asked, adding that measures like these could have "a chilling effect on freedom of speech."…

To answer your query, Bill: We draw the line at giving airtime to Mel repeating his drunken tirade about “the Jews” and their scheme for global conquest. We draw the line at broadcasting the views of his crackpot, conspiracy-addled, Holocaust-denying Papa. We draw the line at allowing jihadis to preach jihad in the hopes of finding new recruits for the holy war against the infidels. We draw the line at letting the jihad hitchike into Canada under the guise of multiculturalism and human rights and free speech.

 

That’s where we draw the line.

 

As for VisionTV lacking the time and resources to do background checks: It’s been running Ahmad’s sermons for at least two years and Yahya’s “documentaries” for much longer than that. Surely in all that time someone at VisionTV could have found a mo to google their names and retrieve some info about them. It took me all of a minute to find this, the mission statement of Tanzeem-e-Islami, the Pakistani Caliphate restoration movement founded by Ahmad:

 

The essence of what we call the “Islamic revolutionary thought” consists of the idea that it is not enough to practice Islam in one's individual life but that the teachings of the Qur'an and those of the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) must also be implemented in their totality in the social, cultural, juristic, political, and the economic spheres of life. The credit for reviving this dynamic concept of Islam in the Indian subcontinent, after centuries of neglect and dormancy, goes to Allama Muhammad Iqbal. The first attempt towards the actualization of this concept was made by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad through his short-lived party, the Hizbullah. Another attempt was made by Maulana Sayyid Abul A`la Maududi through his Jama`at-e-Islami; however, the decision by the Jama`at after the creation of Pakistan to take part in the electoral process instead of continuing the original revolutionary methodology gradually resulted in its degeneration from a pure Islamic revolutionary party to a mere political one. The vacuum left by the departure of Jama`at-e-Islami is being filled by Tanzeem-e-Islami, founded in 1975.

 

Objective

 

The obligations of a Muslim as ordained by the Qur'an and Sunnah, can be understood as having four levels:

 

a Muslim is required to develop real faith and conviction (Iman) in his heart;

he is required to live a life of total obedience to the injunctions of the Shari`ah;

he is required to propagate and disseminate the message of Islam to the entire Humanity;

and he is required to try his utmost in establishing the ascendancy of Islam over all man-made systems of life.

 

The objective of establishing Tanzeem-e-Islami is to assist the Muslims in carrying our (sic) these obligations. The ultimate goal is to seek Allah's pleasure and salvation in the Hereafter.

 

Nope. No alarms bells there.

 

It took me less than a minute to google Harun Yahya and find the following on--what are the odds?--Harun Yahya’s own website:

 

The author has also produced various works on Zionist racism and Freemasonry and their negative effects on world history and politics. The Zionism criticised by the author in his books is the baseless claims of Zionist extremists pretend to world sovereignty, regard other human beings as worthless entities, maintain that the Jews are the chosen people and that God is theirs alone.

 

Again, completely innocuous.

 

Seems to me that it wasn’t a matter of VisionTV lacking the time and resources to conduct “background checks”; nor was it about the broadcaster’s having to make some "wrenching" decisions weighing Charter freedoms and hate speech. It was about VisionTV’s being bone lazy, dead ignorant, asleep at the switch, and not overly concerned about who was providing its Islamic content so long as the bills got paid.

 

A situation which a new Code of Ethics, as well as a CRTC investigation conducted at the behest of B’nai Brith Canada, will no doubt rectify.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:57 | link | comments (2)

Nasty’s master: To mark the first anniversary of Hezbollah’s great victory over the Zionist scourge, a bunch of the faithful in Windsor, Ontario paid to mount a billboard featuring the visage of Sheik Hassan “Nasty” Nasrallah and other Hezbollah notables. The pro-Hezbollah Muslim Canadians asserted that Nasty and his cohorts were “peacemakers” seeking to bring, um, "peace," to Lebanon, and that they hoped to bring the same kind of, er, "peace" to Canada.

Well, don’t ya know that old Nasty had to go and blow their cover? In an interview on Iranian TV, he explains that all the palaver about wanting “peace” in Lebanon is a fraud. What Nasty and his cohorts really desire is to serve their Iranian masters for the greater glory of Shia Islam, the one true branch of the one true faith. From YNet News:

Parts of an interview given by Hizbullah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah to Iranian national television were censored by Iran's censors to avoid raising ire in Lebanon.

"We are ready to be torn apart, spliced into tiny pieces, so that Iran will remain exalted. For if Iran remains exalted, we too shall be exalted. I am a lowly soldier of the Imam Khamenei. Hizbullah youths acted on behalf of the Imam Khomeini, with the aid of Imam Hussein, and sent their blessings to the Iranian people," said Nasrallah in an interview with reporter Bijan Nobaveh on the day marking the start of the Second Lebanon War according to the Persian calendar.

 

Nasrallah also thanked Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and all the "brothers and sisters" in Iran.

From an internal Lebanese perspective, Nasrallah's words, which carry much weight, are tantamount to dissent. Nasrallah confirms that he serves supreme leader of Iran (Khamenei) and that his men fought for Iran last summer…

Nasty could care less about “Lebanon.” All he cares about is ethnically cleansing the infidels in the vicinity (in both Lebanon and Israel) so his Messiah can unocclude and usher in the end of the world.

 

Put that on a billboard, Windsor Hezbollahites!

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:03 | link | comments

Bad date: Looking for love on the Net? I'd definitely give this guy a pass.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:34 | link | comments (2)

Totally awesome imams: There’s a shortage of homegrown imams in the OC, which is a problem since foreign born ones don’t speak the same lingo, dude, and have a completely different frame of reference than the Americans they’re guiding. From the Orange County Register:

The muezzin's call echoes around the mosque here, beckoning the Muslim faithful to midday Friday prayers.

Stragglers scurry to take their places, as imam Yassir Fazaga – at 35, younger than many in attendance – comes down from his office ready with this week's sermon on lessons from the recent violence at a mosque in Islamabad, Pakistan, that left more than 100 dead.

During the 20-minute prayer and talk, Fazaga moves fluidly from Arabic to English. Afterwards, he stands outside the mosque entrance, where congregants line up to speak with him.

Omar Azizi, 21, and his brother Mostafa, 16, of Mission Viejo, hug the sheik and exchange greetings.

The Azizi brothers represent the growing ranks of Muslims in Southern California and in the United States. By some estimates more than half of the 5 million to 7 million Muslims in America are under 18. While the East Coast has more native and native-trained imams than the West Coast, there's a shortage of such imams in the country, especially of Middle Eastern heritage, and difficulty connecting with the youth.

An imam is the religious leader of a mosque, helping worshippers fulfill their spiritual needs, performing services and counseling them. There is no system of ordained clergy in Islam. Ultimately, the community picks the person it trusts and who is educationally qualified to be an imam, Muslim leaders say.

The Azizi brothers, born in the United States to Afghan parents, are comfortable with Fazaga, in part because he speaks fluent English and frequently searches the standard American calendar for ideas. Recently, Fazaga was mulling a sermon on what he called the "bored American child syndrome" during summertime.

"That is the most difficult part – deciding on what is going to be the topic and how can I make it relevant," he said. "So sometimes I look into the calendar to see what is happening. What is today? World AIDS Day, Earth Day, today is domestic-violence month awareness."

That may very well be where the key difference between foreign and native imams lies.

"The difference is the imams that have been living here a while, they know how the society is, how the people are," said Omar Azizi, a part-time college student.

"They can make much more difference than the imams overseas. I am not saying the imams overseas aren't as knowledgeable," he added. "The imams overseas, they don't really know what's going on here, especially California, United States."

"Its way better when it's someone who understands the culture, the media," Mostafa Azizi said. "It's like they watch the same news as we do, so they're pretty much translating everything the news is saying … and it's just totally, totally better."…

Totally. On the one hand, I’m inclined to agree with him. Native imams are likely to be better than ones whose provenance is, say, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. On the other hand, an American born imam can be every bit as “by the book” as one born in Dar al Islam, in which case, the totality of the totalitarian message imparted would be totally, totally the same—and totally dangerous for the unreverted.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:15 | link | comments

How the cult of multiculturalism enfeebles us and empowers our enemies: By Theodore Dalrymple in City Journal:

In an effort to ensure that no Muslim doctors ever again try to bomb Glasgow Airport, bureaucrats at Glasgow’s public hospitals have decreed that henceforth no staff may eat lunch at their desks or in their offices during the holy month of Ramadan, so that fasting Muslims shall not be offended by the sight or smell of their food. Vending machines will also disappear from the premises during that period.

 

Apparently the bureaucrats believe that the would-be bombers were demanding sandwich-free offices in Glasgow hospitals during Ramadan. This kind of absurdity is what happens when the highly contestable doctrine of multiculturalism becomes a career opportunity for the semi-educated and otherwise unemployable products of a grossly and unnecessarily swollen university system.

Meanwhile, the highest court in Italy was confirming an appeals court’s acquittal of the father and brother of a Muslim girl, whom they beat and locked up for becoming too Westernized—that is to say, for having a Western friend. The court ruled that, though they had undoubtedly beaten her and locked her up, this was not because of any culpable ill-feeling toward her. It was, rather, because of “her lifestyle, which did not conform to their culture.”

 

The sound of a civilization committing suicide can be heard in these stories; for civilizations collapse not because the barbarians are so strong, but because they themselves are so morally enfeebled.

 

And so utterly clueless.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:47 | link | comments

Mully-bullies flex their muscles: There goes the mullocracy again, rattling its nukes and lobbing threats at Great Satan. From the aptly-named IranMania:

LONDON, August 18 (IranMania) - Ahmad Khatami, a senior Iranian cleric said that plans by the United States to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps as a foreign terrorist group invited a fight with the Iranian nation which America could not win, Reuters reported.

"Americans should know that in this field, as with nuclear energy, they are dealing with the whole nation. And the great nation of Iran will never abandon its revolutionary people," Ahmad Khatami told worshippers at Friday prayers in Tehran.

"Americans should know that if they act madly in this regard, they would be entering a swamp they won't be able to get out of," the conservative cleric said in a speech that was broadcast live on the radio.

Khatami is a member of the Assembly of Experts, an influential clerical body which has the power to appoint or dismiss Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

US officials said on Wednesday the United States may soon name the Revolutionary Guard as a foreign terrorist group, reflecting frustration over Tehran's nuclear program and suspected role in Iraqi violence.

The designation would be the first time the United States has placed the armed forces of any sovereign government on its list of terrorist organizations and would allow Washington to target the Guards' finances.

A Guards official brushed off the threat, saying the force "will grow in strength despite US efforts to isolate it."…

I thought Khatami was supposed to be one of those “moderate” senior Iranian clerics.

 

Go figure.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:45 | link | comments (1)

Projection, projection, projection: The hairy lit'ler Hitler calls Israel "the standard-bearer of Satan"--a demonization effort similar to the one that preceded the Nazis' Penultimate Solution (as it will be known once Ahmadinejad gets to finish what Hitler started).

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:29 | link | comments

Webmasters: Consider the Nazis. With the crude media available at the time—the radio, the printing press, the newsreel, the Leni Riefelstahl film—they managed to bewitch an entire people into buying into a supremacist, totalitarian ideology predicated on the genocide of the Jews and a global conquest that was supposed to endure for a millennium.

Now, consider the jihadis. They have the entire global web at their disposal, and, as Globe and Mail investigative reporter Omar El Akkad writes in a must-read report, they are using it to spread their pernicious propaganda hither and yon and entice lots of young lads to sign up for the holy war. And we clueless infidels seem powerless to stop them.

 

When it comes to propaganda, the jihadis make the Nazis look like pikers:

…The FBI estimates somewhere in the range of 6,000 terrorism-supporting websites are currently active. Last week, the Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust Studies published a report stating that, in terms of nefarious online activity, terrorism promotion had eclipsed hatemongering.

This is the new jihad – the evolution of a propaganda effort that, just a decade ago, consisted mostly of Osama bin Laden speeches on video tapes smuggled out of a hideout in Afghanistan. Today, the public-relations arms of terrorist organizations – run less by grizzled warriors than by 20-something computer geeks – deal in digital currency, getting their messages out instantly and universally using the scope and anonymity of the web.

The process is borderless. A beheading video moves from a hideout in Peshawar to a server in London to a computer screen in Toronto unhindered, fuelling a global radicalization juggernaut that intelligence agencies describe as perhaps the biggest threat facing the West today.

All manner of video, audio and even interactive propaganda have found an audience among many disaffected Muslim youth around the world. But while the majority of people who download such content may only fuel a passive resentment of the West, for others the audiovisual diatribes of Mr. bin Laden and his kin have served as a sort of gateway drug to a more violent worldview. That was the case among some of the alleged ringleaders of the Toronto terrorist group arrested during a sweep last summer – a trail led from some of those arrested to a massive, and now defunct, web forum where angry youth traded incendiary content.

In another case, a young British man named Younis Tsouli was arrested in England in 2005 and charged with “conspiracy to murder, conspiracy to cause an explosion, conspiracy to obtain money by deception, fundraising and possession of articles for terrorist purposes.” Mr. Tsouli, now 23, had never so much as fired a rifle – his agitation was purely online. The computer hacker got his start moving propaganda videos around the web for al-Qaeda in Iraq and soon popped up in connection with at least three alleged terrorist plots, including one in Canada. For Mr. Tsouli, it was not a great stretch from posting beheading videos to sending out suicide-bomb-belt manuals.

Besides the anonymous registries, many effective terrorist-propaganda producers rely on the hugely popular public blogging and file-sharing sites used by millions to rant about their bosses and share barbecue recipes. That leaves law-enforcement officials in the uncomfortable position of trying to catch a wisp of an enemy without trampling on everyone else's civil liberties.

And so a battle rages in Ottawa, as Canadian police and spy agencies complain that the legislation governing online crime is a historical relic. Privacy advocates, on the other hand, fear a world where every 0 and 1 is visible to Big Brother.

Meanwhile, terrorist propaganda operations have come to rival the PR departments of multinational corporations, complete with publishing houses, movie-editing studios and video-game developers. This is the ammunition in a battle of ideas that all sides agree may end up being more important than any blood-and-bullets conflict – a battle that, so far, the West is losing...

In this web of hate, they’re the spiders and we’re the flies—and insects who resist their fate are immediately accused of arachnophobia. Surely our side can marshal enough computer geeks to sabotage the electronic jihad before we all get consumed.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:24 | link | comments (2)

Heart of Stone; head of mush: Film director Oliver Stone is like a pitbull with a juicy bone--he won’t let go. The bone in question: a bio-doc about pint-sized Islamic Hitler, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Ollie thinks Moo, like other Muslims, hasn’t gotten a fair shake in the Western media, and wants to help rectify the situation. From the Tehran Times:

TEHRAN – Oliver Stone is still proposing to make a documentary about the Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad, Iranian producer and filmmater Alireza Sajjadpur said on Thursday.

The request has been submitted by Stone’s publicist via an email to the president’s office, he added.

“Stone’s publicist referred to the bad image that the U.S. media has given to Islam and Islamic countries and said that the documentary could assist in countering such negative propaganda,” Sajjadpur explained.

Sajjadpur, who is regularly consulted by the president’s art and cultural advisors and is also the secretary of Iran’s Islamic Society of Artists, emphasized that it is western media and Hollywood which are the culprits responsible for creating a bad image for Islam and said, “We should see how Stone can manage to improve this image within such a bad atmosphere which has been created by the media.”

Ahmadinejad’s art advisor Javad Shamaqdari stated that the president has not yet given any response to this latest request and remarked that Ahmadinejad wants the film to be made by an Iranian.

Stone’s first request for making the documentary was announced by Sajjadpur on June 28, but President Mahmud Ahmadinejad’s media advisor Mehdi Kalhor rejected Oliver Stone’s request calling him a part of the Great Satan.

The Founder of the Islamic Republic, the late Imam Khomeini, first dubbed the U.S. “the Great Satan” after the 1979 Islamic Revolution

Just call him Ollie Riefenstahl.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:49 | link | comments (1)

Food for thought: Eat up. From the National Interest (link via Martin Kramer):

One of the more puzzling aspects of the Iraq misadventure has been President Bush’s serene confidence of ultimate success amid the mounting evidence that the mission is crumbling. We now have some important insights into Bush’s thinking from a recent interview with National Review editor Rich Lowry and other conservative journalists. Lowry quotes the president extensively regarding prospects for democracy in the Middle East.
 
What emerges from Bush’s remarks is the picture of a man who largely rejects the role of culture in determining political values and systems. Embracing the "universality of freedom", he states bluntly that "Muslims desire to be free just like Methodists desire to be free." He adds that "nothing will change my belief." Later, he states that governments can transform societies (citing the example of Japan after World War II) and that the emergence of governments based on liberty is "inevitable."
 
Bush’s view is not merely simplistic, it is profoundly dangerous. The president assumes that when people in the Middle East and people in the West speak of freedom, they have the same concept in mind. There is virtually no evidence to support that belief. For all too many people in the Middle East, freedom means the ability to live the way the local mullah tells them that they ought to.
 
The foundation of an effective democracy is not some subjective desire of a person to live in freedom (however defined)—it is the willingness to allow fellow citizens, who may have different values and lifestyles, to live in freedom. That crucial spirit of tolerance is tragically underdeveloped in Middle Eastern societies. So is a pervasive attitude that political, economic and religious disputes must be settled solely by peaceful means.
 
Without those two pillars—the essence of a vibrant civil society—prospects for even quasi-liberal democracies in the foreseeable future are extremely dim. Even in Turkey, where these conditions are markedly stronger than in Arab countries, the political system is, at best, a shaky, rather illiberal democracy. Putting in place the mechanisms of electoral democracy before the necessary cultural conditions are strong (as the United States has done in Iraq) is likely to make bad situations even worse. Pushing for democracy without those crucial preconditions is akin to trying to build a house from the roof down.
 
Elections in such an environment will merely empower political demagogues and religious extremists. It is no accident that voters in Iraq spurned the more tolerant, secular parties who sought to reach across the Sunni-Shi‘a-Kurdish divides and instead supported blatantly sectarian parties. The fallacy of assuming that democracy is a panacea for the Middle East was even more graphically confirmed by the elections in the Palestinian
territories, when Hamas routed the more moderate (though hardly tolerant) Fatah.
 
That is not to say that Middle Eastern societies will never be ready to implement Western-style liberal democracy. There is no anti-democracy gene in human DNA. Societies change over time, and the emergence of stable, liberal democratic systems in the Middle East might well occur at some point in the future. But it’s not likely to happen in the next generation or two, and for the president to base U.S. policy in the region on the expectation that it will is irresponsible...

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:37 | link | comments (2)

Splitting the holy war: A report commissioned by the New York Police Department has revealed a growing threat of “homegrown terror.” According to the report, this type of jihadi terror bears absolutely no resemblance to the type of homegrown terror faced by Israelis. From an editorial in the New York Sun:

...We've got our own issues with the NYPD report, primarily the troubling way in which it contrasts homegrown Western terrorism with Palestinian Arab terrorism against Israel. "Much different from the Israeli- Palestinian equation, the transformation of a Western-based individual to a terrorist is not triggered by oppression, suffering, revenge, or desperation," the report says. Since the report is a study of terrorist attacks in America and Europe, not attacks against Israel, it's hard to see the basis for the NYPD's assessment of the motivation of attacks on Israel. If any such basis exists, evidence for it certainly is absent from the report. Many of the attacks on Israel are motivated, inspired, supported, and funded by Saudi, Iranian, and Syrian agitators who are neither oppressed nor suffering nor desperate...

 

Newsflash for the NYPD: There’s one jihad, indivisible, with tyranny, injustice and homegrown terror for all infidels.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:39 | link | comments

Systems disruption, networked gangs and bioweapons, oh my: An article about the coming urban terror, from City Journal:

For the first time in history, announced researchers this May, a majority of the world’s population is living in urban environments. Cities—efficient hubs connecting international flows of people, energy, communications, and capital—are thriving in our global economy as never before. However, the same factors that make cities hubs of globalization also make them vulnerable to small-group terror and violence.

 

Over the last few years, small groups’ ability to conduct terrorism has shown radical improvements in productivity—their capacity to inflict economic, physical, and moral damage. These groups, motivated by everything from gang membership to religious extremism, have taken advantage of easy access to our global superinfrastructure, revenues from growing illicit commercial flows, and ubiquitously available new technologies to cross the threshold necessary to become terrible threats. September 11, 2001, marked their arrival at that threshold.

 

Unfortunately, the improvements in lethality that we have already seen are just the beginning. The arc of productivity growth that lets small groups terrorize at ever-higher levels of death and disruption stretches as far as the eye can see. Eventually, one man may even be able to wield the destructive power that only nation-states possess today. It is a perverse twist of history that this new threat arrives at the same moment that wars between states are receding into the past. Thanks to global interdependence, state-against-state warfare is far less likely than it used to be, and viable only against disconnected or powerless states. But the underlying processes of globalization have made us exceedingly vulnerable to nonstate enemies. The mechanisms of power and control that states once exerted will continue to weaken as global interconnectivity increases. Small groups of terrorists can already attack deep within any state, riding on the highways of interconnectivity, unconcerned about our porous borders and our nation-state militaries. These terrorists’ likeliest point of origin, and their likeliest destination, is the city...

 

Years ago, I read Jonathan Raban’s book Soft City, in which he wrote that the city is the perfect place for those who want to disappear and/or remain anonymous. Here’s a quote from that book, written long before city dwellers (and non-city dwellers) had any awareness of jihadism and martyrs seeking posthumous nookie:

 

We live in cities badly; we have built them up in culpable innocence and now fret helplessly in a synthetic wilderness of our own construction. We need—more urgently than architectural utopias, ingenious traffic disposal systems, or ecological programmes—to comprehend the nature of citizenship, to make a serious imaginative assessment of that special relationship between the self and the city; its unique plasticity, its privacy and freedom.

 

Given what’s happening today—Islamic supremacists using the city’s plasticity, privacy and freedom to devise plots to blow up infidels—the above seems positively quaint.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:21 | link | comments (2)

D.I.Y for jihadis: The biggest difference between Mafia thugs and jihadi thugs—aside from a little matter of religion, of course: the jihadi thugs have how-to manuals. MEMRI has info about one of these documents, which tells the fanatical how to kidnap infidels and hold them for ransom—a time-tested piratical/jihadi pursuit. The manual can be found on a jihadi website hosted in Texas:

The guide begins by enumerating goals that a kidnapping can achieve, including the release of prisoners, extraction of information from the hostage, weakening the enemy's morale and creating deterrence, raising international awareness of conflicts in which the kidnappers' organization is involved, blackmailing the enemy for money, and generating anti-government sentiment in the hostage's country of origin.

In the section dealing with selecting a target, the guide recommends choosing someone of importance to the enemy (such as a high-ranking military officer or a prominent businessman). However, he should not be a physically strong person who can put up significant resistance. In order to ensure that the operation goes smoothly, it is recommended that he be knocked out with tranquilizers.

As for the kidnappers, the guide states that they should be devout and in good physical condition. In addition, they must be familiar with the locale, and must be able to disguise themselves and to blend in with their surroundings. The guide gives various scenarios and explains how to deal with them - for example, what to do if the target enters a building or turns around suddenly while being followed. The guide states that, ideally, the kidnapping should be carried out at night, and in an isolated spot.

Next, the guide explains how to transport the hostage to the hideout. It recommends using a vehicle of a type that is common in the locale, and that it be prepared by removing the handle on the inside of the door where the hostage will sit. As for the hideout itself, it must be a large apartment with several exits, and the hostage must be kept in a windowless room. The apartment must not be on a road where there are checkpoints.

The last section of the guide deals with the demands stage, and states that after stipulating their demands and setting a deadline, the kidnappers must conduct negotiations using a mobile phone registered under a false name, or else a pay phone (a different one for each call). The guide also explains that if it becomes necessary to execute the hostage, this is best done by hanging or poisoning rather than by shooting. This is because soldiers regard death by shooting as an honorable death, and because shooting leaves considerable bloodstains at the scene.

The better to film and showcase in gory-ous Technicolor for this and other jihadi websites.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:55 | link | comments

The perils of internet dating: Lonely? Single? Female? Looking for love in Israel and environs? Whatever you do, don’t fall for a slick Prince Charming who seems to be really into you, but who wants to lure you into a life of sexual slavery. From YNet News:

A Palestinian from Ramallah turned an 18-year-old Israeli girl he met on the internet into his sex slave, Ynet reported on Friday.

A few months ago Tal (not her real name) met who she thought was her prince charming in an internet chat room. Following a brief period of online correspondence, the two met in person. The Palestinian took Tal out to restaurants and showered her with gifts, and the unsuspecting Israeli teen thought she had found the man of her dreams.

 'Muslim girls are afraid to return to Israel'

Within a month of their first encounter she was already in love with him, and did not hesitate for a second when he asked her to move into his home in Ramallah. But shortly after the two began living together the man approached Tal and asked that she “comfort” a friend of his. She agreed to sleep with the friend as a one-time gesture for her beloved boyfriend, but was forced to have sex with others as time went by.

Tal was then brought to a lavish villa, where she and several Muslim women granted sexual services to senior Palestinian Authority officials on a regular basis. Eventually Tal managed to escape and return to Israel.

 

A volunteer in an organization that offers help to Israeli teenagers who have experienced similar traumas told Ynet that Arab girls from Jaffa have also been lured to the territories under false pretenses.

 

“The Muslim girls are afraid to return to Israel because they lose their virginity there. When they meet the person in a chat room they are certain that it will lead to marriage. Their families in Israel don’t want them back because they have ‘brought shame’ upon them,” she said.

 

The volunteer said the victims are usually lonely people from a low socio-economic background. 

 

At least, once rescued, girls like Tal don’t have to worry that their father or uncle or brother is going to murder them to restore family honour.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:29 | link | comments (1)

A Padilla poem: 

When convicted, the famed “dirty bomber”

Had a demeanour which couldn’t be calmer.

Though he’ll be locked in the can

He’ll still read his Koran

And continue to be a salaamer.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:10 | link | comments

The world’s strangest laws: I would direct your attention to numbers 14 and 1, laws that are not only strange, but that are strange in a weird, sexual way.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:01 | link | comments

Critical of cynophobes: I didn’t write a letter to the Vancouver Sun re its report about that city’s “Solomonic” taxi cab settlement, but I applaud George Muenz, a Vancouverite who “gets it”, and who did write one:

Re: Taxi firm settles with blind man refused ride because of guide dog, Aug. 16

It might look like an accommodation was reached on this issue, but it sets a dangerous precedent. Who decides whether an issue or a person is "contrary to religious beliefs"? In several Muslim countries, women are forbidden to leave the house unless they are accompanied by a male relative. Will local Muslim cab drivers refuse to take women who are travelling alone?

In several Muslim countries, women are required to be completely covered. Will cab drivers refuse to take passengers who are not "suitably" covered according to their "religious" interpretation? Many Muslims do not eat pork. Will cab drivers refuse service to someone who has purchased bacon at the grocery store?

Right on, George!

My solution: the Halal Taxi Company, which employs and transports true believers and only true believers.

Either that or cabbies who refuse to carry service dogs because they’re “unclean” have to suck it up or find another line of work.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:41 | link | comments

Bad law: Those who subscribe to a totalitarian system cannot abide those who refuse to get with their all-encompassing program and who go even further and, Heaven forefend, make fun of it. Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen is one person who has experience totalitarian wrath for her outspokenness, most recently when a bunch of religious totalitarians in India crashed a party launching one of her books. The totalitarians ran riot and physically assaulting Nasrim because, once again, she had dared to “insult Islam”—a big no-no with these types. (According to the Ceeb report, which tries to downplay the riot, the aggrieved merely “threw flowers and other items and called for her death.” What other “items”? Chairs? Rocks? Whatever they were, I have a feeling they had a lot more heft than pretty blossoms.) India, the world’s largest democracy but one with a substantial and restive Muslim population, took the only action open to it by law—it arrested the outspoken author:

…Nasreen, author of Wild Wind and Shame, is an exile from her native Bangladesh because of a fatwa against her and a threat by the government to lay charges stemming from her writing.

She lived in Sweden and France for several years, but moved to India in 2002.

In articles and books, she writes about the poor treatment of Hindus in mostly Muslim Bangladesh, and rape and mistreatment of women in Muslim societies. A police official in Hyderabad said Nasreen had been charged with "hurting Muslim feelings," according to Agence France Presse.  

Under Indian law, promoting "disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will" between religious groups is punishable by up to three years in jail.

Three legislators were charged with rioting after a police investigation into the incident at the publication party.

However, a senior member of an Islamist party registered a complaint, leading to the charges.

Nasreen has been an outspoken advocate of women's rights and opponent of sharia law.

In March, an Indian Muslim group from Uttar Pradesh state offered a bounty of 500,000 rupees ($13,000 Cdn) for her beheading.

However, human rights groups in India are arguing on her behalf.

If democracies are governed by laws that make it illegal to speak out against the obvious brutalities of a totalitarian system, including the system of laws that sanctions beheading—beheading!— for the mouthy, they are helping facilitating the totalitarian agenda. And there is no way a democracy can remain strong and free with such foolish laws on its books.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:20 | link | comments

A Tonge lashing: Jennie Tonge, one of the U.K.’s most over-the-top raving moonbats (and in a field that includes Robert Fisk, Ken Livingstone, Harold Pinter and George Galloway, that’s saying something) knows who’s to blame for the wretched circumstances the Palestinians find themselves in. Not Yasser Arafat. Not Mahmoud Abbas. Not Ismail Haniyeh. Not any of the mully-bullies or their front man, the hairy lit’ler Hitler. Nope. The people who are to blame for the Arabs’ desperate plight are—wait for it; you know it's coming; who else could it be but; drum roll, please—THE JEWS.

That’s right. If not for the Jews and their selfish desire to have their own sovereign nation, the Palestinians, a civilized, refined, highly cultured people, would have constructed a veritable ancient Athens—with an Islamist twist, of course. Instead, those dastardly Jews have foisted “apartheid” on these poor blameless victims, and single-handedly transformed a would-be Utopia into a Third World backwater. From the Jerusalem Post:

An Israeli scholar has firmly rejected comments by controversial UK Liberal Democrat politician Jenny Tonge, who recently accused Israel of driving the Palestinians to their current impoverished situation and claimed that this issue was being used to fuel Islamic extremism.

"Ever since 1948, Palestine has been used as a battle cry and a propaganda weapon for Islamists worldwide," she said in a speech in the House of Lords last month. "I have witnessed this in some African countries and, more recently, in Bangladesh. Palestine is what the West does to Muslims. That is the message. The Palestinians have been brought to their knees. A cultured and well-educated society with high skill levels has been reduced to a Third-World country. The statistics are there for all to see."

Tonge also alleged that the IDF was disrupting school exams in Nablus, resulting in a generation of illiterate and unskilled Palestinians.

"Even education is being destroyed as children are terrorized by raids on their schools," she said, claiming that the products of such a system would be "capable of very little except low-wage labor. The economy cannot be rebuilt unless Israel changes its policies."

But Dr. Jonathan Spyer, research fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, disputed such assertions, which he said betrayed an "appalling ignorance of Islamist movements. Radical Islam is a political idea, some of whose proponents use the method of terrorism. This idea sees world events as shaped by a struggle between the forces of authentic Islam, and those of the non-believers. It uses a long list of supposed Muslim grievances as a way to mobilize support," he told The Jerusalem Post.

He noted that al-Qaida had been formed to overthrow the Saudi Arabian government in opposition to the US presence there in the 1990s. "Al-Qaida hardly mentioned the Palestinian issue prior to 2001."

"The idea that this trans-national idea, which feeds off many local issues, is somehow 'traceable' to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and would be settled by the creation of a Palestinian state alongside Israel - an outcome which the Islamists in any case reject - is an absurd one. It's used by people like Tonge in order to hold Israel to blame for radical Islam's war in the West."

Baroness Tonge was sacked as a member of Parliament and as the Liberal Democrat spokeswoman in 2004 after expressing support for Palestinian suicide bombers.

Daniel Seaman, director of the Israeli Government Press Office, told the Post on Thursday that at a recent meeting in Jericho, Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas told Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that the PA could not control Hamas.

"Any disruption is down to the extremists of Hamas who are operating in the area. Israel is operating in the area to protect its citizens. If exams are being disrupted, this is unfortunate. However, exams can be retaken. Lives cannot be brought back," Seaman said.

Tonge also questioned how things could get better. "The new government talks of rebuilding the economy in Palestine and of getting the Palestinians back to work, which is very welcome, but how will they do that with road blocks, checkpoints and Bantustans divided by settler-only roads?" she asked. "I am not anti-Semitic, but I am appalled by the racist, apartheid state of Israel. I use the word 'apartheid' in its literal sense; it means separation, because that is what is going on."...

Poor Jen. She’s a bulb with exceedingly low wattage. If she wants to know what a real apartheid state is like, I suggest she direct her attention to Zam Zam land, where Jews are not allowed to set foot lest they defile the holy turf with their Jew-dhimmi-devil-infidel cooties.

 

And FYI Jennie: an antisemite is someone who has an irrational, over-the-top hatred of Jews, one that belies the facts and the reality of who Jews are and what they do. As such, I'd say you have impeccable credentials to be considered antisemitic.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:59 | link | comments (3)

Ritual ablutions: It’s that time of year again. From Arab News:

MAKKAH, 16 August 2007 — Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah washed the Holy Kaaba on Tuesday night in the presence of princes, prominent religious scholars, government ministers, foreign dignitaries and members of the diplomatic corps from Muslim countries.

Those who participated in the washing of Islam’s holiest edifice included Chechen President Akhmad Kadyrov, the head of Azhar University Dr. Muhammad Syed Tantawi and Mufti of Egypt Dr. Ali Jumaa.

King Abdullah performed the ritual circumambulation around the Kaaba and the two-rakah prayer of the Tawaf on his arrival to the holy precinct, Saudi Press Agency reported yesterday.

The king then proceeded to wash the interior of the Kaaba with Zam Zam blended with rose water and several other perfumes. The ritual also included rubbing the walls with a cloth drenched in perfumed Zam Zam.

The Kaaba is washed twice a year, once before the fasting month of Ramadan and once during Haj. The ceremonial washing follows the practice of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) of cleansing the Kaaba on the day he conquered Makkah in the eighth year of Hijrah (Migration) to Madinah…

Circumambulation, the two-rakah prayer of the Tawaf and perfumed Zam Zam—that Abdullah sure knows how to throw a shindig.

 

My limerick for the royal Zam Zam user:

 

King Abdullah, an unctuous Wahhabi

Was in no way a guy you'd call snobbi.

His circumambulation

Delighted the nation

And tickled the whole Muslim lobbi.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:14 | link | comments (1)

Dangerous critters: PETA is peeved at Hamas for showing cruelty to animals on its kiddie indoctrination TV show, the one the used to feature Nahoul the Jihadi Mouse but, following that character’s untimely demise, is now hosted by Nahoul, the adorable—but pathological—Killer Bee. (No mention of PETA’s objecting to the show’s cruelty to Jews—I guess that’s way outside its purview).

The news inspired me to revise Edward Lear’s anthropomorphic poem, “The Owl and Pussycat”; sorry about that, Ed:

 

Farfour and Nahoul appeared on TV

To teach all the youn’uns to hate.

They spewed some lies

And gave alibis

To soften them up for their fate.

Farfour looked straight into the camera, and smiled,

And spoke of remarkable deeds,

“O lovely children! O children, my loves,

You were all born to be shahids, shahids, shahids,

You were all born to be shahids.”

Nahoul said to the vermin “It’s hard to determine

Precisely who hates the Jews most.

Is it you, you faux Mickey, who’s so very tricky,

Or I, who most wants them to roast?”

Then Farfour was shot dead

By a Zi’nist who said,

“We’ve claimed every bit of your land.”

And in Gazastan, Hamas hatched a plan

To make ev’ryone heed its command, command,

To make ev’ryone heed its command.

“Wee shahids are you willing to get on with the killing?”

Said the kidlets, “We believe, and we will.”

So Nahoul carried on, tho’ Farfour was gone—

There was plenty of blood left to spill.

And the hate filled young brains till no reason remains;

Their hearts thrilled to their mur’drous endeavour.

‘Cause there’s one thing we know,

“Peace” plans come and they go,

But the Judenhass lasts forever, forever,

The Judenhass lasts forever.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:04 | link | comments

A very Canadian solution: Welcome to Canuckistan, a multiculti Trudeaupia where newcomers don’t have to adapt to our prevailing values because we are merely an empty vessel into which they pour their own far more important values (since they emanate from the impoverished, non-Western—and thus inherently virtuous—Third Word). Canuckistan—where a blind man with a seeing eye dog is denied a ride by a Muslim cab driver because, according to his religious precepts, the service animal is “unclean,” and it’s hailed as a great victory for all concerned when a court rules he never has to pick up such a fare again so long as he’s made his beliefs known in advance to his employers. From the Vancouver Sun:

A blind Vancouver man who was shunned by a taxi driver who didn't want a guide dog in his cab has reached a $2,500 settlement with North Shore Taxi.

Bruce Gilmour, 49, had called a cab from a West Vancouver coffee shop after a day of skiing in November 2006.

But North Shore Taxi driver Behzad Saidy, a Muslim, refused to transport Gilmour and his golden retriever Arden, saying he drove a no-pet cab. Saidy later said his religion prevents him from associating with dogs on the basis that they are "unclean," Gilmour said.

Gilmour, who has been blind for 30 years, filed a human rights complaint, alleging discrimination.

"I'm tired of defending my dignity," he said in an interview Wednesday.

Last Friday -- three days before a B.C. human rights tribunal hearing -- Gilmour reached a settlement with the taxi company that was issued as a tribunal order.

It attempts to balance the rights of blind people with guide dogs to obtain taxi service with the rights of a Muslim cab driver to follow his personal beliefs.

Gilmour said he will donate part of the monetary settlement to the Az-zahraa Islamic Centre in Richmond because of the help he received from Imam Syed Jaffir, who acted as an expert witness, and to B.C. Guide Dog Services. They will likely get $500 to $700 each, he said.

Under the terms of the settlement, North Shore Taxi was ordered to immediately establish a policy forbidding any driver to refuse a fare from a blind person accompanied by a certified guide dog.

The only exceptions are for drivers allergic to dogs and those who satisfy the company that they have an honest religious belief that precludes them from transporting certified guide dogs.

However, such drivers must call dispatch for the next available cab, give their name to the blind person and remain with them until the next cab arrives…

A brilliant solution! Why, it’s practically Solomonic (or, as Behzad Saidy and the imam might call it, “Suleimanic”). My question: what happens when, due to an honest religious belief, a cabbie decides he can’t in good conscience pick up an unveiled woman, or one who insists on appearing in public without a male family member to act as her escort and preserve her family’s honour? Tell me: where do we draw the line?

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:47 | link | comments (2)

Catching kafirs with honey: An expert on the Islam Online site advises true believers on how to practice da’wa—inviting infidels to answer Islam’s call and submit to the one true faith. As he sees it, semtex and explosive shampoo is out; good manners and a Boy Scout demeanour are in:

…What should you say when people ask about Islam? Well, first of all, if they ask you a question and you do not know the answer, apologize to them and admit as much. Do not make up an answer, to make yourself look clever. Explain that you will get back to them with a full answer to their question.

Islam is perfect and it has the answer to every question in the minds and hearts of men and women. The problem is that, because we do not read and study enough, we do not always know what that answer is, so we make Islam seem inadequate, when we are really the ones who do not know.

Never imagine that you have to persuade anyone to become Muslim. This is not da`wah. Our duty is simply to proclaim the message, and we then leave others to make up their own minds.

What a terrible thing if we were to persuade someone to become Muslim, in the heat of the moment, and then leave them without any support so that they quickly gave up their good intentions.

Millions of pounds, in fact, are spent in calling others to Islam, but hardly a penny is spent in looking after the new Muslims once they have declared Shahadah. If anything, we should actually make people hesitate, take their time, before embracing Islam. Make sure they know what they are accepting.

One very useful way of talking to others about Islam, especially if they have misconceptions about different aspects of it, is to talk about things from our own experience.

For example, if someone brings up the whole thorny issue of Muslims being terrorists, you can tell them that you are not a terrorist and that you do not know any. No one can argue with your personal experience without calling you a liar.

It is important, too, to speak to people in a language they understand. There is no need to go into special religious jargon just because you talk about Islam. Chances are that the one you are talking to will not know what you are talking about. No, use the language and the things people are familiar with.

Similarly, do not expect to prove a point by quoting them chunks from the Qur'an. The Qur'an will not have a value for non-Muslims until it has been proved to have a value. Do not expect them to be bowled over with your quotes.

Finally, always be very courteous and very cheerful. Show people that being Muslim does not mean you have to stop being human. A cheerful expression and a very polite manner will go a long way to give a very image of Islam…

For more pointers on being very courteous and very cheerful to kafirs, tune into the Ceeb’s fantasy agit-prop sitcom, Little Mosque on the Prairie.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:17 | link | comments

Rudy rocks!: There’s no way Rudy Giuliani can become president. He speaks truths far too many Americans—including Dubya and Condi— simply don’t want to hear. From the New York Sun:

WASHINGTON -- In a sweeping repudiation of the conventional wisdom that America's war on terrorism must address Palestinian Arab national grievances, the leading Republican contender for the presidency is warning of the dangers of pressing too soon for Palestinian statehood and is asserting that Israeli security is a "permanent feature of our foreign policy."

"Too much emphasis has been placed on brokering negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians-- negotiations that bring up the same issues again and again," Mayor Giuliani writes in an essay published yesterday in Foreign Affairs. "It is not in the interest of the United States, at a time when it is being threatened by Islamist terrorists, to assist the creation of another state that will support terrorism."

In some of the boldest language on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict used thus far by any presidential candidate, Mr. Giuliani writes: "Palestinian statehood will have to be earned through sustained good governance, a clear commitment to fighting terrorism, and a willingness to live in peace with Israel."

That language appears to be a direct shot at President Bush and Secretary of State Rice, who are making just such a push for final status negotiations between President Abbas and Prime Minister Olmert in September, despite Hamas's takeover of Gaza in June…

A man who truly “gets it”—and for that reason virtually unelectable.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:05 | link | comments

Iranian terrorists: The Bush administration is pondering whether to designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, a group deeply implicated in fomenting chaos in Iraq, as a terrorist organization.

Truth be told, the whole frikkin’ mullah apparatus is a terrorist organization, but the AP, for one, isn’t too encouraging about the possibility of the new designation for this one sector. From the Washington Post:

CAIRO, Egypt -- A Bush administration move to blacklist Iran's Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist group would ratchet up pressure on businesses from construction to oil that the military corps is thought to control, analysts said Wednesday.

Such a step also would heighten the U.S. confrontation with Iran, giving a pretext for tougher action in the future, they said.

A U.S. official in Washington said the administration had not yet decided whether to sanction the entire Guards organization or just part of it. Either way, the move would be dramatic _ the first time the U.S. has put a foreign government's military agency on the list, which includes the al-Qaida network and the Middle Eastern militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah.

The more confrontational U.S. stance comes after months of diplomatic wrangling over American accusations that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons in violation of its treaty commitments and supplying Shiite Muslim militants in Iraq. Tehran denies doing either.

"The move reflects that there is a lot of frustration that the diplomacy isn't yielding results," said Ray Takeyh, a specialist on Mideast policy at the Washington-based Council on Foreign Relations.

The designation would allow Washington to freeze U.S.-based assets of companies connected to the Guards, but those are believed to be minimal. More importantly, the listing would give the U.S. a cudgel to pressure foreign enterprises to cut off doing business with Guards-linked firms _ the threat of being accused of supporting terrorism.

The Revolutionary Guards is an elite force separate from Iran's regular military and has its own ground, naval and air units, with an estimated 200,000 men. It has also become increasingly involved in Iran's vital commercial affairs, with interests in oil, nuclear infrastructure and construction.

A terror listing would signal to Iran that the United States was ready to act against the Guards at some point, analysts said.

"Once they get classified as terrorist, American institutions will have the legitimacy they need to fight the Revolutionary Guards," said Mustafa Alani, a terrorism expert at the Gulf Research Center in Dubai.

"If this is a terrorist organization and it fires missiles in the (Persian) Gulf, then the U.S. would have an obligation to fight the Guards," he said. But Alani said he did not expect any such action soon, since American military forces are heavily involved in Iraq.

There was no immediate reaction from Iranian officials to the Bush administration's move to blacklist at least some of the Guards, which was first reported by The Washington Post…

I may be going out on a limb here, but I'm pretty sure it won't meet with their approval.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:39 | link | comments

No longer in love: In a previous lifetime, my Sundays were punctuated by two key pastimes: listening to the Sunday morning show on Ceeb radio, and reading the Sunday New York Times, which was delivered each week to my doorstep.

Times, as we know, have changed, (although the Times, as we also know, has not). Today I would sooner open a vein than listen to Michael Enright and the other hard lefties bloviating away on the Ceeb, or waste good money on a subscription to the Sunday New Dhimmi Times.

 

Someone else who seems to have taken the same journey: Phyllis Chessler, who recounts her former infatuation--and more recent disenchantment--with the Times on the FrontPage magazine site:

 

Once upon a time, I only read and wrote for the most radical, left, and feminist media on the face of the earth. Reluctantly, suspiciously, I read just one establishment, "grown up" paper: The New York Times. After all, it was my home town paper and being as provincial as most Manhattanites, I somehow still believed (you learn this from the drinking water) that the Times covered issues in an objective, sophisticated, and leading-edge way.

 

I still subscribe to, and read the Times, but never first and sometimes not at all (I love how they cover weddings and usually check their obituaries). But duty calls and, as a culture warrior on the front lines, so to speak, I have to read the Times.

 

But now, I first read The New York Sun, Wall Street Journal, The New York Post, The Weekly Standard, The New Republic, Commentary, Middle East Quarterly, the American Jewish media, the online Israeli and Middle Eastern papers and then check about twenty five other internet websites beginning with FrontPage and Pajamas Media in order to steel myself for the ordeal of reading The Paper of Record--yes, the same paper which buried news of the Holocaust on its back pages; the one which today, chooses, positions, and captions photos in such a way that over time, its readers have come to believe that Israel is really an "apartheid" nation state and that every single Palestinian, including the suicide killers, their handlers, and their billionaire funders are barefoot, unarmed, and innocent victims of Israeli and Jewish aggression.

Just the other day--on precisely August 11, 2007, what fresh outrage blinded me and caused me to reach for my blood pressure medication? There, right on the front page of the Saturday Times was a photo four columns wide and five inches hig. It was not about the American miners who were, at the time, heartstoppingly, tragically trapped in Utah.

It showed us a lonely man (Camus' existential stranger-hero, perhaps Kafka's lonely civilian facing a nameless bureaucracy) on a long, long road surrounded by a high wall. The article was captioned: "A Segregated Road in an Already Divided Land." One more time, the Israeli attempt to defend itself from terrorist attacks by building a security wall and, incredibly, in this instance, to allow the West Bank Palestinians (those who do not comprise the 1.2 million who live in Israel proper as Israeli citizens) to travel from Ramallah to Bethlehem without checkpoints, without being stopped, without having to deal with Israeli soldiers.

One might think that congratulations were in order. Nope. In fact, the pull quote read: "A Lack of Exits Will Keep Palestinians Out of Jerusalem." I do not recall any similar pull quotes about how Jews or Christians are not allowed to practice their religions in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan or even at their own holiest sites in Muslim-held territory. And, as Paul Berman has brilliantly pointed out, the Times has glamorized fascism in its overly gushing reviews of the work of Tariq Ramadan, the grandson of the founder of The Muslim Brotherhood, who now teaches at Oxford University and is published by their distinguished press.

When Islamic jihad intensified against Israel in 2000, I began meticulously to document such media biases. I wrote articles, delivered speeches, lost old friends and colleagues but made new ones for doing so. I counted myself one lucky woman when HonestReporting, Camera, and Memri emerged to do just this both systematically and splendidly. Let me note that because the Times is still so large it can afford to throw bones, offer scraps, to cover their considerable moral nakedness.

Thus, the paper has also published inspired, "corrective" reportage by Nicholas Kristof, Christopher Caldwell, and David Brooks--even occasionally by Thomas Friedman on the subjects of Islamic gender and religious apartheid and about the Middle East. And, let me admit: I still read their Sunday Book Review which, although it chose not to review my last two books, (a "first" for me, but a very educational experience), still remains essential reading. But, the book reviews in the New York Sun, Wall Street Journal, and Weekly Standard are now also essential reading…

If, on September 10, 2001, you had told me that in fairly short order I would be shunning the Ceeb, the NYT and other mainstream outlets in favour of the New York Sun, the National Post and the NRO, I would have called you an absolute lunatic.

 

And I would have been dead wrong.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:04 | link | comments (5)

B’nai Brith complains about VisionTV: In the wake of articles in the National Post about VisionTV’s Dil Dil Pakistan program and its propensity for featuring material from notable Jew-haters, B’nai Brith Canada has lodged an official complaint with Canada’s broadcasting regulatory body, the CRTC. From the Jewish Tribune:

B’nai Brith Canada, Canadian Jewry’s senior human rights organization, has filed an official complaint with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) following the airing of a series of broadcasts on Vision TV’s Dil Dil Pakistan of individuals holding antisemetic and anti-western views.

 

Bill Roberts, president and CEO of Vision TV, following reports a month ago in the National Post about the glorifying of jihad on Dil Dil Pakistan by fundamentalist Islamic preacher Israr Ahmad, apologized profusely for the incident. He told the Jewish Tribune last month that sometimes the screeners don’t know the background of the person and that his station will be more vigilant in future (see Jewish Tribune, July 26, 2007).

 

Yet only a week later, Ahmad again appeared on Dil Dil Pakistan, and a few weeks after that, another individual known for his hatemongering – Turkish author Adnan Oktar, aka Harun Yahya – was given air time.

 

In a letter sent to CRTC Secretary-General Robert Morin last week, Anita Bromberg, director of B’nai Brith Canada’s Legal Department, said the organization carefully reviewed the tapes of the original broadcast by Israr Ahmad, during which he stated: “Jihad is the way of Allah,” and “in execution of this responsibility [of jihad], you might have to lay down your lives also, to sacrifice your lives.” This clearly brings to question the excuses given by Vision TV executives that Ahmad was merely providing “historical” commentary.

 

“The open calls for jihad broadcast directly into Canadian homes could clearly be interpreted by his supporters as a call to engage in terrorism,” Bromberg wrote. “While we have accepted Vision TV’s invitation to lend our expertise to a revision of its policies and procedures in its effort to take corrective actions [following the July 14 screening], we believe that the repeat broadcasts of Israr Ahmad’s lectures, as well as the subsequent airing of Mr. Yahya’s documentary, clearly merit a formal investigation by the CRTC. The procedural failures, which arose here, leave little confidence in the broadcaster’s present ability to implement procedures to meet its responsibility to control the content of its varied mosaic programming. B’nai Brith indicates that it has pressed ahead with its CRTC complaint because in its view these incidents highlight the broader need to ensure that effective industry-wide safeguards and procedures are in place, so that Canadian airwaves cannot be turned over to preachers of hate.

 

While I’m pleased that B’nai Brith has filed the complaint, I have about as much confidence in the multicultists of the CRTC being able to figure out what’s really going on here (i.e. clever Islamists taking advantage of Canadian cluelessness) as I have in VisionTV's being able to figure it out.

Posted by: scaramouche at 16:36 | link | comments

Paging Maggie Poppano: If, as she says, the Queen’s University English prof is genuinely concerned about “Palestinian oppression,” she might want to have a gander at this IPS story and start organization her boycott of Lebanese academe:

BADDAWI CAMP, Northern Lebanon, Aug 13 (IPS) - Palestinians displaced by the fighting at the northern Lebanese refugee camp Nahr al-Bared have accused the Lebanese Army of torturing and abusing civilians.

As the fighting between the Sunni Islamist group Fatah al-Islam and the Lebanese army enters its 12th week, thousands of Nahr al-Bared residents have sought refuge in the nearby Baddawi camp. Many give detailed descriptions of days spent in detention under harsh interrogation.

Fadi Wahbi, 36, told IPS that he was detained for questioning by the Lebanese army as he fled Nahr al-Bared with family members. He was held for two days at the nearby Kobbeh military base and then transported, along with other young and middle-aged men who fled the fighting, to what he believes was the Ministry of Defence in Beirut.

There Wahbi's long ordeal began. Prison officials accused him of belonging to Fatah al-Islam, and kept him blindfolded in a crowded prison cell for eight days with scores of others similarly accused. When he insisted on his innocence, they began to beat him.

"Every time I said that I was not lying, they struck a blow," he recalled. "I did not know where the blows were coming from. I spent most of the eight days blindfolded and without sleep." Prison authorities also tortured Wahbi, twisting his extremities almost to the point where he lost consciousness. Later he said he was forced to stand in excruciating positions for days.

"I expected it to last an hour or two, but they kept me standing, handcuffed behind my back, blindfolded, for 36 hours," he said. "Every two or three hours I would fall to the floor. As soon as I hit the floor, someone would beat me up against the wall. It happened five or six times. Then I started to like falling, because it meant I could rest my legs. It was so painful that I preferred to fall and rest for a few seconds, even if that meant being beaten."

Dozens of Palestinians were kept in a single room, without space to sleep and unable to communicate with each other.

"We were never allowed to stretch our legs. We slept handcuffed, sitting with our backs to the wall and legs bent," he said. "If you stretched your legs, someone was there to kick you on your legs."

He was eventually sent back to Kobbeh in northern Lebanon, and managed to reach a nearby hospital after his release.

The psychological toll was extreme. Wahbi recalled that "at one point, I was seeing things. Unreal things. One time I imagined a door opening up in the wall that led me to my family. I stood up and ran into the wall. A guard came to me and shouted 'What are you doing? Are you trying to hurt yourself? You are not allowed to hurt yourself, only we are allowed to hurt you.' And he started beating me."

Wahbi's story mirrors the testimonies of dozens of Palestinians, most of whom are too terrified to speak on the record. Milad Salameh, a nurse at the Shifa' Clinic in the Baddawi camp, says he has seen more than 30 cases of abuse at the Army's hands.

"Many of the injuries we received," he told IPS, "were sustained under detention, inside the army detention centres. Many people came with signs of torture, abuse and beatings. We saw signs of electrical shocks as well, and some even reported sexual abuses, such as rape by bottle."

The Shahed Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, based in Beirut, has documented over 50 cases of torture of Nahr al-Bared residents. Its director, Mahmoud al-Hanafi, told IPS that the army has systematically ignored human rights in its battle with Fatah al-Islam, and called upon both the Army and Fatah al-Islam to respect the Fourth Geneva Convention, which governs the treatment of civilians during wartime…

 

The international community’s response to the Lebanese Army’s actions—one resounding ho-hum; as we know, the world only gets in a lather about Palestinians being mistreated when Jews are involved.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:24 | link | comments

Campus backlash: The heads of several Canadian universities recently released a statement in which they condemned British academia’s boycott of Israeli universities. The Canadian academics, who, thankfully, seem to have a clue, slammed the boycott for unfairly singling out Israel for opprobrium. The fallout from that principled stance is now beginning to be felt, as the anti-Zionists on campus take to howling and seething about “Palestinian oppression” and how Israeli academics are somehow implicated in it. (A real knee-slapper, considering that much of Israel’s academe is as cluelessly leftist and self-excoriating as the boycott supporters) The Toronto Star, for example, has an article about the flack Karen Hitchcock, the head of Queen’s University, is getting from the vocal anti-Zionists on her campus:

The head of Queen's University is being accused of "hypocrisy" on her home campus for condemning a proposed British boycott of Israel's universities over its treatment of Palestinians.

 

Principal and vice-chancellor Karen Hitchcock was told her anti-boycott position, matched by several other university presidents in Canada and globally, is a "mischaracterization and defamation of Queen's community members ... who strongly oppose your stance," the Queen's Coalition against Racial and Ethnic Discrimination advised her in a letter this week.

 

Calling her statement "blatantly political," English literature professor Margaret Pappano said yesterday her QCRED group is angry that it was posted on the Queen's website without prior debate, contrary to the principles of healthy academic discourse.

 

"There's great hypocrisy in all this," said Pappano. "You can't be silent for years about what's gone on to Palestinian academic freedom and suddenly issue a statement of support for Israeli academic freedom without it having political connotations."

 

Britain's University and College Union decided in May to consider suspending links with Israeli academic institutions, a step that has been urged by Palestinian groups.

 

The boycott, which trade-union academics are now debating at the local level, could affect such interactions as student exchanges, publishing of research papers and attendance at conferences.

 

Those favouring a boycott say Israel's intellectuals and academics have been complicit in their nation's oppression of Palestinians.

 

A Queen's spokesperson said yesterday the campus group's dissenting letter had been received but that Hitchcock is away.

 

Her July statement will remain on the website, the spokesperson said.

 

In it, Hitchcock denounces the boycott as "antithetical to the core value of academic freedom, which is cherished by Queen's and other universities around the world."

 

She said if the U.K. union pursues its "ill-advised course," it should add Queen's to its boycott list.

 

Ryerson, York and University of Toronto are among numerous Canadian universities also denouncing the proposed boycott.

 

"We will not stand by as the very nature of university education is being undermined," said Ryerson president Sheldon Levy.

 

Joel Duff, Ontario organizer with the Canadian Federation of Students, said his group has not taken a position on the boycott. Student unions at the campus level may choose to consider the proposal once the school year starts, he said.

 

The real “hypocrites,” of course, are the mouthy Pappano and her ilk—Palestinianists who are actively working for Israel’s demise (the final Final Solution), but who have the audacity to frame this effort a matter of “justice” for the “oppressed.” Newsflash for Maggie et al—we know what you’re up to, and we ain’t gonna stand for it.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:06 | link | comments

Clueless in Oz: For the moment both Canada and Australia have Conservative Prime Ministers, but that could change for both countries come election time. In Canada, polls show Stephen Harper is neck and neck with his opponent, pallid eco-freak Stephane Dion (whose command of spoken English is even shakier that that of old syntax-fracturer, Jean Chretien, but who has a doggie named Kyoto—very appealing for the sanctimonious green crowd). In Australia, John Howard is trailing Kevin Rudd, a clueless Laborite with an internationalist outlook.

Mary Kissel in OpinionJournal offers this capsule portrait of the man challenging Howard:

…After a few leadership debacles, the Labor Party found Mr. Rudd, a 49-year-old fresh face. He styles himself a new left "economic conservative" who would keep the budget balanced. He spouts the odd non sequitur--he'd "keep interest rates low" while "preserving central bank independence"--and panders to the trade unions, threatening to roll back the Liberals' program of flexible work contracts. But other than that, Mr. Rudd largely echoes Mr. Howard's free trade, conservative economic management--something the prime minister acknowledges with relish. "I think it's a bit of a risk electing a bloke who doesn't have a plan of his own," Mr. Howard told radio host Mr. Hadley.

 

It's on the "fear issues" such as climate change, job security and foreign policy where Labor wants to distinguish itself--and where the election, if Mr. Rudd wins, could impact the U.S. and its allies. The opposition leader wants a phased withdrawal of Australian troops from Iraq, playing to local fears that the war on terror has "made Australia a target." He advocates humanitarian aid for, and dialogue between, opposing factions--unsurprising positions for a man who spent seven years as a foreign service bureaucrat before entering politics. Under a Rudd government, Australia would maintain its close U.S. alliance, he says, but plump for a stronger United Nations and nurture its relationship with China. Mr. Rudd also supports ratifying the Kyoto Treaty…

 

God help the Aussies—and us—if they opt for the guy who wants “a stronger” U.N. and who thinks the jihad won’t come a-knockin’ once the Aussies decamp from Iraq.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:39 | link | comments

Halleluliah!: That’s me cheering on Gregory Davis, author of Religion of Peace? Islam’s War Against the World, as he cuts through the multiculti crap in an interview in FrontPage magazine:

FP: Why do you think there is so much that the West actually doesn’t know about Islam? Why the impulse to deceive oneself?

Davis: I think that there are several reasons. The first is a natural if unwarrantable reluctance to face the very uncomfortable reality that there is an entire civilization seeking our subjugation under nothing less than a totalitarian system of government, i.e., Islamic (Sharia) law.

When faced with National Socialism and Communism, the West demonstrated a similar unwillingness to face up to very grim realities. The continued emphasis on a "new world order" in which violence and warfare will be swept into the dustbin of history makes it that much more difficult for people to realize that, far from a coming era of perpetual peace and happiness, we are facing a future of conflict and civilizational struggle.

The second reason I believe is the persistence of the multicultural myth that all peoples, religions, and civilizations are morally equivalent. Despite its manifest absurdity, this idea nonetheless continues to taint just about every public discussion on Islam and throttles any kind of objective analysis of the origins of Islamic violence.

Thanks to multiculturalism, every theory except the obvious one -- that Islamic violence has roots in Islam -- is advanced: that the jihadists are acting out of "frustration" due to "poverty," "disenfranchisement," etc. Such theories are belied by such jihadists as the 7/7 bombers in London, who were native Britons, and the more recent British doctors, who seemed to have plenty to live for in Western society.

And then there is of course someone like Osama bin Laden, a multimillionaire many times over, a father, poet, and animal-lover, who nonetheless is willing to throw it all away in order to follow in the footsteps of Muhammad. The unhappy truth is that the jihadists are, to a great extent, acting from genuine, deeply-held religious conviction.

Invariably, the jihadists are serious, pious Muslims, many of whom recently rediscovered the tenets of their faith. It is an uncomfortable fact for a tolerant society such as ours to acknowledge that sincere religious belief can pose an imminent danger to a society's physical safety. We would be better off discarding "religion" as a term and instead focus on the very real distinctions between religions and their implications.

FP: So what hope exists that there can be a modernization and democratization within the Islamic world? How can this even begin to happen when the extremists appear to be in command in most of its quarters?

Davis: Hope that a "reformation" of Islam will somehow eliminate its fundamental hostility to the non-Muslim world is wishful thinking. The only even modestly successful attempts to "reform" Islam have taken the form of de-Islamization. This was the policy of Attaturk, who in Turkey replaced the cult of Muhammad with the cult of himself.

Throughout Islamic history, the only alternative to the rule of Islamic law is military dictatorship. It is between these two extremes that modern Turkey continues to oscillate.

Democratizing Islam is really a contradiction in terms: one might as well try democratizing National Socialism or Communism. Islam is what it is: a repressive, expansionary, militaristic religious and political system with a mandate from Allah to conquer the globe. Putting it that way almost sounds silly to the Western ear, but this does not deny the truth of it.

The fundamental problem is that the Muslim extremists are not really "extreme" at all -- rather they are the orthodox faithful. By Western logic, Muhammad himself -- who engaged in political assassination, wars of aggression, and massacre --- would qualify as an "extremist." Violence and intolerance are mainstream in Islam, not distortions of its orthodox traditions as they would be in a religion such as Christianity.

And let us say, “Amen.”

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:35 | link | comments (1)

A clueless lefty gets a clue—sort of: Toronto Star fortnightly writer Mark Abely recalls his encounter with Taslima Nasreen. Nasreen is the outspoken Bangladeshi novelist, a Muslim apostate, who has written about the horrific plight of Muslim women. She has been the target of many death threats over the years, and last week was set upon by a seething mob of true believers who almost succeeded in killing her.

Abely abely describes Nasreen’s bravery, and her refusal to submit to those who want to silence her:

Courage is one thing Nasreen has in abundance. "In Christian countries," she told me on that visit, "people can say anything they like against Christianity. So why should people in Islamic countries not have the right to criticize Islam? If any religion keeps women in slavery, then I cannot accept that religion."

Out of deference to the sensitivities of believers, many of us in Canada tiptoe around that kind of statement. We hate to cause offence. The last thing we want to do is sound like imperialists.

Nasreen has no such qualms. She speaks the truth as she sees it. And, as the news item from Hyderabad reminded me, she pays a price for her outspokenness.

Nasreen was trying to launch a Telugu language version of one of her novels. A mob broke into the Press Club, where the event was being held, hurling objects at Nasreen and shouting abuse. One of them – Akbaruddin Owaisi, an elected member of the Andhra Pradesh legislature – personally threatened to behead her.

After several days, the local police registered a case against him. They had already registered a case against Nasreen for "promoting enmity between different groups." They did this at the behest of Akbaruddin Owaisi, who declared that Nasreen's writings "hurt the sentiments of the faithful."

So should the sentiments of the faithful have the power to turn an unbeliever into a criminal – or a corpse?

At this stage cognitive dissonance rears its head, and a lefty who submits to the mainstream mishegas wherein Muslims are always the victims, the West (especially America and Israel) is always wicked, and the jihad is a fanciful creation of George W. Bush and his band of neo-Jews, gets a glimmer of a clue that his usual way of thinking makes no sense:

At some point, Western liberals have to draw a steadfast line. Sure, the American invasion of Iraq was an atrocity; sure, Muslim minorities from Bosnia to China have suffered grievous oppression; sure, Palestinians continue to be mistreated and abused; sure, the vast majority of Muslims are peace-loving people.

But having said all that, we liberals need to define and hold onto the values that are essential to us – values we hold sacred, to use a loaded word. We need to defend and proclaim our own moral convictions.

For me, freedom of speech is sacred. For me, a library is as holy as any mosque or church. I despise anyone for whom religious sentiments justify a threat of murder.

I also despise anyone who thinks that out of sensitivity to Muslims, we should keep silent about the threats against Taslima Nasreen.

Good on you, Mark. You’re on the road to enlightenment—maybe.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:57 | link | comments

“Peace” in Windsor: The pro-Hezbollah billboard in Windsor has been replaced with an ad for a car vendor, but the Islamic supremacist whose idea it was to put it up is pleased that, in its brief two days on the scene, it got its message across. From the Windsor Star:

The controversial billboard depicting Hezbollah's leader had disappeared Monday morning, but one of the men responsible for the sign says it's not because they're backing down from fierce public backlash.

"What ever we believe, we'll speak about it anytime," said Hussein Dabaja. "We will speak about human rights, about the truth, about Nasrallah. We're going to do it and nobody can stop us. We'll talk about it anywhere, any place we have a chance."

Dabaja said the company that owns the sign, CBS Outdoors, covered the billboard because the Lebanese community members only paid to have it up

"We paid for the weekend and it's done," said Dabaja. "We have our message, and our message got the point across."

CBS Outdoor didn't return phone calls on Monday.

The billboard depicting Hezbollah's leader Hassan Nasrallah was quietly replaced Monday morning with an advertisement for a car dealership.

The sign was erected Friday morning at the corner Wyandotte Street and Marion Avenue, and immediately drew fire from the Windsor Jewish Community Centre, the Lebanese Christian political group Kataeb and others.

Among other Lebanese leaders, the sign prominently depicts the head of the political and military group representing Shia Muslims. Hezbollah, considered a terrorist organization by the Canadian government, was created in 1982 primarily to resist the Israeli occupation of Lebanon that lasted two decades.

Dabaja said it was meant to honour friends and family who have died fighting in Lebanon.

To be accurate: it was meant to honour the “martyrs” who have died fighting the jihad against the uppity Jewish dhimmis, the ones who refuse to get with the Prophet’s program and grovel to their Islamic superiors. It was also meant to brazenly announce Hezbollah’s presence in Windsor.

Thankfully, the local Jews refused to submit:

Harvey Kessler, executive director of the Windsor Jewish Community Centre, said the sign was "the opposite of peace" and a message from terrorists.

"I'm pleased it is down," said Kessler. "Hopefully, it leads to a discussion about the kind of community we want to live in. Also in the Lebanon and Arab communities, they need to talk about these issues as well, and the kind of community, the kind of Canada we live in. I hope it will generate a lot of discussion and some positive outcome."

However, a local politician, who is obviously accustomed to catering to his constituents, sounds far more wishy-washy:

Alan Halberstadt, city councillor for Ward 3 where the sign went up, said it was "hard to say" whether those responsible for the sign should have the right ot (sic) put it up.

"Certainly, the Canadian government has indicated they define Hezbollah as a terrorist organization," said Halberstadt. "That would certainly lend a lot of weight to not displaying that sort of thing."

He did say it's probably a good thing that the sign is gone.

"Perhaps it is a good thing it is down, because it caused such a discord in Windsor," said Halberstadt. "We don't need that kind of discord."

Wimp.

 

So far the Windsor Star (not wanting to stir up “that kind of discord”?) hasn’t published a single letter to the editor about the controversy, including this one:

 

Hussein Dabaja claims to be someone who wants “peace” and, further, claims that those who are protesting the pro-Hezbollah billboard in Windsor “don't like Hezbollah and they don't want peace."

 

He’s half right. Those protesting the billboard, which features the visage of Hezbollah chief, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, don’t like Hezbollah. But then, when it comes to a jihadist organization dedicated, like its Iranian paymasters, to wiping Israel off the map and divesting Lebanon, formerly the Middle East’s Christian nation, of its Christian influence, there’s not really a whole lot to like.

 

That doesn’t mean, however, that the protesters don’t want peace. They just don’t want Hezbollah’s brand of peace—the “peace” that will be in place once the Middle East’s Christians and Jews have been soundly trounced.

 

If that’s the kind of peace that Mr. Dabaja desires, it’s one that has no place in Canada, where, last time I checked, Hezbollah was still listed by as an outlawed terrorist organization by the Canadian government.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:06 | link | comments (1)

A wake-up call in Windsor: As Canadians give themselves high fives about the success of multiculturalism, the Islamists, whom the policy has most benefited, are becoming more brazen. A bunch of true believers who support Hezbollah’s jihad against Israel have set up shop in Windsor, Ontario, across the border from a part of Michigan that has a large Muslim population. The Hezbollah buffs paid to put up a large billboard in Windsor featuring the bewiskered punim of Sheik Hassan Nassrallah, the outfit’s killer-in-chief. Some dhimmis in the community have protested the appearance of a sign touting a terrorist movement that is outlawed in Canada, one led by a genocidal Jew-hater who, given the chance, would finish the job Hitler started. But the Windsor jihadists are so besotted by the “human rights” and “freedoms” they’ve been told they get to have here in Canada—the ones they were denied back home—that they’re standing firm and insisting the billboard remain where it is. From the Windsor Star:

One of the people responsible for a controversial billboard depicting Hezbollah's leader said he did it to honour  freedom fighting families back home -- and it's their Canadian right to do so.

"In Canada we want peace," said Hussein Dabaja, a Lebanese-born Hezbollah supporter. "We're not trying offend anybody. We have freedom of speech. It's a free country. We can do anything. Every Lebanese in Canada has somebody that died in Lebanon, the freedom fighters. Who is Hezbollah? Our brothers, our family, our parents, our friends. We came to Canada and they stayed there to fight."

The billboard went up Friday at the corner of Wyandotte Street East and Marion Avenue, and immediately drew fire from the Windsor Jewish Community Centre, the Lebanese Christian political group Kataeb and others.

Among other Lebanese leaders, the sign prominently depicts Hassan Nasrallah, the head of the political and military group representing Shia Muslims. Hezbollah, considered a terrorist organization by the Canadian government, was created in 1982 primarily to resist the Israeli occupation of Lebanon that lasted two decades.

"The sign shows the Lebanese community finally got a chance to express their feelings about what is going on, to show respect," said sign supporter Ayat Choukeir. "Before we were Canadians we were all Lebanese. To see a part of Lebanon in our city makes us really happy."

Dabaja said the billboard was not meant to be an anti-Jewish statement.

"People who have something against the billboard don't like Hezbollah and they don't want peace," he said…

Wrongo, Dabaja. People who don’t like Hezbollah do want peace. They just don’t want Hezbollah’s—and your—kind of peace: the peace that will exist once the world has submitted to Islam. The question is: are these people prepared to do something about it or will they, in the words of Eli Wiesel speaking at the Canadian Bar Association’s annual legal conference, succumb to “indifference,” and allow the evil to take hold under their very eyes.

 

One further comment: once again, Canada’s cluelessness and humanitarianism are being used against it, as the Choukeirs and Dabajas—Islamic supremacists who believe in the primacy of sharia law—are allowed into Canada and afforded the protections of citizenship. We are idiots for giving these jihadis, these enemies of Western freedom and democracy, a beach head on our shores.

Update: My unlogged commenter informs me that the billboard has been taken down. Give-'em-Hell blogger Debbie Schlussel, who lives across the border from Windsor in what she dryly calls Detroitistan, has more on the story and on Hassan Dajaba, the Hezbollah buff whose idea it was to put up the billboard:

…Dabaja said [in an article in the Windsor Star and the National Post] he's one of a number of local Lebanese community members who had the idea about seven months ago, after discussing other options to honour people back home that included a candle light vigil.

He said community members and leaders of organizations representing about 700 people settled on the billboard plan. Dabaja said support from people has swelled since the sign went up, including some who stopped by Sunday to take pictures.

This is important becaues the Dabaja family is one of several families from the South Lebanon Hezbollah stronghold of Bint Jbeil, Lebanon, who've moved here and been involved with support for the terrorist group. They are well known operatives and agents of the terrorist group, there and here in North America. Many of the Dabajas live in Dearbornistan and most are open supporters of Hezbollah.

Also interesting is that, last year, Al-Seyassah, Kuwaiti newspaper reported on meetings by Hezbollah operatives and agents of Gen. Michel Aoun (a Maronite Christian allied with Hezbollah) in Dearbornistan and Windsor. The paper reported that Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) agents raided the Windsor meeting.

I'd bet Dabaja was at the meeting. Hopefully--but doubtfully CSIS and the FBI--have been keeping an eye on Dabaja. No doubt, he's been over the river to Dearbornistan to visit--and plot--with his Hezbollah-supporting cousins.

The important question is: Who gave Dabaja and company the money, and are they receiving funds from Hezbollah in Lebanon? Did any of the money come from Dearbornistan?

Oh, those jihadis. Always thinking globally and acting locally.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:30 | link | comments (1)

A new flare-up of an old sickness: A Reuters piece on the Der Spiegel site notes the disturbing resurgence of antisemitism in Europe and the Middle East since 9/11—the subject of a new exhibition in Berlin—and, surprisingly enough, admits that anti-Zionism is the latest mutation of this age-old pathology (my word, not Reuters’):

…When an exhibition on contemporary anti-Semitism opened this month at the Foreign Office in Berlin, Deputy Foreign Minister Gernot Erler said it was "appropriate" that the topic wasn't squirreled away in a historical museum but on display in the bright atrium of a German ministry.

"Anti-Semitism has sadly not been left where it belongs, in the poison cabinet reserved for the pathogens of hard-to-cure diseases of the past," he said. "Unfortunately it is a phenomenon of today's Europe which our foreign policy has to confront as well."

The exhibit, called "Anti-Semitism? Anti-Zionism? Criticism of Israel?" is a series of anti-Jewish posters and cartoons from Europe and the Middle East. It covers manifestations of anti-Semitism in the era of September 11, the second intifada, and the Iraq war -- from left-wing groups in Europe calling for boycotts of Israel to white supremacist bands and soccer hooligans behaving badly on the distant right.

"We have to uncover the roots of anti-Semitism," said Wolfgang Benz, director of Berlin's Center for Anti-Semitism Research, in an interview with the German daily Die Welt. (The Center organized the exhibition along with Jerusalem-based Yad Vashem, Israel's official Holocaust memorial.) "Above all we have to show that behind all forms of Jew-hatred there's some sort of instrumentalization: Jews are made responsible for grievances which they had nothing to do with."

The exhibition shows ugly examples of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories that surfaced after the September 11 assaults in America and the 2004 tsunami in Indonesia. (Jews were blamed for both.)

Other parts show recent photos of virulent far-right graffiti and broken headstones in Jewish cemeteries in Germany. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's 2005 speech called "A World Without Israel" receives a wall panel's worth of commentary, and so do protests against "Zionism" by Palestinians in Europe who carry signs comparing Ariel Sharon to Hitler.

"The Islamic world," said Benz, "takes its recipes from the poisonous kitchen of 19th-century European nationalism. Racism originally was quite foreign to Islam, in contrast with European cultures."

One striking panel shows the lurid covers of various editions of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion." The book, which purports to describe a Jewish world conspiracy, was a hoax invented by an anti-Semitic Russian journalist in the late 1890s and propagated in Europe by the Nazis. Covers from Europe in the 1930s show grinning Jews squeezing blood from the globe; a cover from an Arabic edition shows Jews slicing open a bearded man's throat. But the Jewish "plot" outlined in the text still has currency in the Muslim world: The exhibit shows a cover from one edition that was on sale, illegally, in the Iranian pavilion at the 2005 Frankfurt Book Fair.

The Difference Between Criticism and Anti-Semitism

The show also takes on the controversial subject of how to distinguish legitimate criticism of Israel from political debate masquerading as anti-Semitism. It devotes a wall panel to a cartoon by Dave Brown, published in Britain's Independent newspaper in 2003, which shows Ariel Sharon stalking a battlefield with a headless child in his mouth, half-naked, posed like the Roman god Saturn in Francesco de Goya's famous painting, "Saturn Devouring One of His Sons."

"What's wrong?" says Sharon in the cartoon. "Have you never seen a politician kissing a baby?"

The cartoon received sharp criticism from the Israeli government but went on to win first prize from the British Political Cartoon Society in 2003.

The award, back then, led to fierce debate on blogs and in the letters columns of British newspapers. But the exhibition in Berlin restricts itself to noting that Brown's image reminded many Jews of the blood libel, the ancient anti-Semitic horror tale that Jews use children's blood in religious rituals. It doesn't examine whether Brown meant to be anti-Semitic. "My cartoon was intended as a caricature of a specific person, Sharon," he said at the time, "in the guise of a figure from classical myth who, I hoped, couldn't be farther from any Jewish stereotype."

That's certainly arguable, but the exhibition would need a bigger venue -- maybe even a museum -- to handle such questions in detail...

I doubt even the West Edmonton Mall is capacious enough to handle such questions.

Then again, I can boil down the issue such that it can fit in a back pocket. Here goes: the world has never come to terms with the fact of the Jews, who had the great good fortune and the even greater misfortune to be the world's first monotheists—a happenstance for which they can never be forgiven; and down through the ages the evil, the delusional, the fanatical and the ambitious have sought to disguise their own longing for absolute power, their own triumphalism, by projecting it onto the Jews.

Posted by: scaramouche at 23:03 | link | comments

Foolish optimism and false premises: Condi Rice and Tony Blair are convinced that resolving the sticky Palestinian-Israel issue will be the magic bullet that will cure the rest of the Mideast’s ills, including a belligerent Iran that will soon have its own a nuclear arsenal. Dore Gore explains why that’s flat out wrong—and how nothing good can come of such muddled thinking. From OpinionJournal:

The U.S. and other Western powers are pushing for a new Israeli-Palestinian breakthrough, to help contain Iran and undercut the appeal of al Qaeda and radical Islam. A grand-scale Middle East peace conference is planned for this fall.

The underlying assumption is that radical Islam has something do to with Israel-related political grievances. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair has made this argument repeatedly. If he and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice roll up their sleeves and work toward a permanent settlement of the Palestinian issue, so the logic goes, they will be providing a powerful diplomatic antidote to the jihadism threatening the security of the entire Western alliance.

But is this really the case? In August 2005, the international community embraced Israel's unilateral disengagement from Gaza, largely for these very reasons. The "occupation," which they tirelessly argued was polarizing the Middle East, would be rolled back. The Palestinians would take over Israeli greenhouses and export cherry tomatoes to the European Union. They would pump gas from lucrative off-shore gas fields being developed by British Gas to bring in huge revenues to the Palestinian people.

Ms. Rice also pushed hard for the "Rafah Border Crossing Agreement," which was supposed to facilitate trade between Gaza and the rest of the world while keeping terrorists out. EU observers were deployed.

But moderation did not ensue. Five months after Israel's withdrawal from Gaza, Hamas won the Palestinian elections and formed a government. In March 2006, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas told the London Arabic daily Al-Hayat that al Qaeda had penetrated the area. A month later, the newspaper reported that al Qaeda operatives had infiltrated Gaza from Egypt, Sudan and Yemen.

Huge amounts of weapons and cash also poured into Gaza. And regardless of their tactical disagreements, Hamas did not fight al Qaeda but in fact joined forces with one of its Gaza affiliates, the Army of Islam (Jaish al-Islam), in kidnapping Israeli Cpl. Gilad Shalit. In July 2007, the head of al Qaeda in Egypt fled that country's security forces to hide in Gaza.

In short, the U.S. and its Western allies thought that Israel's Gaza pullout would establish the foundations of a Palestinian state and thus reduce the flames of radical Islamic rage. Instead they got an al-Qaeda sanctuary on the shores of the Mediterranean…

The real naqba: the good intentions of Western leaders paved the road to Gaza’s—and Israel’s—Hades.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:06 | link | comments

Giddy-up: One of the biggest drawbacks of multicultism—it offers an effective smokescreen for the Islamists to hide behind. The smoke allows them to pretend that their desire to see religion play a role in public life is exactly the same as the desire of other religious groups for more faith-based initiatives. (Tax-payer funded Ontario madrassas, anyone?) On that basis, the cluless infidels have no problem giving sharia law an piggy-back ride into their home turf. From Islam Online:

CAIRO — Faith-based groups and funds in the United States have made over the past few years impressive financial strides by investing heavily in securities and shares of companies with moral agenda, while shunning the "sin stocks" of industries like pornography, tobacco and abortion pharmaceuticals, The Washington Post reported Saturday, August 11.

"It's just a matter of growing up," said Ronald A. Simkins, director of the Kripke Center for the Study of Religion & Society at Creighton University in Omaha, Nebraska.

Simkins said faith-based groups have opted now for more sophisticated tools for advancing their moral and religious agenda rather than the traditional boycott.

"Now, instead of boycotting Disney, they'll be investing in Fox Family Films," said, referring to a company that distributes family-friendly and morally-driven movies and programs.

In the past, faith-based groups used to rely primarily on consumer boycotts and sympathetic lawmakers to undermine immoral investments and products.

A successful 2006 boycott campaign by the American Family Association, for instance, has led to the demise of NBC's racy "The Book of Daniel."

Now, the faith-based groups have been investing in the so-called religious investment products and "moral" stock indices with a market that has grown by more than 3,500 percent over the past decade, according to fund-tracker Morningstar Inc.

They are actually screening out companies and stocks affiliated with pornography, abortion, gambling, tobacco, alcohol and non-married lifestyles.

For example, the American Family Association is for the first time urging its 2.8 million online members to "purge" their investment portfolios of companies that support a "gay agenda" or "anti-family" practices

The Evangelical Timothy Plan, a group of mutual funds, has also pledged to avoid "securities of any company that is actively contributing to the moral decline of our society."

The KLD Catholic Values 400 Index attracts investors concerned not only about abortion but also environmental protection...

Cut to the chase. Several paragraphs down the core message is finally revealed (talk about burying the lede):

…Muslim economists have also proved their mettle.

The Amana Funds, which invests according to Shari`ah, has grown from $30 million under management in 2003 to more than $700 million this year.

A major reason, according to Deputy Portfolio Manager Monem Salam, is the funds' strong financial returns, which he says have attracted many new, non-Muslim investors.

Today, many new non-Muslim investors; tomorrow, the whole flippin’ dar-al-Harb.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:32 | link | comments

Verminous hack: Useful idiot/odious jihad-enabler Robert Fisk, who two years ago released a magnum opus of mishegas, tells an Islam Online freelancer that he practises "mouse" journalism.

Correctamundo, Bob--Farfour Mouse journalism.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:54 | link | comments

“Jew”-liani and the global threat : When I read this headline in the Tehran Times (“Iran’s leading international daily”)—Rudy Strangelove’s fear of the Green Peril—I thought “why does this T.T. opiner think Giuiliani’s afraid of the Goracle—and what the heck does it have to do with Stanley Kubrick’s Cold War satire about mutually assured destruction (M.A.D.)?” Turns out the scribe had a different green peril in mind: Rudy’s misplaced concerns re the jihad, a fear being fanned by—you guessed it—“the Zionist lobby.”

Even the daughter of Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani is not supporting his campaign.

The politically aware young lady currently favors Democratic candidate Barack Obama over her father, who says he wants to crush the USA’s enemies by any means possible and even revealed his desire to use tactical nuclear weapons against the Muslim nations.

The fearmonger in chief from New York has been telling audiences across the country that Muslims hate U.S. citizens because of their superiority and modern way of life.

“We are facing an enemy that is planning all over this world, and it turns out planning inside our country, to come here and kill us.”

On the campaign trail, the former mayor of New York plays a man maddened by the inability of Americans to see the danger coming. “This is reality, ma’am,” he told a startled woman at Oglethorpe, Georgia. “You’ve got to clear your head.”

The political website Slate.com tracked down Caroline Giuliani’s Facebook blogspot profile, on which the 17-year-old describes her political views as “liberal”, something of a dirty word in the U.S. nowadays.

However, she later removed the part of her profile which listed her as a member of the group “One Million Strong for Barack”.

In a recent interview with CNN, Giuliani said he would approve the use of nuclear weapons against Muslim nations. “This war is not a bumper sticker,” he said. “This is a real war”.

Giuliani has a calm and confident demeanor but does not conceal his colossal ego and declares that he has wanted to be president since he was in diapers.

Since Giuliani announced his candidacy, the Zionist lobby has been promoting him as a role model for modern world leaders, citing the “extraordinary” role he played in response to the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York.

To fabricate a charismatic image for the candidate, writer Ken Kurson, known for his connections to the Zionist lobby in the United States, was assigned the responsibility to pen a book on Rudy’s “exceptional” leadership qualities. Later the book Leadership was declared an autobiography co-written by the “leader” himself -- Rudolph W. Giuliani.

The Zionist lobby is trying to depict him as a true American hero who not only fought gallantly against the odds in the hour of trial but also has the vision to cope with potential terrorist incidents in the future. Back in his ideological home, Israel, newspapers have gathered panels of experts who have declared him the “best” presidential candidate for the Zionist regime.

Some political analysts even say that Giulani, a self-confessed war-lover and Zionist loyalist who is himself Jewish, could be a worse president than George W. Bush if elected.

Rudy Giuliani never served in the military but still declares himself a soldier who wants to take the United States’ enemies head-on and wants to go to any lengths in the campaign to “save America and Israel” from the Green Peril of Islam.

Rudy's a Jew? I guess that explains why he's in cahoots with the Zionists.

 

What makes this story particularly unsettling, not to mention diabolical, is the fact that there is a Dr. Strangelove in the picture—the lit’ler Hitler and his gang of Armaggedonists who, at this very moment, are building nukes they have every intention of using against Israel and the U.S.

 

Given a choice between M.A.D. and the mad mullahs, I’ll take the Commies every time. At least their ambitions were this-wordly, and thus the Soviets could, on occasion, be reasoned with. There is no reasoning with religious fanatics who are convinced that the annihilation of the planet is in the best interest of mankind, since what matters most is the life after death when all the true believers will romp in Paradise while the infidels roast their toesies in Hell.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:30 | link | comments

Drink up: You can relax about multiculturalism being the Trojan Horse inside whose belly an assortment of Islamist undesirables have ridden into Canada, where they hope to set up a sharia state—or as least, a sharia state within the larger state. The Toronto Star’s pre-eminent Islamism-enabler/America basher (funny how those two always go together), Harpoon Siddiqui, says multicultism is a fabulous policy, and the multiculti Kool-Aid we’ve been imbibing for so long is helping construct the perfect, Utopian society.

That’s exactly what we non-multicultists are afraid of, Harpoon:

The Couchiching Conference, named after the lake on the bucolic shores of which it is held, has evolved into a venerable Canadian institution, dealing with one contemporary public policy issue every summer.

The 76th edition, which ends today, was called, in the prevailing spirit of fear of terrorism, The Stranger Next Door: Making Diversity Work. But there were no strangers here, only Canadians trying to make Canada work better.

Does diversity undermine core Canadian values and social harmony? No, I said.

Canada was always legally diverse. The 1867 BNA Act recognized three racial, religious and linguistic collectivities: the aboriginal peoples, the French and the English.

Multiculturalism is an evolution of that revolutionary model, and carries with it similar challenges, only on a larger scale.

Does pluralism/multiculturalism threaten security? No.

Muslim acts of terrorism in the West – 9/11, 7/7 and Madrid – occurred in nations that are not officially multicultural.

Irish Canadian funding for the IRA preceded the 1988 Multiculturalism Act, while Tamil Canadian financing of the Sri Lankan Tamil Tigers followed it. And we cannot credibly argue that the 1985 Air India bombing, believed to have been carried out by Canadian Sikhs, wouldn't have happened had there been no Section 27 of the Charter, guaranteeing multiculturalism.

Conversely, multiculturalism did not deter Ottawa from implementing tough post-9/11 measures: tightening the Immigration Act, gutting the Privacy Act and the Freedom of Information Act, and enacting the draconian Anti-Terrorism Act and the Public Safety Act.

Similarly, multicultural imperatives did not prevent the Maher Arar tragedy, the reported torture of three other Canadian Arabs in Syria with alleged Canadian complicity, the detention of six Canadian residents under "security certificates" on secret evidence, the botched arrest in 2003 of 23 young Pakistani and Indian men as suspected terrorists, and last year's arrest of more than a dozen Toronto Muslims, whose trials we await.

None of this is to say that some Canadians of this or that ethnic or religious minority may not pose a security risk, only that it is facile to link it to multiculturalism and diversity.

Nor is it to say that the public has no right to be scared. As Tariq Ramadan, the foremost Muslim European thinker and a professor at Oxford University, told the delegates: "Being scared is not a matter of opinion. It is a state of mind."

But in addressing it and tackling the challenges that we do face in integrating 250,000 immigrants every year, we need to be rational and avoid turning on minorities or multiculturalism.

The multicultural model has, in fact, been a great success, and Canadians know it, even if critics don't, said pollster Michael Adams, author of an upcoming book, Unlikely Utopia: The Surprising Triumph of Canadian Pluralism...

When someone puts the words “triumph” and “Utopia” in the same sentence, deafening alarm bells should go off.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:23 | link | comments

They’re angry, fanatical, crazed jihadis, but, by gum, they’re our angry, fanatical, crazed jihadis: That appears to be the thinking behind the British Prime Minister’s demand that the  U.S. return five Gitmo detainees—residents though not full-fledged citizens of the U.K.

Be careful what you wish for, Mr. Brown.

 

From the Time Online:

THE Pentagon has claimed that five terror suspects whom Britain wants back from Guantanamo Bay have close ties to some of Al-Qaeda’s most high-ranking leaders.

Only days after Gordon Brown took the surprise decision to call for their release, a senior American official this weekend disclosed previously classified evidence to show that the men are “extremely dangerous individuals”.

Sandra Hodgkinson, who is in charge of US detention policy, warned that the suspects may seek to rejoin the war on terror and could pose a risk to the UK if not kept under close scrutiny.

In a fresh series of allegations against the men, Hodgkinson claimed that:

— One of them had been an interpreter for Osama Bin Laden and was funded by the Al-Qaeda chief while living in Afghanistan.

— Another detainee had “a long-term association” with Abu Musab al-Zar-qawi, the ex-leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

— A third suspect is a “jihadi veteran” with links to a Moroccan terrorist jailed for 18 years over the 2003 Casablanca bombings.

Britain originally refused to take back the men, none of whom are British, but who have residency rights. The U-turn has prompted criticism and the new claims will increase pressure on ministers to enforce a tough security regime when the men return.

The suspects’ lawyers have dismissed many of the allegations as “fantasy” and claim the Pentagon is smearing their clients to justify their incarceration at Guantanamo.

Hodgkinson, deputy assistant secretary of defence for detainee affairs, said: “Among these men are some extremely dangerous individuals . . . if they are sent back to the United Kingdom they could pose a risk.

“Because of some of the extensive ties these individuals have with well-known Al-Qaeda [leaders], we have concerns that they will try to reconnect with some of their old counterparts and return to the fight in the sense that they will try to carry out attacks, whether it’s in England or elsewhere.”

Although ministers may place the men on control orders - a form of house arrest - an initial US request to watch them round-the-clock is believed to have been rejected as too costly…

An excellent definition of “penny wise and pound foolish,” I’d say.

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:59 | link | comments

Continental drift: “Asian” men are in hot water in the U.K. for preying on under-aged non-“Asian” girls and turning them into their sexual playthings. As this article in the Times Online reports, that’s because in the “Asian” culture, sex with “Asian” chicks is verboten till you’re hitched (most preferably, to your first cousin on your father’s side), and young white chicks are considered fair game for "Asian" males' predatory practices:

A hidden world in which Asian men “groom” young white girls for sex has been exposed with the jailing yesterday of two men for child-abuse offences.

Zulfqar Hussain, 46, and Qaiser Naveed, 32, from east Lancashire, were each jailed for five years and eight months after exploiting two girls aged under 16 by plying them with alcohol and drugs before having sex with them.

Both men pleaded guilty at Preston Crown Court to abduction, sexual activity with a child and the supply of a controlled drug.

Despite being told explicitly by police and social services that both girls were under-age and should be returned to care, the men picked up one girl from a children’s home in Blackburn and then drove on to collect her friend who was living in temporary foster care in North Wales.

Naveed, from Burnley, gave one girl the first of five Ecstasy tablets at a motorway service station before having sex with her on the back seat of the car while the group drove back to Lancashire. The court was told that the two men later took the girls to an address in Blackburn where Hussain, from Blackburn, had sex with the second girl and gave her a total of ten Ecstasy tablets.

Yesterday Judge Andrew Gilbart, QC, jailed the two Asian men under new sex laws designed to protect youngsters from being groomed for sexual activity. Judge Gilbart said: “This is a truly shocking offence. You knew them. They were exploited for sex by the two of you. No other description is possible. They were under-age girls who you knew it was your responsibility to protect and not exploit.”

The trial came amid growing concern at the attitudes of some Asian men towards white girls which campaigners for women claim few people wish to address…

I can see the campaigners’ point. The Times Online can’t even bring itself to call a spade a spade, preferring to cower in safety and employ a vague, continental designation instead of an exact religious one. Wouldn't want to tread on delicate “Asian” sensitivities, after all.

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:38 | link | comments

Blaming the powerless: I don’t know about you, but on the list of jobs I’d never want to have, “domestic worker, Saudi Arabia” ranks near the top. Saudi servants, who come from a number of impoverished countries, are at the mercy of wealthy employers who often brutally abuse them, and being doubly lowly—infidel and female—these domestics usually powerless to fight back.

An article on the Arab News site wants everyone to know who the real victims are here—and it ain’t the chicks with the Swiffers:

There are growing concerns that Saudi dependence on imported domestic help has not been a helpful one for either party. Tales of abuse and inhumane treatment from errant employers have gathered enough publicity to elevate this phenomenon into a worrisome trend. There have also been enough individual situations publicized in our press to drive the point home that not all is well in the field of domestics.

As a reader pointed out recently, the question of having a domestic helper or housemaid has moved beyond the idea of employing one just for the sake of it. Today, housemaids are a necessity for reasons such as:

— Larger families with diversified needs.

— Working and entrepreneur women.

— Women carrying on with higher studies after marriage.

— Sickness or disability in the family.

— Children with special needs.

— Widows, widowers and divorcees.

But to be honest, there are two sides to the story. Yes, on the one hand we hear and read of abuses by employers. But there are also an equal number if not more of abuses suffered by the employers at the hands of their domestic helpers. Lying, stealing, cheating, child abuse or simply running away to a better-paying job are some of them. Most of these cases do not attract much publicity as they have increased in numbers. And human rights violations are more geared to the oppressed.

Now it would be OK for these domestics to seek higher paying jobs, but not at the expense of employers who have paid a fortune in visa fees and recruitment charges to get them to this country only to see them disappear in a month or so. And none of these fees is refundable. Therefore for a family with limited means, but in desperate need for household help, such a betrayal can often be economically crippling. To go through the procedure of reapplying for a visa and coming up with the required funds for recruitment is often very demanding...

Yeah, must be a bummer when you do all that paperwork, and then your ungrateful slave, er, servant takes off for greener pastures.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:56 | link | comments

The face of hate: A billboard featuring the visage of an avowed genocidal Jew-hater is on view in a Windsor, Ontario neighbourhood. It’s okey-dokey with most of the locals, though, since the Jew-hater looks like this, not this.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:12 | link | comments

Sanguine jihadis: Headline—Taliban ‘optimistic’ as hostage talks continue.

Should read ‘opportunistic'.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:31 | link | comments

Charades: For the sake of a few photo-ops, two feckless leaders are playing a dangerous game of “let’s pretend.” From YNet News:

Two people meet opposite the Brooklyn Bridge. "Buy the bridge from me," says one to the other, "You'll get a bargain price." "How much?" the potential buyer asks. "A million dollars," is the reply. "We have a deal," says the buyer. He takes out his checkbook and proceeds to write a check. The check changes hands and each goes his own separate way.

An observer turns to the buyer and asks: "You know that that bridge doesn't belong to him, and he knows that your check is worthless, so what are you actually doing?" The buyer responds: "What about the pen I took, isn't that worth something?"

Ehud Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas are discussing a final-status agreement: One is weak and afraid and hasn't quite hatched from his egg, while the other has the level of support of those advocating the flu. Everyone knows that the one isn't selling and the other isn't buying, so what's this ridiculous charade all about? It's all about a few photos and a lamb stew with rice.

One is in need of aid, desperate for cash so that his murderous militias will not be defeated by another murderous militia. The other, our man, is desperate for some achievement, something that would finally work for him, but the price he is willing to pay for it and the damage it will cause are the problem.

The Palestinians do not abide by any agreements after all. According to the road map, in the initial phase they are supposed to collect all the weapons, disarm all the armed organizations, and refrain from terror etc. As they have not abided by any commitment thus far, a patent was found: Let's lower the bar of stipulations, and this way each time the Palestinians commit themselves to something and obviously don’t abide by it, we will concede a little more and lower the bar even further…

 

Time to raise the bar and lower the boom on the Peace in Our Time talks. And time to give Ehud and Moo and their traveling snake-oil show the old heave-ho.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:23 | link | comments

Hasta la vista, Dil Dil: It’s history. It’s a goner. It’s toast. From the National Post:

VisionTV yesterday suspended Dil Dil Pakistan, the weekly program that sparked controversy last month by airing lectures by a fundamentalist Muslim preacher.

Bill Roberts, VisionTV's president and CEO, said the show will remain off the air at least until a committee reviewing the channel's standards and procedures completes its work, but refused to speculate on whether Dil Dil Pakistan would ever return to the airwaves. "VisionTV has always been a leader when it comes to standards and ethics and we will continue to be so, but I am not going to prejudge the outcome of the task force," Mr. Roberts said.

The committee, composed of network representatives and leaders from different faith groups, will begin its meetings next week with the intention of delivering a report later this fall. Part of the group's mandate will be developing safeguards to ensure air time is not given to disreputable people or organizations.

"We are now looking beyond the broadcast content itself to organizations and personalities," Mr. Roberts said.

VisionTV was recently forced to apologize for airing lectures by Israer Ahmad, whose writings call for a global jihad and the "extermination" of Jews.

In a speech shown July 14 on Dil Dil Pakistan, the preacher said Muslims had to either fight jihad or fund it. After receiving complaints, VisionTV said it regretted airing the show, but then broadcast another lecture by Mr. Ahmad the following week. The network cited procedural lapses for the broadcasts.

Dil Dil Pakistan faced further controversy this week for showing a documentary on Muslim creationism credited to Haruan Yahya, the pen name of Turkish author Adnan Oktar.

In his books, Mr. Oktar claims "Zionism and the State of Israel" use the Holocaust as a means of "legitimizing" crimes against humanity.

In 1996, an organization led by Mr. Oktar also published a book entitled The Holocaust Lie, although he has disputed his involvement in its production.

Bernie Farber, CEO of the Canadian Jewish Congress, said Dil Dil Pakistan's suspension was a "good conclusion to an otherwise bleak situation."

Mr. Farber, who is a member of VisionTV's task force, said the group's work will set an important precedent in Canadian broadcasting.

"I know this had been a tough row to hoe for VisionTV, but we've had to confront a situation that I don't think broadcasters have had to confront before," he said…

Yeah, I’m all choked up about VisionTV’s tough row-hoeing too, Bernie. After allowing Islamists free reign for Allah knows how long, the broadcaster has been forced by serendipitous circumstances to pay attention to who’s getting airtime. Life’s a bitch.

 

It will be interesting to see how VisionTV fills up the 3:00-4:00 hole that’s opened up on Saturday afternoons. Probably with more da’wa in this vein.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:27 | link | comments

Straight shooter: The editors of National Review give a reluctant thumbs-up to the idea of arming the oily Saudis. Mark Steyn, ever a voice of sanity and an NR contributor, shoots it down. From the Hugh Hewitt Show:

DB: …So Mark, we have a lot to discuss today. The first thing that leaps to mind is America has decided, the Bush administration has decided to sell $20 billions dollars worth of arms to the Saudi government. Good move?

MS: I think in the end, you know, just between us, that the Saudi state is unsalvageable, and has to be destroyed. Essentially, every time you keep the present Saudi state, which is this kind of, this enormously wealthy pseudo-royal family who were kind of Bedouins in the desert, no fixed abode, eighty years ago, and have been enriched tremendously by oil wealth, and they use that oil wealth to radicalize Muslim populations on every corner of the planet. I think Saudi Arabia is the source of a lot of our troubles. And simply because they’re now scared by the rise of Iran, and the Bush administration is selling all these weapons, I think you know, in the long run, I don’t think that’s in America’s interest, and it’s not something I would be inclined to support.

DB: Yeah, and the insanity of it, to my mind, is that the House of Saud clings to power tenaciously, because the Wahabists there don’t like them much at all. And the weapons we’re selling them could someday very well fall into the hands of a group that either is al Qaeda or has a philosophy much akin to al Qaeda’s.

MS: Well, the thing is, you talk about the House of Saud. And I think it’s impossible to generalize about that. I mean, in a sense, in the old days of the Cold War, we used to have Kremlinologists who used to look at the May Day parade in Moscow and tell you who on the Politburo was up and who on the Politburo was down. And there were 20 guys in the Politburo, and maybe if you’re an expert, you really did know what was going on. The last time I counted Saudi princes, there were about eight and a half thousand of them.

DB: Yeah.

MS: Basically, there’s a new Saudi prince born every two weeks. It may be up to ten thousand by now. And the fact of the matter is there are different factions among those, that royal house. There were ones that…there are a lot of people like Prince Bandar, the long-time U.S. Saudi Ambassador in the United States, although actually, U.S. Ambassador isn’t a bad way of putting it.

DB: Yeah (laughing).

MS: He swanks around town as if he was America’s viceroy, and he was one of these classic Saudi guys who basically played both ends off against each other. But there’s a lot of other princes who are openly supportive of the jihadists. So I think it’s not even possible to generalize about the House of Saud. And with all these thousands of wacky princes running around, I mean, it’s very difficult to meet anyone from Saudi Arabia who isn’t a prince. I mean, people are either princes or hard core jihadists. They’re either these billionaires buying up all the high priced hookers in London and Paris, or they’re the jihadists flying the planes through the skyscrapers. There’s not a lot of room in between.

HH: You know, someday, Mark Steyn, somebody’s going to have to write a scholarly study on the dearth of a Saudi middle class.

MS: Yes, I think that’s actually a very good way of looking at it. I mean, essentially, I don’t take princes seriously. I’d hate to become the old British subject on you, but in the House of Windsor, once you get past being the grandson of the king, you can’t call yourself prince. In other words, there’s a limited number of princes you can have. And the fact of the matter is, they have all these ones, guys running around, on the take, they’ve been given billions, they spend billions. I mean, basically, we see things like this recent libel case that came up at the high court in London in which they’re essentially able, simply by buying the best lawyers, the best lobbyists, to buy everybody they need to buy in Britain, in America, in Europe, every corner of the planet. And this is not something…in the end, we have to have the courage to stand up to the Saudi subversion of the Western world. And it’s one thing on which I do, you know, I’m afraid, disagree with the Bush administration fairly profoundly on.

Me too.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:54 | link | comments

Mother Theresa Jolie’s racy past: She currently holds the title of Most Virtuous Hollywood Star on the Planet, but there was a time B.O.B. (before orphans and Brad) when she was a wild one who wore a vial of Billy Bob blood around her neck and had what seemed to be a rather unwholesome relationship with her brother. And that’s not the half of what she gave up. From Hollywood.com: 

HOLLYWOOD - Angelina Jolie has given up girls and S&M after falling for Hollywood hunk Brad Pitt.

The 32-year-old actress admits bedding women in the past, including a 10-year relationship with model Jenny Shimizu, and has also confessed to experimenting with knives during sex.

But she insists her relationship with Pitt, which began in 2005, has tamed her.

She says, "I've never hidden my bisexuality. But since I've been with Brad, there's no longer a place for that or S&M in my life."

An immense sacrifice, for sure. Do I sense a Nobel Peace Prize—or perhaps sainthood—in the offing?

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:26 | link | comments (4)

Shocker in Tripoli: Wacky Gadafi's son fesses up--the foreign medics held for years in a Libyan jail were tortured mercilessly during their stay for crimes they did not commit.

Don't expect the news to have any impact on French President Nicolas Sarkozy's decision to build a nuclear reactor for the wacky waxwork potentate; morality in foreign policy has never been France's strong suit.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:32 | link | comments (2)

Genuine partners—and fake ones: By Caroline Glick in the JWR:

Building and maintaining coalitions is one of the most difficult tasks of a nation at war. On the one hand, a state must ensure that its coalition partners share enough common goals and interests to ensure that their cooperation is effective. On the other hand, a state must constantly weigh the political and diplomatic benefits of maintaining its coalition against the price it must pay in terms of military effectiveness by delegating responsibility to others.

 

The price of maintaining coalitions is starkly exposed by the British military's failure to rein in radical Shiite forces and Iranian influence in Basra, the Iraqi port city and oil hub. The question of whether having coalitions advances a nation's interests at all is brought to bear in Israel's diplomatic and strategic handling of its relations with the Palestinians and of the emerging situation in southern Lebanon.

 

Tuesday, a US intelligence official was quoted by The Washington Post saying, "The British have basically been defeated in the south."

 

The Post article goes on to explain that the British "are abandoning their former headquarters at Basra Palace, where a recent official visitor from London described them as 'surrounded like cowboys and Indians' by militia fighters. An airport base outside the city, where a regional US Embassy office and Britain's remaining 5,500 troops are barricaded behind building-high sandbags, has been attacked with mortars or rockets nearly 600 times over the past four months."

 

The British defeat in Basra was eminently foreseeable. Immediately after the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime in April 2003, some one hundred thousand Iraqi exiles that lived in Iran since the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s entered the city. Under the command of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, during their time in exile, these Iraqis had organized a number of militias including the Badr Brigade, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq and the Dawa party, as well as several smaller militias. Muqtada el Sadr's Mahdi Army, although Iraq-based, was also supported by the Iranians.

 

These Iranian-backed forces were the most organized groups in the city in the chaos that engulfed Basra after the regime fell. Capitalizing on their organizational advantage, the groups volunteered to serve in the police and security services the British were raising to run the city. So it came to pass that within a short period of time, radical Shiite forces, backed by Iran successfully took over Basra.

 

This radical Shiite takeover precipitated a reign of terror and intimidation in the city. As freelance reporter Steven Vincent chronicled before he was murdered in Basra in August 2005, the militias instituted a Khomeinist regime in the city replete with death squads, generally comprised of off-duty policemen which executed hundreds of civilians they accused of ties to the Ba'ath Party; the brutalization of women caught unveiled in public;, the takeover of Basra's university and hospitals; and the extortion of businessmen in mafia-like protection rackets. All the while, the British turned a blind eye to the devolution of the city into an Iranian enclave.

 

In an interview with the BBC, Air Chief Marshall and chief of the British Defense Staff Jock Stirrup made clear that Britain never considered it its business how post-Saddam Iraq developed. Insisting that the British mission in Basra has been a success, Stirrup allowed that one's judgment of the British mission depended on "what your interpretation of the mission was in the first place." As he put it, Britain viewed its mission as limited to getting "the place and the people to a state where the Iraqis could run this part of the country, if they chose to."

 

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's government is keen to withdraw Britain's remaining forces from Iraq in the fall. Given Britain's performance in Basra, a British withdrawal would probably advance rather than harm the US's strategic interests in Iraq.

 

And yet, for all the difficulties that the British forces in Iraq have created for the Americans (and for the Iraqis who are interested in living in a free society), there is no doubt that both countries perceive themselves as strong allies. To this end, the Americans refrain from publicly criticizing the British military's dismal performance. For their part, the British have made clear that they will withdraw their forces in a manner that will minimize embarrassment to the US.

 

The Anglo-American alliance is a clear example of a true, but problematic partnership. In contrast, the Olmert government's representations of Fatah and Egypt as Israel's coalition partners against Hamas on the one hand, and the UNIFIL forces as Israel's coalition partner against Hizbullah on the other hand are a sham.

 

Four little words: Get. Rid. Of. Olmert. He’s as stupid as he is dangerous, and if allowed to continue, he’ll be the architect of Israel’s demise.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:21 | link | comments

“Yuman” rites: The Brits are thrilled to, well, bits, that some of their jihadis may soon be sprung from Gitmo and will be allowed to return to British soil. There’s at least one Brit, though, who’s determined to swim against the tide of cluelessness, and who’s bracing himself for sickeningly rapturous reception the lads will likely receive from the odious British media--Richard Littlejohn in the Daily Mail:

Strike up the band, roll out the red carpet, hoist the bunting. They're coming home, they're coming home. Let joy be unconfined. The Government has demanded the immediate release of five British "residents" held at Guantanamo Bay. And the U.S. seems certain to comply.

The moment they touch down at Heathrow, the infamous five will be feted by the media. There will be sympathetic interviews on the BBC, book deals, columns in The Guardian. They'll be flavour of the month on Facebook. We will be treated to lurid, tear-strewn accounts of their illegal incarceration and "torture".

Their implausible claims of mistaken identity and wrongful arrest will be swallowed without question by gullible reporters and commentators, anxious to grasp any stick with which to beat America and undermine the war on terror.

These poor lambs will be invited to denounce unprovoked Western aggression against Muslims, to tell us that Bush is "worse than Hitler". Fat claims for compensation will follow - on legal aid, naturally.

It will be Tipton Taliban time, all over again.

But before you reach for another bottle of Bollinger to celebrate this triumph for truth and justice and "yuman rites", it's worth a quick glance at the track record of these British "residents".

The Government demanded the immediate release of the five British 'residents'

None of them are British citizens and nor were any of them actually resident in Britain at the time they were detained.

All had been granted the right to remain here after arriving as asylum seekers. But when they were picked up, they were thousands of miles away in, variously, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Gambia…

Be careful what you wish for, Prime Minister Brown, especially when it’s a blatant ploy to appeal to the seething Muslim masses and the clueless non-Muslim ones. It’s very likely to backfire.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:34 | link | comments

Whither freedom?: Diana West says our freedoms are being rapidly eroded. Not by any government security measure, mind you, but by the Islamists—many of whom have tons of cash and don’t mind using it. These rich and powerful Islamic supremacists—Saudi “allies," in many cases—have figured out how to use our system against us and silence the voices that are critical of Islam and the jihad. From the Washington Times:

Remember when we heard that if only our leaders had known how to "connect the dots," the September 11 attacks could have been prevented? After nearly six years without a similar attack, the government has learned much about detecting the outlines of jihadist terror plots before they take shape. As a result, and after all the aggravations and humiliations of what I still hope are temporary safety procedures, our security has remained essentially intact. But can we say the same thing about our freedoms?

At this point, I must interrupt this column to apologize to all leftists settling in for a juicy tirade against the Patriot Act, wiretaps for terrorists, or the sufferings of sensitive poets in residence at Guantanamo Bay. It is not the Bush administration's efforts to protect us from "terror" (more maturely known as jihad) that compromise our freedoms, it is jihad itself. And the basic freedom to discuss, analyze, debate, imagine, and, therefore, resist jihad is now under unprecedented assault.

Consider the following events.

On or about July 30, Cambridge University Press surrendered to a libel suit brought in British court by Khalid bin Mahfouz over the 2006 book, "Alms for Jihad," which identifies the Saudi billionaire as a supporter of al Qaeda. The publisher apologized for allegations documented by the authors, paid damages and promised to destroy all unsold copies of the book, and to request libraries and universities, even in the United States, to destroy their copies.

On Aug. 1, Chauncey Bailey, editor of the Oakland Press, was murdered. Mr. Bailey had been investigating what sounds like a black Muslim crime family operating out of Your Black Muslim Bakery, and its connections to crime in the Oakland area, where, not incidentally, Muslims associated with the bakery have used violence against liquor stores, a la Taliban, to enforce aspects of Islamic law. A 19-year-old Muslim bakery employee has confessed to the crime.

Also on Aug. 1, the Web site, Radar, recounted a familiar tale of Hollywood woe — a screenplay project terminated by a producer before completion. But this one had a post-September 11 twist. The screenwriter, Jason Ressler, maintains that his screenplay, "Dove Hunting," a thriller with a Saudi prince for a villain, was terminated after the producer he was working with, Mark "March of the Penguins" Gill, received a massive infusion of cash from backers including, well, a Saudi prince: Sheikh Walid al-Ibrahim, an owner of al-Arabiya network and a brother-in-law of the late King Fahd. Mr. Gill denies politics affected his decision.

On Aug. 2, the Young America's Foundation was threatened with legal action by lawyers for the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) if the conservative student group didn't cancel a scheduled talk on CAIR by best-selling author and Islamic expert Robert Spencer. To be sure, neither the redoubtable Mr. Spencer nor the student group buckled under CAIR's bullying, and, to date, CAIR's threats have not materialized. Indeed, both Mr. Spencer's resolve and Young America's Foundation response — "CAIR can go to hell and take their 72 virgins with them" — are an inspiration.

There's even a bright spot in the Cambridge disgrace. The two American authors of "Alms for Jihad," J. Millard Burr and Robert O. Collins, were not sued; just the British publisher. For this protection, we can probably thank courageous Rachel Ehrenfeld, terror expert and author of the 2003 book, "Funding Evil." When Miss Ehrenfeld was sued in 2004 by the same litigious Saudi billionaire in British court (he has brought or threatened suit 36 times on similar grounds), she refused to accept the premise that a British court should have jurisdiction over an American writer's American-published book. She took legal action in U.S. courts, where, to date, her case is finding protection for American writers from British law…

Sometimes, the jihad can be explosive. And sometimes, like the fog, it rolls in on little cat’s feet, quietly making inroads when we're not looking.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:27 | link | comments

Grin and bear it: They’re cute, sweet, German, and have a tendency to stick to your teeth. They’re gummi bears, and they’re celebrating their 85^th birthday.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:42 | link | comments (2)

The jihad defence: Attorneys defending alleged dirty-bomber Juan Padilla and his alleged terror cell-mates tried to haul sharia law into an American courtroom, arguing that Padilla and his cohorts should let be off the hook ‘cause they believe in another (Allah’s) set of laws, but the judge presiding over the case said no dice. From AP via the New York Times:

Jurors in the trial of Jose Padilla and two other men cannot consider whether the men’s actions were justified by Islamic law, a federal judge ruled. The judge, Marcia G. Cooke of Federal District Court, agreed to a request from prosecutors to instruct the jurors that each of the men could be convicted even if they “may have believed that the conduct was religiously, politically or morally required, or that ultimate good would result.” A cornerstone of the defense during the nearly three-month trial has been the idea that Islamic teaching provides for legitimate “defensive jihad.” Mr. Padilla and his co-defendants, Adham Amin Hassoun and Kifah Wael Jayyousi, are charged with being part of a North American terrorism support cell.

 

Good call by Judge Cooke. Can you imagine the dire consequences if she had ruled otherwise, and the concept of “defensive jihad” had been enshrined as a precedent in American law?

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:08 | link | comments

The web of jihad: MEMRI has a round-up of websites that are promoting the jihad in Iraq. Ironically, most of them are hosted in the U.S.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:27 | link | comments

Radical measures: How do you keep would-be martyrs off airplanes? “Racial” profiling is out—too discriminatory and politically incorrect, and, anyway, the faithful are likely to subvert such efforts by sending one of those bright-eyed, Caucasian female “reverts”—or maybe a slow-witted male “revert” with incendiary footwear. How about using more scientific methods—machines which, unbeknownst to passengers, can detect tics, accelerated heart rates and excessive sweating, signs of suspicious behaviour—as Washington is planning to do? Nope, according to some “experts,” that won’t work either. From Islam Online:

…Experts are skeptical of the use of such devices, urging authorities to rather delve into the root causes of terrorism.

"We need to reduce the motivation for people doing these kinds of things," said Richards.

"We shouldn't just accept that terrorism will remain as it is or worsen over the next 20 or 30 years and then just put all the technological solutions in place."

Richards, who has helped Britain preempt terrorist attacks, recognizes that technology is a fundamental element in terror-combat.

"But that shouldn't detract from the crucially important challenge of finding out what is driving terrorism," he insisted.

"We need to have a sensible and honest appraisal as to what is radicalizing young people."

Peter McOwan, a computer scientist who is developing sensors to detect people's moods at Queen Mary, University of London, agreed.

"It's just like something from Minority Report. They have been watching too many Tom Cruise movies."

The Congress has recently approved a new anti-terrorism bill that would provide lawsuit protection to people who report "suspicious activities."

Six imams, who had valid tickets and cleared the security screening, were removed from a Phoenix-bound US Airways flight last year over what a passenger felt was "suspicious behavior".

They were handcuffed and detained in the airport for questioning for over six hours.

The imams have filed a discrimination lawsuit against the country's fifth largest airline.

A sensible and honest appraisal of what is radicalizing young people: the jihad imperative as set out in the Koran, the flawless, uncreated word of God that has existed for all time (there’s a master copy somewhere up in Heaven, although I hear there’s a really long wait list if you want to reserve it); the example of Islam’s founder, the first jihadi, whom Muslims are commanded to emulate since he’s God’s final prophet and the most perfect human being who has ever lived.

 

See, that wasn’t so hard—and it didn’t require any special equipment.

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:52 | link | comments

The war on drugs today: Headline—US Unveils New Counter-Drug Strategy for Afghanistan.

Just say “no grow”?

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:20 | link | comments (1)

Advice for a “David”: Deborah Lipstadt, the woman who successfully fended off a libel suit in Britain brought against her by Holocaust-denying “historian” David Irving (he took umbrage at her assertion that he was a Holocaust denier) weighs in on Rachel Ehrenfeld’s legal battle. From History News Network:

Whenever David Irving's libel case against me comes up someone inevitably asks: How could he sue you in the UK? I explain that my book was bought and published by Penguin UK and therefore he could drag me into a UK court.

Turns out that now the reach of UK libel laws has been greatly extended. It's a frightening development. In an earlier post I wrote about Rachel Ehrenfeld and how she was sued for libel by the Saudi Khalid bin Mafouz for writing that he had supported terrorism.

But here's what makes Ehrenfeld's story quite different from mine: her book was NOT published in the UK. Some people in the UK [I wonder if it was the Saudis or their lawyers???] bought a copy over the Internet.

Bin Mafouz pounced and Ehrenfeld was ordered to pay him damages. Now the American courts have come to her defense. [Scroll down at this link to find the New York Law Journal report on the Ehrenfeld case.]

Now the Saudis have silenced another book. This one is by J. Millard Burr, a former relief coordinator for Operation Lifeline Sudan, U.S. Agency for International Development, and Robert O. Collins, professor of history at the University of California at Santa Barbara.

They have written a number of books on Darfur and Sudan. Their most recent book, Alms for Jihad was published by Cambridge University Press. [Since their book was published in the UK, their case is closer to mine than Ehrenfeld's.]

The authors explore how, in the words of Michael Rubin, writing in the New York Sun:

The Saudi royal family played a pernicious role, founding and promoting charities to spread militant Sunni Islam, not only as an inoculation against resurgent Shi'ism from revolutionary Iran, but also to radicalize the Muslims in Europe and America.

The British lawyers for Khalid bin Mahfouz and his son Abdulrahman bin Mahfouz wrote Cambridge University Press saying they intended to sue the Press and the authors for defamation against their clients.

Cambridge University Press contacted the authors,and they provided detailed material in support of their claims made in Alms for Jihad.

Nonetheless, Cambridge University Press decided not to contest the argument and next week they will apologize in court.

As Rachel Ehrenfeld has just written to me in an email: "Get a copy of “Alms of Jihad” before it’s banned..."

Sadly, Amazon has already delisted the book. For the time being you'll have to make do with Ehrenfeld's earlier work dealing with much the same topic.

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:10 | link | comments

Today’s limerick: Inspired by this story from the Beeb:

A P.M. named Nouri Maliki

Got himself in a jam that was sticki.

He appealed to an Iranian

(The man’s plum insanian)

‘Cause beggars can’t afford to be picki.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:35 | link | comments

Banking on terror: The terrorist attacks of 9/11, largely the work of Saudi nationals, shone an unwanted light on an aspect of Islamic charity in America that, until then, had gone unnoticed: the connection between filthy rich Saudis and the funding of Islamic terrorism. The International Herald Tribune, still clueless after all these years, holds a pity party for one of these guys, a financier who can’t seem to evade the black cloud that’s hovered over his head ever since the Twin Towers were felled:

NEW YORK: Before the attacks of Sept. 11, Prince Mohamed al Faisal al Saud felt welcome in America.

A member of the Saudi royal family and a pioneer of Islamic finance, he was a pillar of a Saudi business establishment that had long relished its ties with the United States.

Since then he has kept his distance. The company he founded in 1981, Dar al-Maal al-Islami Trust, or DMI - a holding company based in the Bahamas with a portfolio of Islamic banks in Bahrain, Niger, Egypt and Pakistan - is a defendant in a consolidated $1 trillion lawsuit brought by the families of those who died on Sept. 11, 2001, and his lawyers have advised him not to set foot in the United States as the case winds its sluggish way through federal courts in New York.

The lawsuits naming Mohamed personally were dismissed in 2005. But as chairman of DMI, he is the public face of the sprawling financial conglomerate that has been accused of aiding terrorism.

More than that, the prince, and by extension DMI, are a distillation of the discordant views that surround Islam and money since Sept. 11. Some see him as the leader of Islamic finance, a thriving piece of the global economy that approaches $800 billion in assets. Others have accused the prince, a follower of the conservative Sunni branch of Wahhabi Islam, as being involved in funneling money to Al Qaeda.

Fueled by rising oil prices and an increasingly open investment climate, capital is flowing to the Middle East, often steered to institutions like DMI and its subsidiaries that, to comply with Islamic law, eschew interest and speculation in favor of investments in which the borrower and lender share in the risk and reward.

Yet, in the wake of the attacks on Sept. 11, the tendency to connect the businesses of established Muslim financiers to Islamic extremism continues. That point became clear last year during the outcry over whether DP World, a port operator based in Dubai, should run terminals in the United States.

Even now, such suspicions show no sign of abating…

Poor fellow. No doubt he’s one of those “moderate” Wahhabists who confines his charitable activities to the funding of Islamist mosques and madrassas.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:49 | link | comments (3)

Washington fudges while Iran enriches (itself and uranium): From the Wall Street Journal:

WASHINGTON -- With Iraq's future an open question and Iran's regional clout likely to keep growing, the Bush administration is forging a long-term strategy to secure energy supplies that relies on drawing Arab governments into an alliance to coordinate defenses of oil-related infrastructure, combat terrorism and thwart Tehran's nuclear and regional ambitions.

The Pentagon hopes the tens of billions of dollars of new weaponry for Middle East allies announced last week will underpin various regional defense initiatives. But the administration's ultimate goal is to push a much more ambitious security agenda in concert with the six countries that make up the Gulf Cooperation Council, as well as Jordan and Egypt.

Next month, the U.S. and the "GCC Plus Two," as the group is called, will hold their sixth meeting of the year. Pentagon and State Department officials have been crisscrossing the Middle East recently to promote what they call a Gulf Security Dialogue. One U.S. official involved in the diplomacy said it seeks to build a consensus on Iraq and fighting al Qaeda, as well as "deterring an increasingly hegemonic Iran." In addition to Saudi Arabia, the GCC is made up of Kuwait, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Qatar. Yemen is in negotiations to join the organization.

The strategy is one of Washington's principal initiatives in the Middle East, alongside its efforts to broker a regional conference this fall to tackle the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Critics, however, argue the move has led Washington to sacrifice its calls for political change and liberalization in countries such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt in pursuit of its desire to contain Iran.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice last week said long-term democracy promotion and the defense of the Arab states were compatible initiatives.

Many security strategists say Washington has misidentified the challenges. While the U.S. is backing large-scale armies, they say, Tehran has expanded its influence in places such as Lebanon, Iraq and the Palestinian territories through backing militias such as Hezbollah and Hamas. Iran has also improved its strategic position through the effective use of charities, social-services networks and public diplomacy.

I’m with the strategists on this one. Washington has misidentified the challenges—and has grossly “misunderestimated” the threat posed by holy rollers intent on ushering in the era of the 12^th imam by nuking those believed to impede his arrival.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:42 | link | comments

Map quest: Martin Kramer says that U.S. policy has been bent on maintaining the status quo of the Middle East map, the one that was redrawn by Britain and France after World War I. Every time a nation has sought to redraw the borders (Egypt, when it absorbed Syria, Iraq when it absorbed Kuwait, Syria when it absorbed Lebanon), the U.S. has strived to put them back where they were. The thinking has been “If only the map could be completed…the Middle East, like Europe, would cease to be preoccupied with identity, and move to more productive pursuits.”

The problem with this type of thinking, says Kramer: it fails to consider the bigger picture—the inherent instability due to the Sunni-Shia divide and the groups who aren’t contained in one specific country but who spill over into several of them. From the Jerusalem Post:

…There are three specific impacts of the Iraq war that are rendering parts of the political map an anachronism.

The first is the Shiite revival in Iraq and beyond, also known as the “Shiite Crescent,” a phrase coined by Jordan’s King Abdullah in a loquacious moment. The idea—a Sunni one, not a Shiite one—is of a Shiite band of population running from the Arab Gulf states through Iran, southern Iraq, leap-frogging Sunni parts of Iraq and Syria, and extending into Lebanon—a trans-border, trans-ethnic belt of allegiance with Iran at its center. The “Shiite Crescent” is one part hype, one part reality. There isn’t a contiguous belt of Shiites like the one shown in newspaper graphics; Shiites outside Iran and Iraq are still surrounded by a Sunni sea. Nor are Shiites driven by a need to reconfigure the map. In key states in the “Shiite Crescent”—Lebanon, Iraq, Bahrain—Shiites are not minorities: they seek to capture the state whole, not break it into parts. Still, wherever the Sunni-Shia rift runs through a state, that state is vulnerable.

The “Shiite Crescent” may be a hyped Sunni slogan, but it highlights the growth of an allegiance that is both sub-state and supra-state, and that erodes the state order from without and within.

The second impact gets less attention: the Kurdish crescent. The Kurdish revival is as deep as the Shiite, but it is potentially far more subversive of the state order, because Kurds, unlike Shiites, are everywhere a minority. Iraq's Kurds already have a de facto state, and it is a going concern, which is unlikely to maintain more than a formal tie with the rest of Iraq, if that. The autonomy of Iraq’s Kurds is a long-standing American commitment, which the Kurds are reinforcing through an extensive public relations and lobbying effort.

The third and last impact involves the movement of millions across borders: the refugee crescent. These are mostly Iraqi Sunnis who have fled the chaos of their country to Syria or Jordan, and who are waiting out the war. Their numbers are already substantial, and they could increase dramatically in various scenarios.

As the Palestinian case demonstrates, refugees put more than a material stress on host states. They throw the legitimacy of the status quo into question. While populations are being separated in Iraq, a great mixing is taking place in Syria and Jordan, with outcomes that cannot be predicted. In sum, the map has been undermined. The choice the United States will face with greater frequency and urgency is whether or not to sustain its traditional support for that map.

Past challenges came from aggressive states encroaching on smaller ones, and aggressors could be cajoled, deterred, and punished. But transformation within states, in which the main actors are movements, insurgents, refugees, and secessionists, is another matter.

It is precisely because the United States has so few of the tools it needs to deal with this sort of “new Middle East,” that its strategic and policy implications are not being discussed anywhere. Perhaps now would be a good time to start.

Hear, hear. But it may be a long time until we do hear it (such a discussion, that is).

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:24 | link | comments (2)

The Godly must be crazy: In Islam and Dhimmitude, Bat Ye-or recounts the role the dhimmi churches played in maintaining Islam’s primacy in the Middle East and other Muslim-dominated areas, like the Balkans. In so doing, the churches worked against the interests of their own people, and were instrumental in the oppression of Christians by their Muslim overlords.

Much of the dhimmi clergy in the West continue in this craven, servile tradition, as evidenced by this post by Damian Thompson in one of the Telegraph’s blogs:

The Catholic Church in England and Wales has helped commission a withering attack on Pope Benedict XVI that also refers to the atrocities of 9/11 as “the ‘terrorist’ attacks” in inverted commas.

Catholic Social Justice, a volume of essays put together by an agency of the Bishops’ Conference, systematically rubbishes Benedict’s first encyclical, Deus Caritas Est (God is Love). The book has been given a glowing foreword by the Bishop of Plymouth, Christopher Budd.

Benedict is accused of taking an ideological position in favour of “the capitalist system and colonialism”.

We are told that the Pope’s views on social justice are “hardly credible” in view of the Church’s historic record of violence, torture and theft. We learn that the Catholic clergy teach that “men are superior to women” because they are more in the image of Christ.

Pope John Paul II is also criticised. According to Fr Tissa Balasuriya, the author of the relevant essay, both John Paul and Benedict lived their lives “in a world dominated by white racism” and therefore could not understand the developing world.

This judgment has been produced under the aegis of Caritas-social action, an agency of the Bishops’ Conference. In other words, Catholics in the pew have helped pay for an attack on the Pope.

But worst of all, in my opinion, is this passage in Balasuriya’s essay: “The 21st century was born in violence, with the ‘terrorist’ air attack on New York on 11 September 2001 and the invasion of Iraq by the USA, the UK and Australia on 18 March 2003.”

Those inverted commas are despicable. Did the Bishop of Plymouth notice them before he recommended the book in his foreword?

The other essays mostly consist of sub-Marxist drivel. Philomena Cullen, one of the editors, attacks “the ideology of the nuclear family” and endorses “the open family ideology rooted in a feminist perspective”.

Cullen – social policy coordinator of the Bishops’ Conference agency – notes that all dominant ideologies entail the misuse of power, “whether manifested as sexism, racism, disabilism, ageism, hetereosexism”.

Need I go on? How much evidence do Catholics need that the Bishops' Conference has been hijacked by Left-wing activists working under the patronage of bishops who are in many cases doctrinaire socialists?

Pope Benedict is incredibly badly served by his English bishops, at least one of whom – Budd – is undermining the Pope by putting his name to this book.

Forgive them, Lord, they know not what they do.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:45 | link | comments

Buh-bye, Britian: So it has come to this—British police are now “investigating” those who dare expose the teachings of radical Islam, and are coddling the Islamic radicals. From Islam Online:

LONDON — British authorities have accused a public-service TV station broadcasting to all areas of the United Kingdom of doctoring a documentary about extremism in British mosques and stirring up racial hatred in the country.

"The splicing together of extracts from longer speeches appears to have completely distorted what the speakers were saying," Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) lawyer Bethan David was quoted as saying by Reuters.

In January, Channel 4 Dispatches program "Undercover Mosque" featured footage shot in a number of British mosques where imams criticized democracy as un-Islamic and praised Taliban for killing British soldiers.

But a police investigation into the Muslims' speeches found that the footage was manipulated.

"In this case we have been dealing with a heavily edited television program, apparently taking out of context aspects of speeches which in their totality could never provide a realistic prospect of any convictions," insisted David.

"The priority for West Midlands Police has been to investigate the documentary and its making with as much rigor as the extremism the program sought to portray," said Assistant Chief Constable Anil Patani.

"West Midlands Police has taken account of this advice and explored options available to them and has now referred the matter to the broadcasting regulators Ofcom as a formal complaint," he added.

Police asked the CPS to consider a prosecution of Channel 4 under the Public Order Act 1986 for showing material likely to stir up racial hatred.

They decided not to bring charges against the preachers featured in Dispatches, a weekly documentary series often featuring hard-hitting investigative reporting.

Police said some parts of the program may have been considered offensive, but, when analyzed in full context, there was not enough evidence to bring charges.

Shame

Abu Usamah, one of Muslim imams featured in the documentary, said he was shocked by his depiction in the one-hour documentary.

"To try and demonize the efforts of these people by taking their comments out of context was shocking," he told the BBC.

Abu Usamah, who preaches at Green Lane Mosque, said he had been featured as calling for throwing homosexuals from a mountain at a time he was explaining that this was an opinion featured in some books, and a one he advocates.

He asserted that the Green Lane Mosque has "a 33-year-old tradition of preaching and teaching the moderate version of Islam.”...

To be accurate, the Green Lane Mosque subscribes to Salafism, an Islamist movement that wants the modern world to view everything through the pristine prism of the 7^th Century, Islam’s “golden age.” “Moderate” Salafists are those who don’t think that violence is necessary to bring sharia law to Dar-al-Harb since it will prevail soon enough through demographics, multiculturalism, and infidel cluelessless. That British police are now doing their part to help it along represents what may very well be the final nail in the U.K.’s—Britainistan’s—coffin.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:12 | link | comments (2)

Kah-vetch, kah-vetch, kah-vetch: Before Stephen Harper was elected, many Canadians were obsessed with his “hidden agenda.”

What was the agenda? They couldn’t say for sure. All they knew was that it was dastardly, Conservative, and likely involved plans to scotch abortion, gay marriage and stem cell research.

 

Now that Harper’s been in the driver’s seat for over a year and none of the dire predictions about his covert plans have come to pass, Canadians have done an about face and are kvetching about something else. A new survey has revealed that 46 percent of those polled think Harper’s agenda lacks direction.

 

Hidden and scary or self-evident and aimless—make up your minds, guys.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:25 | link | comments

Get out your head hankies: If a clueless dhimmi academic has her way, Canadian universities will set aside one day each year in honour of—hold onto your hats—the hijab. From the CCD (links added by moi): 

The McMaster professor who initiated Hijab Day to support Muslim women is trying to create a national event across Canadian universities.

In April, Muriel Walker grabbed headlines when she created the event to draw attention to discrimination against Muslim women. A week later her office door was vandalized, plastered with Islamophobic and sexist graffiti.

Now, with the help of a students' association at McMaster, she is about to launch officially the idea of "Wear my Hijab day" on every Canadian campus at once. She has created a website, hijabday.net, and hopes to soon pick a date for the event.

This week Walker, a professor of post-colonial French literature, is in Paris with three students speaking at the fifth international conference on New Directions in the Humanities. The hijab is a flashpoint in France. The Hamilton delegation is speaking about the McMaster experience and the reaction.

The McMaster local of the Canadian Union of Public Employees and a Toronto lawyer and special adviser to the federal minister of multiculturalism, Mark Persaud, are among the supporters of the McMaster delegation in France.

"The students asked McMaster for funding but they were told that the university doesn't endorse this kind of students' initiative, so I took it upon myself to find other sponsors," said Walker.

Persaud was born in Guyana and arrived in Canada in 1983. A formerly homeless person in Toronto, he is the president and CEO of the Canadian International Peace Project, a non-partisan organization.

Persaud believes critical issues affect many of Canada's ethnocultural communities.

"It's a much more serious issue in Europe and France, but in Canada it's largely an issue of ignorance and we have to spend time educating people.

"What professor Walker is doing is highlighting the issue of intolerance against Muslim women wearing hijab and that is important."

 

Nuh-uh. What professor Walker is doing is advancing the cause of political Islam, with its intolerant, Medieval outlook on women, and allowing herself to be used by those who employ the Trojan Horse of multiculuralism to Islamize Canada.

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:48 | link | comments

Two strange escapees: One ursine; one plastic.

Posted by: scaramouche at 22:47 | link | comments

Uneven battle: Money talks. And if you have enough of it, you can use it to silence the voices of those you’d prefer not to hear. Just ask Rachel Ehrenfeld, whose exposé of the connection between Muslim charities and Islamic terrorism has been quashed by an egregiously rich Saudi. From the New York Post:

August 8, 2007 -- THE Saudis' efforts to keep a veil of secrecy over their sup port for al Qaeda and Hamas got a shot in the arm last week, as a British publisher opted to suppress a controversial book on the financing of terror.

Facing the mere threat of a lawsuit from Saudi billionaire Khalid bin Mahfouz, Cambridge University Press agreed to pulp all the unsold copies of "Alms of Jihad: Charity and Terrorism in the Islamic World," issue a public apology to Mahfouz and pay his legal expenses and substantial undisclosed damages.

The prestigious publisher - the world's oldest publishing house - had carefully vetted the book before publishing it last year. Yet now it has asked more than 200 libraries worldwide to pull the work off their shelves.

Bin Mahfouz never sued the authors, J. Millard Burr and Robert O. Collins, both U.S. citizens, who had provided their publisher with all the sources to back their allegations that bin Mahfouz, his family and his former bank, the National Commercial Bank of Saudi Arabia, funded Hamas and al Qaeda. Yet Cambridge University Press still caved - and even asked the authors to join its apology to bin Mahfouz. (They rightly refused.)

Since March 2002, bin Mahfouz has sued or threatened suit in England at least 36 times against those who've linked him to terrorism, including many American authors and publications. Everyone settled with bin Mahfouz - except me.

He sued me in London in January 2004, shortly after my book "Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed - and How to Stop It" was published in the United States. I refused to acknowledge a British court's jurisdiction over a book published here; the court then ruled in bin Mahfouz's favor by default. It enjoined British publication of "Funding Evil," awarded bin Mahfouz $225,900 in damages and expenses and ordered that I publicly apologize and destroy the book. I still refuse to acknowledge the British Court and its ruling...

We can only hope that “David” Ehrenfeld is able vanquish the Saudi Goliath.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:07 | link | comments

A documentary by Creationist/crank conspiracy theorist Harun Yahya that didn't show up on VisionTV: His "insightful" exploration of "the philosophy of Zionism."

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:46 | link | comments (1)

The da’wa of Dil Dil: The producers of Dil Dil Pakistan aired an apology in which they insisted their intent wasn’t to “offend” but rather to offer the peaceful message of the Holy Quran to Muslims and non-Muslims. The apology didn’t mention an ulterior motive behind much of VisionTV’s Islamic programming, including their own: to “invite” infidels to “revert” to the one true faith.

Faith Freedom International, an organization that describes itself as “a grassroots movement of ex-Muslims,” has the testimony of one “revert”—now unreverted—who found his way to Islam via VisionTV:

…Despite having close friendships with Muslims, my initial exposure to Islaamic subjects was via cable television. Airing on VisionTV, a nationwide Canadian multifaith and multicultural television network was a program called ‘Journey Through Islam’. Using material from the Islamic Information Service (IIS) based in California, this one-hour show featured conversion testimonials, documentries, interviews with scholars and thinkers (Maher Hathout, Muhammad Asad, Muzammil Siddiqi, Jamal Badawi, John Esposito, Yusuf Estes, Yusuf Islam, Hamza Yusuf, etc.), and snippets from Harun Yahya’s cunning videos on Creationism. Another program was ‘Let The Qur’an Speak’ by Shabir Ally which featured mostly Qur’aanic lectures and interviews. ‘Reflections on Islam’ by Ezz E. Gad and ‘Call of the Minaret’ by Steve Rockwell also were influential to my indoctrination. Besides the wealth of Islaamic programs on VisionTV, the Christian CTS network aired ‘Islam Today’ with host Bashir Khan and ‘The Muslim Chronicle’ hosted by Tarek Fatah. Both programs featured local interviews, documentaries and educational material. With this wealth of Islaamic education, my heart and mind was won.

But by far, the most stimulating and persuasive piece of all was footage of a talk (titled: ‘Glorious Qur’an, The Liberator’) delivered in 1987 by Yusuf Islam (formerly the pop singer Cat Stevens) at the University of Houston wherein he spoke of the Prophets and their struggle to present the same revelation to mankind. With a pointed index finger and green Qur’aan in hand, he spoke with profound meaning, contentment, spirit, composure and enlightenment. His gift left me in awe and craving what a billion Muslims possessed; a sense of purpose…

It would be interesting to know how many others have heeded the call courtesy Canada’s multi-faith, multicultural broadcaster.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:06 | link | comments

Paid in full: Looks like the Hamas-Fatah reconciliation scheme is going even better than expected. So eager is Fatah to put all the nastiness behind them—and return to the fold—that it is even paying the salaries of the Hamas regime. Of course, Fatah’s feeble explanation is that the payments were the result of a computer glitch. From YNet News:

While Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas insists time and again that he and his government will not deal with Hamas until the organization recants from its Gaza coup, it appears that due to a computer error funds were transferred from the Fatah government's accounts to Hamas.

Palestinian media reported on Wednesday that Prime Minister Salam Fayyad's government – formed on the heels of Hamas' takeover of Gaza – has paid all members of Hamas' special security forces a sum tantamount to 12 monthly salaries.  

The Maan news agency quoted the deputy commander of the force confirming that 3,500 people were paid wages owed to them for the period between June 2006 and June 2007.  

The deputy said that the recipients were surprised by the move and that as far as Hamas is concerned the move constitutes "recognition of the special security forces by the West Bank government and President Abu Mazen (Abbas)."

Officials from both Fatah and Hamas confirmed the reports to Ynet that while most of Fatah's security personnel and civil servants had not been paid for some time, Hamas members were the ones to receive funds from Fayyad's government.

 

Meanwhile, Fayyad announced that he would pay the salaries of all members of the Palestinian parliament, including those representing Hamas…

 

A decision which, clearly, is deliberate and cannot be explained by a computer screw-up.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:40 | link | comments

About as “moderate” as a rattle snake: The Quartet and the Olmert regime are beavering away, trying to convince everyone that Abbas is a “moderate” and the man who will lead the Palestinians to statehood. Meanwhile, the “moderate” is busy talking to his arch-rivals, the genocidal jihadists, in an effort to heal their rift. From israelinsider:

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's plans to bolster Fatah may experience a grave setback in light of Hamas and Fatah's renewal of secret talks aimed at repairing relations. Olmert has been attempting to bolster Fatah's position and isolate Hamas, a militant group whose primary goal is to destroy Israel.

"The talks are being held at a low-level," a Fatah official told the Jerusalem Post. "It's premature to talk about a breakthrough, but at least we are talking again."

Olmert said on Tuesday that he does not have information about the talks, according to sources in the prime minister's office. However during his meeting with PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas on Monday, Olmert said that the renewal of Fatah-Hamas talks could have harsh "diplomatic ramifications," underscoring his opposition to a united Palestinian government. Abbas vowed not to renew contact with the militant group.

A Hamas-Fatah reuinification could undermine all diplomatic progress achieved so far between Olmert and Abbas.

However a senior Fatah official and Abbas aide, Ahmed Abdel Rahman, said Fatah was willing to begin a dialogue with Hamas.

"We want to hear from Hamas an apology for what they did in the Gaza Strip," Abdel Rahman said. "If they want to resume the dialogue with Fatah, they must first admit that they made a mistake when they staged a coup against the legitimate authority."

Hamas officials insist that Fatah is willing to reunite without its demands being met.

Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal on Wednesday called on Yemen to secure a national agreement between Hamas and Fatah because "Israel and other international organizations are seeking to deepen the tear between the two groups."

According to a Fatah official, Russia was also involved in the mediation efforts, the Post reported.

"The Russians informed Abbas that they were planning to invite senior Hamas representatives to Moscow for talks on ways of resolving the dispute," he said. "We are not opposed to the mediation efforts, but there are certain conditions that Hamas must fulfill before we move forward. Hamas must apologize for its coup and hand over all the security installations it occupied last June."

Another official said that several Arab countries were also active in reconciling the two factions, holding meetings in the West Bank, Beirut, Cairo and Damascus, as well as several Gulf capitals.

 

I guess Abbas and Hamas have decided that there’s more that unites them than divides them. Don’t expect the message to penetrate the brains of Abbas’s Western champions any time soon, though.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:25 | link | comments

Oops!: VisionTV gets nailed—again. By James Cowan in the National Post:

Two weeks after VisionTV was forced to apologize for broadcasting lectures by a fundamentalist Muslim preacher, the channel aired a documentary by a Turkish author who has argued in the past that Israel exploits the Holocaust to justify its actions and contends Darwinism is the root cause of terrorism.

Shown on Saturday afternoon, the documentary was credited to Harun Yahya, the pen name of Turkish author Ad-nan Oktar. Founder of the Foundation for Scientific Research, an apparently well-funded organization based in Istanbul, Mr. Oktar contends that "Zionism and the State of Israel" use the Holocaust as a means of "legitimizing" crimes against humanity.

In 1996, his group also distributed a book entitled The Holocaust Lie, although Mr. Oktar has contested his involvement with its production.

The documentary on VisionTV focused on Muslim creationism and did not offer Mr. Oktar's views on the Holocaust or feature the author on screen.

However, Anita Bromberg, B'nai Brith Canada's director of legal services, said it was "disappointing" VisionTV provided a forum for Mr. Oktar so soon after suffering a similar controversy.

"Here's a broadcaster who is committed to furthering the values of multiculturalism," Ms. Bromberg said.

"To have this many strikes against them in a short period of time is a testament to the difficulties of living in the world today where there are those who will use the cover of religion and multiculturalism to preach hate."

VisionTV was recently forced to issue an apology for airing lectures by Israer Ahmad, whose writings call for a global jihad and the "extermination" of Jews.

The station also declared a review of its code of ethics and standards and launched a series of meetings with faith groups aimed at revising its screening practices.

The documentary on Muslim creationism appeared on Dil Dil Pakistan, the same show that last month featured Mr. Ahmad's lectures.

In an e-mail to the National Post, VisionTV president and CEO Bill Roberts said the channel will consider suspending the program. Dil Dil Pakistan is created for VisionTV by an outside producer.

Gail Thomson, VisionTV's director of marketing and communication, said the channel screened Mr. Oktar's documentary prior to it being aired and found nothing offensive in its content.

A memo prepared by the individual who viewed the film describes it as a "Koranic interpretation of creation."

Ms. Thomson said the channel also did some research into Mr. Oktar's background, but that investigation did not uncover his views on the Holocaust.

"Had we known about his views, there would have been a different situation and a different decision made," Ms. Thomson said.

Ms. Thomson said VisionTV's review of its practices is meant to ensure similar mistakes are not made in the future…

Kind of a pre-requisite if VisionTV wants to keep its license.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:52 | link | comments

A welcome dose of reality: The Arabs and their little helpers have successfully (and inaccurately) smeared Israel as a colonial occupier, thus ensuring that Palestinian “victimhood” remains front and centre in the consciousness of tender-hearted (and mushy-brained) lefties. Given that, it’s so gosh-darned insensitive when someone like Joseph Pruder, on the FrontPage Magazine site, tries to “confuse” everyone “with the facts” (to cite the words of my friend E’s colleague, a well-meaning but clueless aficionado of the Palestinian cause). Brazenly, Pruder writes that, based on their perennial claims of having gotten a raw deal, the Palestinians have been the most fussed-over, cosseted, lavishly-financed people in history—to no avail—and it’s high time for the Arab world to do the long-delayed right thing vis-à-vis their Arab brothers:

…As awful as conditions are for the Palestinian refugees, the fact is nevertheless that they have been more pampered by the international community and the UN than any other refugee population who has suffered no less, and probably a lot more. Kurds, Tibetans, Indians, Pakistanis, Hungarians, Laotians, Vietnamese, Bosnians, and Africans did not have a special agency of the UN created just for them. UNWRA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East) was created solely to deal with the Palestinian Arab issue. Many more Indian and Pakistani refugees died or were dislocated in the Indian sub-continent partition of 1947 than Palestinians. There were approximately 600,000-750,000 Palestinian refugees in 1948 compared to 15 million Hindus and Muslims that crossed borderlines, yet no special UN agency was established for them.

Assuming that the past is behind us, why is it not a top priority for the Hamas-led government in Gaza to eradicate the refugee camps and build permanent housing, decent schools, and create employment for fellow Palestinians? The same question should be asked of Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority. Regretfully, these refugees are being used as pawns against Israel, and the PA would rather spend the billions of dollars in international aid on arming its “security forces” rather than on its people in need.

The burdens of education and welfare have been left to the mosques and UNRWA where, in addition to health care and food, Palestinian refugee youth receive a steady dose of hateful incitement against Jews, Israel, Christians, America and infidels. And liberal guilt-ridden West is silent – they pump in millions to assuage their guilt and fail to demand any changes.

The Peel Commission Report summed up the nature of the conflict as it was then in1937 which is as relevant today, “The Arabs desire to revive the traditions of the Arab Golden age. The Jews desire to show what they can achieve when restored to the land in which the Jewish nation was born.”

The Jewish State would have eventually been restored regardless of the Holocaust, albeit somewhat later. 2000 years of persecution and humiliation in exile had created an invincible force. The Arab refugees and their sovereign rights were never denied or rejected. Rather, the Arabs of Palestine themselves determined their future, and they chose to kill the Jews and the Jewish State rather than create their own state. They sought to revive an Arab Muslim Empire in the Middle East. Many still do.

The Western conundrum mired with guilt over the “victimized” Palestinians is misplaced. Instead of guilt the West should demand that Arab and Palestinian dictatorships address the issue of human rights for their people by making welfare and humanity a priority. They should demand, as Ronald Reagan did in Berlin, to “tear down those camps” and give their people a life free from hatred, war, suffering, and death.

According to Bat Ye’or in her book Islam and Dhimmitude, the Holocaust was largely motivated by the desire to prevent the Jews from achieving their Zionist dream. Hence the reason why the Grand Mufti collaborated with Hitler, and a platoon of Muslim soldiers fought under the Nazi flag. The alliance paid off big time for both Aryan and Muslim Jew-haters. Hitler gained support from the Jew-haters of Arab world who shared his genocidal goals, while the Arabs were the only Semites—and Muslims the only religious group—which the Nazis didn’t target.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:40 | link | comments

The Christian Saudi Queen: The previous Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Fahd, had a secret he kept from his people—he was married to an infidel. Now Fahd is dead and his widow wants a share of his oily fortune. From the Times Online:

As she strolls through Knightsbridge, Janan Harb could be easily mistaken for just another of the rich Middle Eastern ladies who frequent this most chic part of London. She is dressed in an Armani suit, decorated by a simple if exquisite gold and diamond brooch, and her throaty, mischievous drawl hints at a life well lived.

But to understand her actual status, one only has to walk with her into her favourite Lebanese restaurant. The maître d’ claps his hands as she enters, and the manager swiftly materialises next to her table. “If there is anything you need, please just ask, Your Highness,” he says.

Harb, 60, is the former wife of King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, once the richest man in the world with a £30 billion fortune. Now she is about to relaunch the biggest maintenance claim in the world, this time using the American courts.

At 20, she married King Fahd bin Abdul Aziz, who ruled the oil-rich nation for 23 years until his death two years ago. Harb, the daughter of a hard-working restaurateur, stumbled into a world of unimaginable wealth and opulence.

She was ensconced in a velvet-draped palace in Jedda, surrounded by Somali and Ethiopian servants. Her chauffeur-driven car was a strawberry-hued Aston Martin, and she was showered with collections of Piaget watches and Oscar de la Renta dresses which King Fahd picked for her himself.

Because she was born a Christian, she was kept hidden from the public in case it was discovered that a Saudi king, the defender of the Islamic faith, had married an infidel. Harb was forced by her husband to have three abortions in a year, and the palace began to feel increasingly like a prison. Two years after their marriage, she was exiled to the US and Britain upon his request and became the King’s escort in the West.

Today, she says, that life seems very distant. King Fahd died two years ago last week, and with him her claim through the High Court in London for a share of his fortune. This year, Harb is to launch a new £1.4 billion suit against the Saudi Royal Family in America, having secured testimony from witnesses to their relationship and wedding in 1968…

I hope Harb (great name for a kafir) takes them to the cleaners.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:20 | link | comments

The downside of funding religious schools: Ontario Conservative leader John Tory (yes, that’s his real name—and wouldn’t it have been funny if he’d grown up to be a Liberal?) has promised to extend public funding to all faith-based schools that meet certain criteria. In a completely unrelated article on the CAMERA site, Ayaan Hirsi Ali explains why that might not be such a good idea:

In a free society, if Jews, Protestants, and Catholics have their own schools, then Muslims should have theirs, too. But how long should we ignore that in Muslim schools in the West, kids are taught to believe that Jews are pigs and dogs? Or that they should distance themselves from unbelievers and jihad is a virtue? Isn't it odd that everywhere in Europe with large Muslim organizations, demands are made not to teach kids about the Holocaust, while in mosques and Muslim bookshops The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is distributed?

Excuse me while I send Mr. Tory an e-mail with Hirsi Ali’s comments.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:48 | link | comments (2)

Unbridled bias: Ezra Levant laces into the media’s outrageous—and irrational—double standard. When Israel defends itself against Islamists who want to bring it down, the outcry reverberates around the world and back again. When Lebanon defends itself against the same enemies—and an entire “refugee camp” disappears—there’s an ominous silence.

Why the diff? Esteemed professor Bernard Lewis once explained it (lamely) as “Jews are news,” but Ezra thinks there’s another factor at work.  From the Calgary Sun:

…Why are military strikes by Israel news, but not those by Lebanon?

Why is an Arab killed by a Jew news, but not an Arab killed by an Arab?

Why did the UN intervene to save Hezbollah from Israel, but the world shrug in apathy -- no, actually send arms -- to support Lebanon against another terrorist group?

There can be no other explanation beside an anti-Israel bias in the newsrooms and diplomatic salons of the world.

This is no revelation; reading the speeches of Arab diplomats at the UN, or the official press of a dozen Muslim dictatorships is like reading old Nazi propaganda.

That explains the bias of the UN, Arabia and its shills.

But it surely cannot explain the double standard here at home of a hundred Canadian newspaper editors and TV producers.

Can it?

Nope. That can be explained by lefty cluelessness and having imbibed too much of the multiculti-flavoured Kool-Aid.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:22 | link | comments (2)

The acid test: Salim Mansour says there is one question that can reveal whether a Muslim is indeed a genuine “moderate”: do you accept the right of Jews to live in security and sovereignty in Israel?

If an individual can’t answer in the affirmative, that person cannot be considered a “moderate.”

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:32 | link | comments

A glaring absence: Many notable names showed up on a petition, spearheaded by Elie Wiesel, expressing disgust for the outrageous British boycotts of Israel. But as James Kerchick writes in contentions, the Commentary magazine blog, one high profile name was missing:

Over the weekend, the New York Times published an open letter from the Elie Wiesel Foundation, originally released July 11, signed by 51 Nobel laureates, including Wiesel, the Dalai Lama, and a host of other luminaries, decrying the various British boycotts of Israel. These boycotts, the statement read, “glorify prejudice and bigotry.”

But there is one man, reputed to know more about the horrific effects of “prejudice and bigotry” than anyone on earth, missing from the collection of signatories. The absence of his name is made even more conspicuous by the presence of another name: that of Frederick Willem de Klerk, the last apartheid-era President of South Africa, who ably helped his country transition into multi-racial democracy. (No doubt the “Israel is apartheid” crowd will use his presence for their propaganda purposes. The presence on the list of Wole Soyinka, the Nigerian novelist and playwright, should complicate their attempt.) The missing name, of course, belongs to Nelson Mandela. And its absence is not all too surprising. Mandela has long been a friend of tyrants, from Fidel Castro to Muammar Qaddafi to Yasir Arafat. In the current issue of Azure, I explore the theme of Mandela’s support for these autocrats within the larger context of the troubling direction in which his political party—the African National Congress—is taking South African foreign policy.

Say an ill word about Nelson Mandela and you become, in the eyes of the mainstream media, international glitterati, and pop culture stars, a heretic of all that’s right and good in the world. But no one is immune from criticism, not even someone who spent 27 years of his life languishing in prison for the ideals of non-racialism and democracy. And if that’s the standard for sainthood, why are figures like Armando Valladares (who spent 22 years in a Cuban gulag suffering conditions far worse than those Mandela faced), Vladimir Bukovsky, and Natan Sharansky not given the same hagiographic treatment as Mandela? One cannot help concluding that the nature of the regime behind the imprisonment—whether a right-wing authoritarian one in the case of South Africa, or a left-wing totalitarian one like the Soviet Union or Cuba—affects the attention paid to the prisoner. And so I am left asking the same question Nat Hentoff posed four years ago, regarding Mandela’s silence in the face of Robert Mugabe’s destruction of Zimbabwe: “Where is Nelson Mandela?”

Where is he? Probably having tea with "Dizzy" Des Tutu, Jimminy Carter and other eminent “Elders” as they bash the Zionist “apartheid” regime.

Posted by: scaramouche at 16:52 | link | comments

A disincentive for moderate Muslims to tell the truth: It's bad for their health.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:40 | link | comments

Now playing: There are those who would have you believe that the Israel-Palestinian issue occupies centre stage in the world's theatre and that, as such, it's the hottest ticket in town. As far as former Quartet envoy James Wolfeson is concerned, though, "Israelis and Palestinians really should get over thinking that they're a show on Broadway. They are a show in the Village, off-off-off-off Broadway."  

I agree that it’s a sideshow. Unfortunately, the show that’s playing is Jihad: The Musical.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:34 | link | comments

Dazed and confused:

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:09 | link | comments

Bakshi shovels it: Islam Online has an interview with Amar Bakshi, the journalist entrusted by Newsweek and the Washington Post to report on the state of anti-Americanism in the world. And—whaddya know?—Bakshi tells I.O. exactly what it wants to hear:

Q. Tell us more about your project.

A: My project aims to explore how America is perceived globally through text and video posts updated daily from around the globe. The goal is to take a look at how personal lives of ordinary people are affected by the US and Americans economically, politically, and culturally, to help get a better grasp on the role this nation plays in the lives of citizens around the world.

Q. What kind of reactions do you come across as far as Anti-Americanism is concerned.

A: I don’t think I have experienced Anti-American feelings yet.

Q. How do you think American foreign policy is affecting the image of America in the Muslim world?

A: I understand those perceptions outside America that it is conspiring to target the Muslim world. If you were in America, say Washington DC, people and policy makers would say that this is an attack on terrorists and no one would say that this is an attack on the Muslim world. And, you know, the goal of American policy should be to go after few extremists and do whatever to capture them and the fact that the US is perceived as fighting Islam is very unfortunate.

Q. Almost the entire American media was gung-ho about the Iraq invasion. Wasn’t it a classic case of Yes-Man-Journalism?

A: Although I am not a media expert but I agree. It was a big think in the US. How media lied down. And this project is trying to bring together viewpoints from people all across the world. It will be great to find out how America is perceived outside. It will give Americans an insight as to what people think of them and their government. There was so much turmoil in the US media. But now the media is moving very quickly especially this project. We want more voices articulated on world views and people who don’t find an avenue to express their feelings; this project is a good platform to share their ideas.

Q. Many think that America might be winning war on the battlefield but losing battle for hearts and minds. What do you think?

A: There is a very much perception outside America that America is doing this to dominate the Muslim world. There is resentment in America as well. And you must remember that there is right now a fundamental difference between American government policy and what American people want. American government does not necessarily stand for what majority of Americans want.

Q. Will your project have some kind of impact on foreign policy?

A: US government is a very complicated thing. I mean who will have effect and how… but as far as Americans are concerned, they will get to know what people think of their government. It gives a little bit of sense to the reader & viewer what other person is like.

Q. Can your project play a role in bridging the gap between the US and the Muslim world?

A: Yes, I believe it can. Because oftentimes both sides dislike an idea they manifest, more than the reality on the ground. There is no clash of civilizations. There are complex, nuanced struggles that individuals are undertaking for a variety of mostly political and personal ends. This project tries to get beyond scary headlines to point out the human details that connect us, so even if we disagree at the end on matters of religion or politics or lifestyle, perhaps there can be a slightly better understanding of why the other does what he or she does, and the myriad ways in which we are similar. It’s easier to hate an idea than a human, and the key is to make the distant real. I hope to do this through text and video posts, bringing the sites, sounds and feelings home.

A most “nuanced” assessment, entirely in keeping with the kind of clueless, it’s-a-small-world-after-all, there’s-no-jihad tripe regularly purveyed by the two aforementioned publications.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:43 | link | comments

Karzai’s treachery: Hamid Karzai—he’s our guy, right? Noble. Anti-jihadist. A real snappy dresser. The Afghan Mandela who wants to heal his wounded land and remake it into a beacon of democracy.

Or maybe not. From the San Francisco Chronicle:

Camp David, Md. - President Bush expressed profound skepticism Monday that security in Afghanistan is receiving a boost from Iran, just days after Afghan President Hamid Karzai called his regional neighbor a valued ally in the struggle to control terror.

"They're not a force for good, as far as we can see," Bush said, addressing reporters after two days of meetings with Karzai at a retreat in Maryland.

Bush also waded into a dispute that has divided top Democratic contenders for president. Asked if the United States would strike against al Qaeda leaders in Pakistan without waiting for permission from the Pakistani government, the president did not explicitly rule out unilateral action.

"I'm confident that with actionable intelligence, we will be able to bring top al Qaeda to justice," Bush said, adding that Pakistanis share an "interest that foreign fighters be brought to justice."

The meetings were scheduled in advance of a top-level gathering later this week between the leaders of Afghanistan and Pakistan, which the United States helped arrange.

While trying to present a united front against terrorism, Karzai and Bush appeared to differ sharply on the role Iran is playing in the Middle East.

In a CNN interview broadcast Sunday but recorded a day earlier, Karzai called Iran "a helper and a solution" in Afghanistan. The two nations, he said, had "very, very good, very, very close relations."…

 

More than 60 Canadian soldiers have been killed trying to keep the Taliban from retaking Karzai’s country. By making common cause with the mullahs, Shia extremists who are even more deranged and dangerous (and powerful) than the Taliban, Karzai is spitting on the Canadian graves—and on the West in general.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:22 | link | comments (1)

Happy campers: Where can you find the newest holy warrior training camp? 

Why, Gaza, of course.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:01 | link | comments

“Divine” comedy: A column in glossy Muslim magazine Islamica written by a Muslim comedian looks to The Cosby Show to provide a model for shows about Muslims on American TV. The Cosby Show, he writes, broke out of the stereotypes and offered a professional, educated African-American family in which Dad was a doctor, Mom a lawyer, and the whole mishpacha was wholesome and respectable. He’d like to see the same sort of show featuring a Muslim-American family, but for now he’ll settle for—you guessed it—Zarqa Nawaz’s Ceeb and VisionTV sitcom, Little Mosque on the Prairie:

...American Muslims are new to the field of professional media generally, and even greener in the entertainment side of the business. So my suggestion to those who are clamoring for a Muslim Cosby Show is that they must be patient. I believe it is inevitable, God willing. But it also means that they should not burden Zarqa Nawaz and her show, “Little Mosque on the Prairie,” with expectations that may be literally impossible for her to meet.

Which brings me to my second point, about Zarqa herself. She is a wonderful woman, a conscientious Muslim sister and a dear friend of mine. However, she would be the first to admit that she is no Bill Cosby. Though I am very wary of loading her show with all sorts of hopes and aspirations, I am also adamant that everyone should give her and her show the props that they deserve. Whether you think the show is funny, accurate or able to sustain an audience, Zarqa has blazed a trail. She made history. Instead of sitting around crying, whining and complaining about how Muslims are portrayed in the mainstream entertainment business (which is what 99 percent of complaining Muslims do), she shut up and got to work on a sitcom – a dream she shared with me more than three years ago. God made her dream come true. She created, developed and produced a Muslim-themed sitcom for a mainstream Canadian broadcast channel, got top Canadian actors to star in it and had more than 2 million viewers tune into the first episode, smashing all sorts of CBC records. It’s really all quite amazing. It’s a type of fath (opening) from God, I believe.

I pray that my Lord continues to bless her, guide her and gift her with even more creative juices and greater passion to continue doing big things. And as for the haters, the Arabs have a proverb: “The dogs bark and the caravan marches along.”

 

How true. And so much funnier than those other Arab proverbs: “First comes Saturday, then comes Sunday,” “May you live in interesting times,” and “Allahu Akbar!”

Posted by: scaramouche at 23:48 | link | comments

VisionTV—a “truther” from way back: The following is from a transcript of The Great Deception, a “documentary” broadcast on VisionTV a few months after 9/11:

Part 1 of a multi-part series (Part 2 airs Jan 28 10.30pm Canadian Time – Today NZT)

Transcript of Mon., Jan. 21 2002 Broadcast

What really happened on Sept. 11th? 9/11 -- Part 1.

For four months I’ve been waiting in vain for the North American media to pursue questions about the startling events of September 11th. Here’s what I want to know:

The multiple hijackings are unprecedented. The first occurs at 7:45 in the morning. It’s a full hour before the first plane hits the World Trade Center. But it’s an hour and 20 minutes -- and after the second plane hits – that the President allegedly becomes informed. Think about that.

Then, he gives no orders. Why? He continues to listen to a student talk about her pet goat. Why?

It’s another 25 minutes until he makes a statement, even as flight 77 is making a bee-line for Washington, DC.

In the almost two hours of the total drama not a single U.S. Air Force interceptor turns a wheel until it’s too late. Why? Was it total incompetence on the part of aircrews trained and equipped to scramble in minutes?

Well, unlike the U.S. Air Force, I’ll cut to the chase. Simply to ask these few questions is to find the official narrative frankly implausible. The more questions you pursue, it becomes more plausible that there’s a different explanation: namely, that elements within the top U.S. military, intelligence and political leadership – which are closely intertwined – are complicit in what happened on September the 11th.

Why U.S. complicity, you ask?

Well, to stampede public opinion into supporting the so-called war on terrorism, to justify a war on Afghanistan for a future oil pipeline, the grab for Middle East oil, big budget increases for the military, and the general drive for global domination by the American Empire.

I know it sounds incredible…

No more incredible than, say, Dr. Israr Ahmad openly preaching jihad from the Koran on Canada’s multi-faith, multicultural channel.

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:13 | link | comments

From the "If it Moves, Eat It" Dep't: Beijing restaurant offers variation on meat and two veg.

Posted by: scaramouche at 15:50 | link | comments (1)

A revel with the devil: Thought I’d share this news snippet from the Toronto Star (no link):

More than 200 Western music fans attending a rock concert near Karaj have been arrested for breaking Iran’s strict Islamic sharia law, local media and witnesses said yesterday.

 

“Most of them were wealthy young people who were not aware of the satanic nature of the concert,” public prosecutor Ali Farbadi told state television. He said concert organizers had told young people to attend if they were eager to learn how “devil worshippers” perform music.

 

Well, that’s one way of trying to get around Iran’s loopy religious laws.

 

Reuters has more:

…Karaj's public prosecutor, Ali Farhadi, said invitations had been sent out via the Internet and that people from Britain and Sweden were among those held. Zarei suggested they were expatriate Iranians visiting the country.

Farhadi said 150 bottles of alcoholic drinks, 800 "obscene" CDs and different kinds of drugs had been confiscated by police, as well as "inappropriate" dresses that those behind the event were giving to female guests as gifts.

"Some 230 people who attended a rock party in Karaj were identified and arrested," Farhadi said on the Web site of Iran's state broadcaster.

He said 20 video cameras had also been seized and that the organizers had planned to blackmail girls after filming"inappropriate and obscene" videos of them.

Under sharia, Islamic law, imposed after Iran's 1979 revolution, women are obliged to cover their hair and wear long, loose clothing to disguise their figures and protect their modesty. Violators can receive lashes, fines or imprisonment.

Also, organizers sacrificed a young, immodestly-dressed virgin and used her blood to add piquancy to some baklava being sold at the concession stand.

 

Oops, sorry. Must be thinking of some other devilish conspirators.

Posted by: scaramouche at 15:42 | link | comments

Faux apologetics?: Is VisionTV genuinely contrite about giving airtime to a radical cleric, a well-known figure back in Pakistan, who thinks the Holocaust was God’s way of punishing the Jews, and who’s not averse to seeing the Final Solution finally completed?

Heck no. Vision’s just royally p.o.’d it got outed and skewered by Canada’s notorious right wing newspaper. Here’s the letter a blogger who complained about the Israr broadcasts received from the Vision’s audience relations (the bolds and italics are his):

 

Thank you for sharing your concerns about the issues raised in the recent issues of the National Post. The Post articles were misleading in suggesting that offensive comments were broadcast on VisionTV. At no time were derogatory remarks about people of the Jewish community, or any other group, broadcast on our network.

As Canada's multi-faith network, celebrates the freedom of religious expression and spiritual diversity that is uniquely Canadian. It is part of our mandate to make airtime available to a broad range of faith communities and ministries. However, we also understand that fundamental freedoms must be balanced against each right not to be subjected to fraudulent claims and misrepresentations with respect to matters of faith. We therefore review each program on prior to broadcast to ensure that the content complies with our Code of Ethics, Standards and Practices. It is not always easy to achieve an appropriate balance between these competing priorities. Decisions on what content to broadcast are not taken lightly but are part of our ongoing effort to provide both a wide range of faith perspectives and the highest quality programming possible.

Israr Ahmad did appear on the program Pakistan, as reported in the Post. But his comments in that program were limited to readings from the Quran andinterpretations of scripture from that holy text. The offensive comments quoted in the Post were apparently made by Mr. Ahmad in other writings. Again, those comments were not broadcast on VisionTV.

Having reviewed this matter with the producer of the program, and having learned of Mr. Ahmad's comments outside of the Pakistan program, the producer voluntarily agreed not to have Mr. Ahmad appear again on Dil Dil Pakistan. We will also be broadcasting an on-air apology for any offence caused Mr. Ahmad's previous appearance on the show. VisionTV and Pakistan have a long history of promoting positive dialogue and the peaceful teachings of the . We will strive to ensure in future that we maintain the highest standards of broadcasting to achieve those goals.

As a broadcaster, takes its responsibilities for content on our network very seriously. In response to your feedback and comments from other viewers, we have undertaken to review our Code of Ethics with stakeholders including the Bnai Brith, the Canadian Jewish Congress, and leaders of other Canadian faith institutions. It is often through viewer feedback that we are able to improve our broadcast standards, and we appreciate you taking the time to share your concerns with us.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you require any additional information.

Best regards,

VisionTV
Audience Relations

 

Funny how Bob Roberts, VisionTV’s CEO, sounded so much more apologetic in the Post.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:59 | link | comments

Norwegian kitsch:

An article in Aftenposten bemoans the cruddy state of Norwegian souvenirs:

How about a troll with three heads? And perhaps a Viking helmet? Or what about a boxer shorts with pictures moose making love?

The above are some of the most popular items in Norwegian souvenir shops. B aut while tourists go crazy for trolls and moose, shop managers are shaking their heads in disbelief.

"To be honest, I don’t really know why they want to buy these things," said shop manager Vigdis Naur of the souvenir shop Vigdis Design to Aftenposten. She has tried to offer more quality souvenirs, but find that tourists are more inclined to buy the cheaply priced, mass-produced, often kitsch, items.

"Items that are too Norwegian don’t sell. Americans in particular would rather buy a smiling Coca Cola Santa Clause," she said.

Souvenir shop managers that Aftenposten spoke to, said however that tourist from different countries generally buy different souvenirs. The Norwegian jumper is especially popular with Americans, Germans generally prefer a bumper sticker for their car, Britons have a predilection for trolls, while the Spaniards and Italians love the Vikings, said shop manager Tor Fredrik Frøberg.

Meanwhile, Norwegian design institution Norsk Form said they are embarrassed by the kitsch souvenirs on offer. "None of it is good," said director Iacob Heiberg.

In 2005, Norsk Form was so embarrassed by the Norwegian souvenirs that they arranged a design competition aiming to bring new souvenirs to the market. While the response was overwhelming and the designs were good, the competition did not achieve its aim, said Heiberg. The new souvenirs were simply too expensive to produce.

"Our products were too exclusive. They wanted quick and easy products which cost nothing," Heiberg said.

"But if you want to build a brand for Norway, a Chinese made troll doesn’t cut it," he added…

I know. How about a Vidkun Quisling bobblehead?

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:26 | link | comments

Fascists on parade: What happens when governments continually fail to take steps to protect their populations against the jihad? The far-right-wing vigilantes are motivated to step into the breech—and then everyone who has valid concerns about how multiculturalism is helping facilitate the West’s Islamization can be tarred with the same Fascist brush. From Islam Online:

PARIS — Though Islam is the continent's second religion, Muslims across Europe are facing campaigns from far-right groups and some church leaders to have stately mosques.

"The desire of Muslims to build a house of worship means they want to feel at home and live in harmony with their religion in a society they have accepted as theirs," German Muslim leader Bekir Alboga told Reuters on Monday, August 6.

Muslims across Europe, who have long prayed in garages and old factories, are aspiring to have grand mosques.

In Germany, a plan by the Turkish Islamic Union (DITIB) to build a grand mosque in Cologne has met opposition on claims that it would be too big for a city housing one of the most imposing Gothic cathedrals in the Christian world.

Leading the anti-mosque campaign is Pro Cologne, a far-right organization which has held five seats in Cologne's city council since 2004.

A mosque project in Pankow, an eastern Berlin area, sparked violent clashes with neo-Nazi groups with a truck being torched at the construction site.

A local council voted against a third in Munich.

Germany is home to some 3.2 million Muslims, Europe's second-biggest Muslim population after France…

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:18 | link | comments

D.O.A: "Skeleton" of a deal awaits Abbas, Olmert in Jericho.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:35 | link | comments

 

Unhappily ever aftering: Rich Lowry writes about a new book that deflates the Camelot myth of the Kennedy White House (apparently, Jackie concocted the story about JFK’s penchant for listening to musical’s soundtrack; as we know he had other ways to fill his down town). And, well, I got to thinking about another myth that’s in the process of being fabricated—the myth of a peaceable, civilized Gaza courtesy the law-and-order-minded jihadists in charge. Here’s my version of the Camelot theme song:

 

A law was made a distant moon ago, lads,

Ordaining the supremacy of ‘slam.

And mosque and state are all bound up you know, lads

In Hamastan.

Uncovered chicks must cover up their hair now

And beardless chaps grow fuzz as per our plan,

And everyone prostrates with lots of flair now

In Hamastan.

Hamastan! Hamastan!

I know it sounds a bit outré

But in Hamastan, Hamastan,

You must do as they say.

The armaments arrive on time like clockwork.

The missiles and the weapons from Iran.

In short, there’s simply not

A more convenient spot

For martyrs seeking Paradise

Than there in Hamastan.

 

Hamstan! Hamastan!

It sure should give a person pause

That in Hamastan, Hamastan

There are sharia laws.

Hamas, they say, is really not so bad now

They got the crooks to give up that newsman.

In short there's simply not

A more convenient spot

To park our fond delusions

Than right there in

Hamastan.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:18 | link | comments

Not yet ready for prime time: The Quartet is gearing up to get the Palestinians their very own state a.s.a.p., but the Palestinian Prime Minister says hold you horses, folks, the “occupation” isn't so bad after all. From Ha’aretz:

The Palestinian Authority's security organizations are unable to assume security control of cities in the West Bank, Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayad told senior Israeli officials during recent meetings. Fayad told Israeli officials that the PA's security forces are unable "to impose law and order in the West Bank at this time."

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was scheduled to meet Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas in Jericho on Monday. The meeting will focus on making substantive progress in preparation for the regional summit planned to take place in November in Washington.

During meetings with senior Israeli officials, the interim Palestinian prime minister and his interior minister, Abd al-Razek al-Yihiya, made it clear that the PA's security cannot at this time assume control of West Bank cities. Among those to whom this message was conveyed recently was Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin.

 

Originally, Fayad and al-Yihiya made the transfer of some West Bank cities to PA security control one of their prime requests of Israel. Israel did not immediately reject the request, but asked that the PA security forces be prepared to take action against any militants who may try to carry out a terror attack against Israel from areas in which Israel would surrender security control.

However, Palestinian security commanders admitted before the PA leadership that their forces are not currently capable of preventing terrorist attacks against Israel, or, as Israel defines it, of "combatting terrorism."

Fayad told Israel that the PA's security forces are unable to "impose law and order in the West Bank at this time."

Senior Palestinian officials told Haaretz that Fayad told Israel, immediately after he assumed power, that he intended to focus on the gradual establishing of law and order in the West Bank, before turning his attention to political negotiations…

 

At the rate they’re going, statehood is a long way off.

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:54 | link | comments

No rest for the weasley: French President Nicolas Sarkozy is trying to fend off intrusive reporters while on vacation in New Hampshire (Mark Steyn’s neighbourhood—I wonder if they’ll bump into each other at the local 7-11?), but the reporters won’t leave him alone. From AFP via Expatica:

…After avoiding a platoon of French reporters for days, a tanned and smiling Sarkozy emerged in front of Wolfeboro's town hall to fend off accusations of a link between a major arms deal struck by European aerospace giant EADS with Libya, and an affair involving foreign medics jailed there.

The recent release by Libya of the six medics, who were imprisoned on charges of infecting hundreds of children with the AIDS virus, was partly brokered by Sarkozy's wife Cecilia.

French Defence Minister Herve Morin confirmed the 405 million dollar arms deal Friday and the opposition Socialist Party quickly demanded a parliamentary enquiry to decide if France offered the contracts to Libya to obtain the medics' freedom.

"It was totally transparent," Sarkozy said of the contracts. "EADS has been discussing them, with full authorizations, for 18 months."

"What do they criticize me for? Getting contracts? Creating jobs for French workers?"…

No, Nico. I think they’re criticising you for your amoral dealings with an addlepated rogue and your promise to build him a nuclear reactor.

 

Just a guess, mind you.

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:40 | link | comments

They were here a minute ago: Investigators say about a third of the guns supplied by the U.S. to Iraq have "disappeared."

Funny how armaments provided to Arab regimes have a tendancy to vanish into thin air (or into the weapons caches of jihadists).

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:17 | link | comments

Eco-freak’s design for living: In Saturday’s Globe and Mail we learned about the über-virtuous Elizabeth May, leader of Canada’s Green Party, and her wunderkind daughter. Lizzie et fille are in contention for the Teeniest Carbon Footprints in Canada Contest—and what with the mother, who needs a new hip, refusing to used a motorized vehicle and her spawn, described by a friend as an “eco-Nazi," insisting she walk everywhere, they are (you should pardon the expression) shoe-ins for the prize.

But wait. According to an article in the Times Online, the Green gals may actually be doing the planet more harm than good. In the latest example of bizarre eco-self-abnegation, a researcher and member of Britain’s Green party has calculated that it’s actually far better for the environment to drive than to walk:

Walking does more than driving to cause global warming, a leading environmentalist has calculated.

Food production is now so energy-intensive that more carbon is emitted providing a person with enough calories to walk to the shops than a car would emit over the same distance. The climate could benefit if people avoided exercise, ate less and became couch potatoes. Provided, of course, they remembered to switch off the TV rather than leaving it on standby.

The sums were done by Chris Goodall, campaigning author of How to Live a Low-Carbon Life, based on the greenhouse gases created by intensive beef production. “Driving a typical UK car for 3 miles [4.8km] adds about 0.9 kg [2lb] of CO2 to the atmosphere,” he said, a calculation based on the Government’s official fuel emission figures. “If you walked instead, it would use about 180 calories. You’d need about 100g of beef to replace those calories, resulting in 3.6kg of emissions, or four times as much as driving.

“The troubling fact is that taking a lot of exercise and then eating a bit more food is not good for the global atmosphere. Eating less and driving to save energy would be better.”

Mr Goodall, Green Party parliamentary candidate for Oxford West & Abingdon, is the latest serious thinker to turn popular myths about the environment on their head.

Catching a diesel train is now twice as polluting as travelling by car for an average family, the Rail Safety and Standards Board admitted recently. Paper bags are worse for the environment than plastic because of the extra energy needed to manufacture and transport them, the Government says.

Fresh research published in New Scientistlast month suggested that 1kg of meat cost the Earth 36kg in global warming gases. The figure was based on Japanese methods of industrial beef production but Mr Goodall says that farming techniques are similar throughout the West.

What if, instead of beef, the walker drank a glass of milk? The average person would need to drink 420ml – three quarters of a pint – to recover the calories used in the walk. Modern dairy farming emits the equivalent of 1.2kg of CO2 to produce the milk, still more pollution than the car journey...

So beef is out and milk is out. Short of committing suicide and consigning one’s corpse to the composter, what’s an ecologically responsible human being who needs to consume actual calories to sustain his/her interal eco-system to do?

...Simply cutting out beef, or even meat, however, would be too modest a change. The food industry is estimated to be responsible for a sixth of an individual’s carbon emissions, and Britain may be the worst culprit.

“This is not just about flying your beans from Kenya in the winter,” Mr Goodall said. “The whole system is stuffed with energy and nitrous oxide emissions. The UK is probably the worst country in the world for this.

“We have industrialised our food production. We use an enormous amount of processed food, like ready meals, compared to most countries. Three quarters of supermarkets’ energy is to refrigerate and freeze food prepared elsewhere.

A chilled ready meal is a perfect example of where the energy is wasted. You make the meal, then use an enormous amount of energy to chill it and keep it chilled through warehousing and storage.”

The ideal diet would consist of cereals and pulses. “This is a route which virtually nobody, apart from a vegan, is going to follow,” Mr Goodall said. But there are other ways to reduce the carbon footprint. “Don’t buy anything from the supermarket,” Mr Goodall said, “or anything that’s travelled too far.”

Love for Mama Earth? I think not. More like the most extreme expression of self-loathing, along with a pathological fixation on a time long, long ago when the Earth was supposedly “pure.”

In fact, not unlike how some fanatics of another stripe have come to think of the “Utopian” 7^th Century.

Posted by: scaramouche at 22:14 | link | comments

Not exactly a vast improvement: I tuned into VisionTV’s Dil Dil Pakistan yesterday, just to see what the producers decided to run instead of radical Pakistani cleric preaching jihad from the Koran. As promised, they offered an apology at the outset of show. It’s gist: they never, ever, in a million years, intended to offend anyone, particularly the Jews, by having a jihadist on the air for two years (I’m paraphrasing here), and want everyone to know that their agenda is to offer the peaceful message of “the Holy Quran” for both Muslims and non-Muslims here in this wonderful country of Canada, which all the producers of Dil Dil Pakistan happen to love a lot.

So the jihadist (having been outed) is out. In his place, the producers ran what looked liked an expensively-produced National Geographic-type documentary that very clearly credited to someone named Harun Yahya.

 

Never heard of him? I hadn’t either until I googled him and discovered that, along with being a noted Turkish journalist/creationist, he’s also one Turkey’s most popular crackpot conspiracy theorists/Holocaust deniers. Here’s a salient bit from his online bio:

Born in Ankara in 1956, Adnan Oktar is a prominent Turkish intellectual. Completely devoted to moral values and dedicated to communicating the sacred values he cherishes to other people, Oktar started his intellectual struggle in 1979 during his education at Mimar Sinan University's Academy of Fine Arts. During his university years, he carried out detailed research into the prevalent materialistic philosophies and ideologies around him, to the extent of becoming even more knowledgeable about them than their advocates. As a result of his accumulation of knowledge, he has written various books on the fallacy of the theory of evolution. His dedicated intellectual effort against Darwinism and materialism has grown out to be a worldwide phenomenon. Quoting from the 22 April 2000 issue of New Scientist, Mr. Oktar became an "international hero" in communicating the fallacy of the theory of evolution and the fact of creation. The author's intellectual struggle against materialism and Darwinism has frequently been mentioned in such mainly evolutionist publications as National Geographic, Science, New Scientist and NSCE Reports. The English and German editions of the November, 2004, issue of National Geographic referred to the author's works concerning the Fact of Creation. The following quotation from the book The Evolution Deceit was also included: "The theory of evolution is nothing but a deception imposed on us by the dominators of the world system." The author has also produced various works on Zionist racism and Freemasonry and their negative effects on world history and politics. The Zionism criticised by the author in his books is the baseless claims of Zionist extremists pretend to world sovereignty, regard other human beings as worthless entities, maintain that the Jews are the chosen people and that God is theirs alone. Yet the author's writings very definitely do not imply a rejection of the Jews' right to live in peace and security within the borders of their own state.

You see, Yahya has no problemo with “the Jews.” It’s those “Zionists” and their eevil-ution that concern him. Yahya’s book, The Holocaust Hoax, details how the Zionists concocted a humungous scam and foisted it on the world so they could get a state, a launch pad for their long-standing stratagem to dominate the world. The book was given a rapturous review by the Institute for Historical Review, the world’s foremost pseudo-intellectual Holocaust-denial body:

A new revisionist book in Turkey has been receiving both warm praise and sharp criticism. Published in Istanbul, Soykirim Yalani ("Holocaust Deception") is the first book-length dissident study of the Holocaust issue to appear in the nation of some 64 million people.

The handsomely produced 285-page softcover work, subtitled "The Secret History of the Zionist-Nazi Collaboration and the True Story of the 'Jewish Holocaust'," is an attractively laid out volume, with numerous photographs, nine pages of source reference notes, an eight-page bibliography, and a good index. A second edition, with an English-language supplement, is scheduled for publication soon.

The book has received praise from Turkish newspapers affiliated with the country's Islamist Welfare Party, whose leader is the country's prime minister. At the same time, "Holocaust Deception" has come under fire from pro-Zionist sources. The author, who wrote the book under the pen name of Harun Yahya, has brought a defamation suit against a journalist who denounced "Holocaust Deception" as "dirty propaganda." His lawyer points out that this serious study is based on extensive research and more than 100 documents in four languages.

The book's first section explores in detail the little-known story of collaboration between Zionists and Third Reich Germany, relying in part on an article on this subject in the June-August 1993 issue of this Journal.

Holocaust deception and fraud is the focus of the book's second section, which relies to a considerable extent on books and other material put out by the Institute for Historical Review, including the IHR Journal. This section traces the development and impact of Holocaust revisionism, showing how revisionist scholars have succeeded in debunking numerous Holocaust claims. Accompanying this detailed survey of revisionist scholarship are photographs of such key personalities as Henri Roques, Fred Leuchter, Germar Rudolf, Arthur Butz, David Irving and Robert Faurisson.

The extensive efforts by Zionist groups, both legal and extra-legal, to suppress revisionism are also detailed. For example, readers are told how the large-circulation Japanese magazine Marco Polo was shut down in early 1995 because it had published an article questioning aspects of the Holocaust extermination story. Photographs in this section show Dr. Faurisson in his hospital bed following the nearly fatal attack against him in September 1989, and the devastated IHR offices in the aftermath of the July 1984 arson attack.

Zionism's "ingathering of the exiles" efforts is the focus of the book's third section, which details the dirty tricks and underhanded measures used by Israeli officials to pressure diaspora Jews into emigrating to Israel.

Realize none of this made its way into the documentary that appeared on Dil Dil Pakistan—that would have been a gross violation of VisionTV’s Code of “Ethics”, as well as Canadian broadcasting regulations. But isn’t it interesting that the producers, who are so apologetic about offending Jews, can’t seem to fill up their air time without the help of dangerous cranks?

 

Time to press “delete” on Dil Dil Pakistan, I’d say.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:43 | link | comments

As if the real thing weren’t bad enough: The Times Online reports that some of the devout have discovered “virtual jihad”:

Islamic militants are suspected of using Second Life, the internet virtual world, to hunt for recruits and mimic real-life terrorism.

Police and the intelligence services are concerned that it may have been infiltrated by extremists to proselytise, communicate and transfer money to one another. Radicals may also be responsible for “virtual” terrorist attacks in which buildings depicted on the website are blown up.

Kevin Zuccato, head of the Australian government’s High Tech Crime Centre, said jihadists may also be using the virtual reality world to master skills such as reconnaissance and surveillance. “We need to start thinking about living, working and protecting two worlds and two realities,” he told a security industry conference in Sydney.

The concerns are shared by Europol, the pan-European police agency, which believes that Second Life provides a means to transfer money across borders in a way that is more difficult for the authorities to monitor. It has recruited security consultants to advise on the use of Second Life for fraud and terrorism.

Of particular concern is the anonymity of Second Life members who can use false names for their digital personas, known as avatars, to disguise their real identity and provide false contact details in the real world.

Intelligence sources said that although communications traffic through Second Life could in theory be monitored, often the only means of tracking an individual is by tracing the user’s IP address - the physical location of a computer in the real world - but even this can be faked. Monitoring complex money movements in the virtual world presents law enforcement agencies with further surveillance challenges.

Second Life, which has a global membership of more than 8.5m, uses three-dimensional graphics technology to create a virtual world. Anyone can become a member or “resident” for free and roam the virtual world after creating an avatar. They then meet and interact with other users’ avatars, visiting shops, theatres and sports events, trading goods and services and having sex.

So popular has Second Life become that companies such as Sony, BMW and Reebok have bought “land” and opened premises there. Some governments, including that of Sweden, have opened virtual embassies in Second Life.

Recently, inhabitants of the virtual world have experienced a more sinister phenomenon - virtual terrorist attacks against buildings and avatars. A recent attack took place at the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s Second Life base. A number of these attacks, known as “griefings”, have been launched by what industry insiders say are “geeky teenagers” giving themselves names such as the Second Life Liberation Army.

Some experts, however, believe the “virtual atrocities” may have been committed by real Islamic radicals. Rohan Gunaratna, a terrorism expert at the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research in Singapore, said that for the past three months he had monitored about 12 jihadists who have assumed identities in Second Life. He said they were mostly based in America and Europe.

A dress rehearsal for the next big kaboom?

Posted by: scaramouche at 23:58 | link | comments

Easy come, easy go: When Hamas took over in Gaza it acquired a treasure trove of documents detailing Fatah’s misappropriation of funds. Apparently, like the Nazis, Fatah keep meticulous records of its malfeasance (which I’m sure, like the Nazis, they have since come to regret). From the Jerusalem Post via the Tehran Times (and you can’t imagine how much it amuses me it is to give such an attribution):

Two paintings worth $66,000 were presented as a gift to a woman in Paris by the PA, which also paid millions of dollars to cover the personal expenses of senior Fatah officials and their families, according to documents released by Hamas recently.

The documents, which were seized by Hamas at various PA institutions in the Gaza Strip in mid-June, were presented to the Palestinian public by top Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar during a press conference in Gaza City.

The 30 documents that were released are related to the period when Yasser Arafat was chairman of the PA, between 1994 and 2004.

Fatah officials in Ramallah reacted with fury to the revelations, accusing Hamas of seeking to mislead the Palestinians through lies and forgery. But Palestinian journalist who examined the documents said they all appeared to be authentic and that there was no reason to doubt their credibility.

One of the documents showed that Arafat had approved the payment of some $30,000 to cover university tuition fees in London for the daughters of his media adviser. Another one revealed that Arafat had approved an annual payment of $9,000 to cover the university tuition of the son of another senior official who was studying in Germany.

The documents also showed that the PA had invested international funds in various economic projects, especially in Lebanon. In one case, a senior Fatah official living in Lebanon was given hundreds of thousands of dollars to purchase houses and luxurious vehicles. He also received $40,000 to pay for his son's wedding and another $130,000 as compensation for damages caused to his daughter's car.

Zahar also presented documents that showed that the Fatah-controlled PA security forces had been involved in commercial activities and in tax-collection, in violation of PA laws.

He said some of the activities were carried out when current PA Prime Minister Salaam Fayad served as finance minister under Arafat…  

As we know, Hamas puts its money to much better use—i.e. to fund hospitals, schools and the jihad.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:11 | link | comments

Tree huggers: Jane Taber in the Globe and Mail has an excruciating puff piece about Green Party leader Elizabeth May and her “remarkable daughter,” Victoria Cate Burton.

What’s so remarkable about her?

 

Well, she’s only 16, but her mother, an earnest and somewhat scattered eco-freak, long ago burdened her with excessive responsibility while Mom was off saving the planet—a burden Victoria still shoulders today:

As well as reminding her of appointments, she relies on her for cooking, cleaning, fetching things when her hip acts up and now even home renovation. (She has spent the summer sprucing up their new home with environmentally correct, clay-based paints.)

Ms. Burton helps out with big decisions too. Ms. May says she would never have run for the Green Party leadership had her daughter not approved.

In fact, she was the first to check out the party website when her mother was considering the move and she was the one who noticed the Greens didn't have a youth wing, something she set about to change.

Ms. May says she has been careful not to indoctrinate her daughter or do anything else that would deny her a childhood. Then again, she has always treated her in an adult manner, and she also feels the years of constant travel have helped Ms. Burton grow up quickly.

"We've always been a super-well-organized as a team," she says, adding that Ms. Burton has developed a great memory and always exhibited "an adult level of concern for the cause."

In the final analysis, she says, their relationship is actually friendship. "Knock on wood, it's the best mother-daughter relationship."

Too bad the mother’s the daughter and the daughter’s the mother.

Since saving the planet can often leave you strapped for cash—unless, of course, you’re Al Gore and can start your own carbon credit operation—Lizzie and Vicky (there is a father in the picture, but he seems a rather pallid chap in this household of Green goddesses) have had some lean times:

She says they live close to the line but have never starved. Not having a car has helped - not surprisingly, she and her mother worry about their carbon footprint. But getting around far-flung Central Nova on foot is tough, so this week a brand-new, environmentally correct silver Prius arrived at their Nova Scotia home. Ms. May says the Toyota hybrid is the first car she has bought in 30 years.

Her daughter is keen to get her driver's licence so she can act as Ms. May's chauffeur, but remains cool to air travel because of the high carbon emissions. Ms. Burton and her mother flew to Nova Scotia recently only because Via Rail refused to let dog Spunky on board, and she has been researching ways to reach Europe by water, as she may do some eco-friendly travel before going to university.

A friend calls her an "environment Nazi," but she doesn't mind. She even gets on her mother's case, insisting that the two walk rather than take a cab even though Ms. May is in dire need of a hip replacement and uses a cane.

Oh, brother.

 

One can only be truly humbled—and extremely nauseated—in the face of such selflessness.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:05 | link | comments

Two from the truth-tellers: Two of my favourite pundits, Diana West and Caroline Glick, throw some much-needed cold water—and some well-earned derision—on Bush’s and Olmert’s fatal blindness re the oily holy royals.

West demolishes the Bush administration’s plan to arm our smarmy enemies. From the Washington Times:

Boy, when it comes to Saudi Arabia, that Condi Rice and Bob Gates sure drive a tough bargain.

Visiting "the kingdom" (the grating, fairytale nickname for that oil-rich human-rights pit), the U.S. secretaries of state and defense delivered a blunt message: If you keep fomenting and financing global jihad; if you keep teaching and preaching the eradication or repression of non-Muslims; if you keep trampling human rights, women's rights, freedom of conscience and freedom of speech; and, last but not least, if you keep supporting Sunni insurgents in Iraq who are battling American troops, well, then, the United States of America will be forced to act. Yessir, you can bet your bottom petrodollar. You Saudis keep doing all that bad stuff and Uncle Sam is going to... deliver $20 billion of cutting edge weaponry to you, ASAP.

That'll fix them.

Or will it fix us? It's easy to get things mixed up unless you remember the latest version of the Bush Doctrine: You're either with us, or we sell you smart bombs.

In the Bush administration, such appeasement counts for Grand Strategy. The leading Sunni state, Saudi Arabia, is supposed to serve as a counterbalance to Shi'ite Iranian terror-statism. Forget about Saudi Arabian terror-statism. (That messes up the Grand Strategy.) And, please, don't wonder what happens if/when jihad revolutionaries, already thought to have infiltrated Saudi security forces, get their hands on our smart bombs. Inspired by the teachings of James Baker — practically an honorary Saudi princeling — Condi, Bob, and, of course, George, see the Saudis as Our Moderate Allies. Who cares if they promote jihad doctrine? Who cares if they sponsor Hamas? Who cares how many Saudis support (or belong to) al Qaeda?

The Saudis and their fellow Sunni states including Egypt and Jordan are supposed to agree with the Bush administration that they have a stake in stabilizing Shi'ite-majority Iraq — which, in Bush-land, is supposed to serve as a curb on Shi'ite Iran, and not simply turn into the natural ally thereof. It's in the Sunni states' interests, the Grand Strategy goes, to help stabilize Iraq, and, while they're at it, to support the so-called peace process between Israel and the Palestinians — or, rather, between Israel and "good" Fatah Palestinians, not "bad" Hamas Palestinians. Never mind that both groups' charters call for the destruction of Israel. And never mind Saudi support for Hamas.

The Sunnis aren't buying the administration's world view, which, in politically correct fashion, ignores the $64,000 Islamic question: Why on Allah's green earth would these states want to staunch the bleeding of ideological enemy number one (us) in Iraq? Of course, these same states are happy to buy American guns and ammo. Which may make Condi, Bob and George masters of let's-make-a-dealpolitik. But that's not saying much.

Oh, but the Saudis have promised to open an embassy in Baghdad and come to peace talks with Israel, administration boosters will say. Well, not exactly. The Saudis said they will consider opening the embassy, and they will consider coming to a peace conference. Frankly, opening that Baghdad embassy makes Saudi sense (it's so much easier to supply insurgents in Iraq using the diplomatic pouch). But since when is the presence of a world-class human-rights violator at a peace conference something worth groveling for?...

Glick demolishes Ehud Olmert’s clulessness and his pathetic desire to score a photo op with the unctuous king. From JWR:

 

This week last year, Israel was in the midst of a terrible war which its government refused to acknowledge. As rockets and missiles rained down on northern Israel, the Olmert government refused to call up IDF reservists or launch a ground campaign in Lebanon. Ignoring reality, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert stood before the graduating class of the IDF's National Security College and announced that Israel had won.

 

Olmert said, "If the military campaign were to end today, already today it could be said with certainty that the face of the Middle East has changed … Now [Hizbullah] can never threaten this nation that it will fire missiles at it - because this nation is contending with these missiles and beating them."

 

The next morning, in an interview with the Associated Press, Olmert expanded on his delusion declaring that the IDF had destroyed all of Hizbullah's military infrastructures in south Lebanon. Even before his interview hit the airwaves, Hizbullah opened its largest bombardment until that point. That day 231 missiles fell on Israel.

 

Olmert also used the AP interview to set out his post-victory plans. Israel's big win, he said, would pave the way for its withdrawal from Judea and Samaria.

 

Back then, even the generally supportive media attacked him for his bold-faced lies and for his willingness to discuss the notion of more Israeli withdrawals when the war itself was the direct result of previous Israeli retreats. When the war ended a week later in Israeli defeat, no one expected that a year later Olmert would still be in power.

But here we are, one year on, Olmert is still the prime minister, and he is still telling lies at National Security College graduation ceremonies. While last year he ignored the reality of war, at his commencement speech Tuesday, Olmert ignored the coming war. By his telling, there is no war on the horizon because, "In the north and in the east live millions of people who want tranquility, a quality of life and quiet — just like we do."

 

One year on, Olmert's government looks more stable than ever. As former minister Natan Sharansky, who now heads the Shalem Center's Institute for National Strategies notes, "With nine percent approval ratings, Olmert's government is more stable than Binyamin Netanyahu's government was with 45-65 percent approval ratings."

 

Indifferent to public rejection, Olmert and his ministers pursue diplomatic and security goals that bear no relation to the regional and global realities facing Israel.

 

Today Olmert has one overriding policy objective: He wants to get his picture taken with the Saudis…

 

Say cheese, Ehud—and then say your prayers. ‘Cause if you put the fate of Israel and the Jewish people in the hands of the Wahhabists, our days are numbered.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:18 | link | comments

Gaza nuptials: Who says genocidal Islamists can’t be romantic? Israelinsider has a tongue-in-cheek post about what may well become a new trend among lonely young “militants” in Gaza—importing your blushing (and newly “reverted”) bride from Russia:

In light of the recent Jewish day of love, tu b'av, and the lingering romance that that inevitably remains, Israel Insider is pleased to announce the recent simcha of a Hamas militant and his Russian bride.

 

The two were married in Gaza following Hamas' bloody coup over a month ago, an event that sang the tune of wedding bells for the smitten militant. He realized then that the time was right. The militant's Slavic bride-to-be, brought from Egypt into Gaza through a cramped tunnel, met her betrothed for the first time after a five-year Internet romance.

The young Hamas member, then 24, found his current wife with the help of a Russian sheik he met on an Islamic Internet forum. The girl, who had converted to Islam, was disillusioned with her country's secularism, Ynet reported.

According to a Russian language news source, the militant reported that his wife was pleasantly surprised upon discovering that her fiance owns an apartment and some furniture. His friends, impressed with the new addition to their friend's family, have also decided to find themselves Russian spouses on the Internet.

The number of women converting to Islam is on the rise in Russia, and the majority of them feel stifled by their country's lack of Islamic accommodation. Perhaps these boys will have some luck.

 

Thus redefining the concept of “shotgun marriage.”

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:54 | link | comments

The “struggle” continues: Hitler’s book about his great “struggle”—Mein Kampf—has been out of print in Germany since 1945, but that may change soon. A leading German academic says it’s time to end what amounts to censorship, and allow this historic document to circulate freely.

Daniel Johnson in the New York Sun writes that it’s already circulating freely in another location—and helping cement the historic bonds between genocidal Jew-haters past and present:

…Nazi literature does not just circulate in the hermetic, deranged mental universe of Islamism-- it is ubiquitous. That is partly because the movement has been influenced by Nazi ideas from its inception, but also because it has a similar demonology to Hitler's: purging of the West in general and Jews in particular.

When the journalist Richard Littlejohn was making a TV documentary on anti-Semitism in Britain, he was shocked to discover how easy it was to buy a copy of "Mein Kampf" in ordinary Muslim-owned stores. He found one on sale a few yards away from the house near Oxford Street where the Blair family will move when they vacate Chequers, the official prime ministerial country residence.

German denazification took a long time-- and it included eradicating the influence of "Mein Kampf." What an irony if the same book were to become the vehicle for the renazification of Europe-- only this time not under the swastika, but the crescent.

The word “irony” seems rather feeble here. “Catastrophe” would be more like it, I’d say. In any case, the real vehicle for the renazification is what historian Bat Ye’or has called Palestinianism, the collaboration between Arab countries and EU elites to undermine Israel and pave the way for its destruction.

 

Should that occur, Hitler’s will turn out to have been the Penultimate Solution, with the Arab-EUnuchs, or perhaps Iran's lit'ler Hitler, getting credit for the final Final one.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:45 | link | comments

Culture clash: A tiny minority of young extremists in the “moderate” Muslim nation of Malaysia tried to have a Gwen Stefani concert shut down, but didn’t succeed—this time, anyway. From AFP via Yahoo! News:

KUALA LUMPUR (AFP) - US singer Gwen Stefani will perform in Malaysia as scheduled despite protests from an Islamic students' group which objects to her raunchy performances and outfits, the sponsor of the show said Thursday.

 

The 10,000-strong National Union of Malaysian Muslim Students has objected to Stefani's August 21 concert -- part of her "Sweet Escape" tour -- because of her past record of "indecent dressing and obscenity."

 

Maxis Communications, the parent company for Hotlink, the concert's main sponsor, said the show would go on because authorities already approved it.

 

"Maxis Communications respects the values and conventions of this country," Maxis said in a statement.

 

"Whether it concerns the singer's attire or the security for the concert, we will abide by the rules and guidelines and assure that nothing will go wrong," Maxis' media, research and event general manager Rozalita Abdul Rahman said.

 

Mohamed Hilmi Ramli, the Muslim students' union president, said Malaysian youth "would be exposed to moral decay if we continue to allow such concerts to be held in Malaysia."

 

"We urge the organiser to cancel this concert or face intervention from our kind of groups," he said.

 

Stefani, who usually sports avant-garde outfits, platinum blonde hair and flaming red lipstick, will be briefed on the standard of dressing and conduct she must follow during the concert, Rozalita said, adding that similar briefings were given to other performers who visited Malaysia.

 

"We always brief the singers to adhere to our guidelines. All foreign artistes need to understand our culture and at the same time, as for Malaysians, we also need to have an open mind on such matters," said Rozalita.

 

The student group has previously objected to concerts by other foreign performers including Pussy Cat Dolls, Scorpions, Michael Jackson and Linkin Park.

 

Malaysian authorities last year fined a music promoter 10,000 ringgit (2,726 dollars) for organising a Pussycat Dolls concert that was considered too raunchy.

 

“Sweet Escape”--sounds like the name of the final, perfect theme song of those who refuse to submit.

Posted by: scaramouche at 15:53 | link | comments

The “new” Hamas: Melanie Phillips on how Hamas is using its role in freeing kidnapped Beeb reporter Alan Johnston to reposition itself as a respectable organization. From the Spectator:

Shortly after the release of Alan Johnston from Gaza the website of Conflicts Forum, a group advocating engagement with Islamists and which is run by the former MI6 officer Alastair Crooke, posted a fascinating transcript. Under the title ‘Hamas briefing’, it was a conversation between Michael Ancram, the former Tory Northern Ireland minister, and Osama Hamdan, a senior representative of Hamas, which took place secretly in Beirut in June while Johnston was still in captivity.

Hamdan suggested Fatah was behind the kidnap — in particular, Fatah’s security minister Mohammed Dahlan — and said it had three times thwarted Hamas attempts to rescue Johnston. ‘The most important thing,’ he said, ‘is that our people know him [Johnston] well, they know him well. I’ve talked yesterday to our [person there in Gaza], he saw him dozens of times, not in public, he visited him in his office ...they respect him.’

Mr Ancram, who says this was his third meeting with Hamas since last autumn, claims he was acting purely from his personal belief in talking to them. He had approached the controversial Crooke to facilitate these meetings simply because he had the necessary contacts in Beirut.

Nevertheless, his encounter with Hamdan has been used by Conflicts Forum to promote the cause of Hamas, which has been enormously boosted by its role in getting Johnston freed.

According to Hamas — an account uncritically swallowed by the Western media — Johnston was kidnapped by a criminal Gaza gang, the Dagmoush family, also known as the Army of Islam, which was said to be at odds with Hamas and to have possible links to al-Qa’eda.

Hamas eventually made a deal with the Army of Islam’s principal protagonist Mumtaz Dagmoush and Johnston was escorted out of captivity by jubilant Hamas officials, with the British Foreign Secretary’s praise ringing in their ears and the Western media now falling over itself to promote their cause.

But this account is highly improbable. The claim that Hamas was unconnected with Johnston’s kidnappers is wrong. The evidence points instead to an elaborate piece of manipulation, with Hamas using the kidnap to open a line of communication with Britain (as its Gaza leader, Ismail Haniyeh, boasted last week).

The government not only sanctioned an informal visit to Britain by a senior Hamas official, Ghazi Hamad, but the UK Consul-General in Jerusalem, Richard Makepeace, met Ismail Haniyeh in Gaza to ask for his help in freeing Johnston.

In doing so, the Western embargo on contact with Hamas was broken — an important step in Hamas’s strategy of gaining international legitimacy, and integral to its plan to undermine Mahmoud Abbas, take over the West Bank and further its goal of Islamising the region…

Seems to be working.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:40 | link | comments

Barack blasted: Political naïf Barack Obama is catching all sorts of flak from both left and right for suggesting that the U.S. should invade Pakistan. One of the flak-throwers on the right: Mark Steyn. From the Hugh Hewitt Show:

Yeah, well I think that’s just, you know, the Democrats are always in favor of the war you’re not fighting. If someone was to say, oh, the 3^rd Infantry Division go in tomorrow, he’d be hailing that as the new quagmire. The fact of the matter is that the Pakistani tribal lands are incredibly difficult areas. The idea that you could send either huge numbers of American troops or even special forces in there to operate, I think, is completely, I think is completely idiotic. It would cause…Pakistan has 120 million people who by and large are hostile to the United States. Getting them dancing up and down in the streets shouting death to the Great Satan is not a good idea.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:27 | link | comments

Take five: Ayaan Hirsi Ali says that, broadly speaking, there are five groups of Muslims. From the Washington Post:

…The first group includes those Muslims who leave the faith because they cannot reconcile it with their conscience or with modernity. This group is important for the evolution of the Islamic world because they ask the urgent and critical questions believers usually avoid. Ex-Muslims living in the west are just beginning to find their voice and to take advantage of the spiritual and social freedoms available to them.

The second group is comprised of genuine Muslim reformers, such as Irshad Manji, who acknowledge the theological out-datedness of the Koranic commands and the immorality of the prophet. They tend to emphasize the early chapters in the Koran urging goodness, generosity and spirituality. They argue that the latter chapters wherein Islam is politicized and the concepts of sharia, jihad and martyrdom are introduced should be read in the context in which they were written, some 1,400 years ago.

The third group is made up of those Muslims who support the gradual perpetuation and domination of Islam throughout the world. They use the freedoms offered in democracy to undermine social modernity and, though initially opposed to the use of violence, foresee that once the number of believers reaches a critical mass the last remnants of unbelievers may then be dealt with in violence, and sharia law may be universally implemented. Ayatollah Khomeini used this method successfully in Iran. Erdogan of Turkey is following in his footsteps. Tariq Ramadan, deeply rooted in his Muslim Brotherhood heritage, is devoted to such a program among European Muslims.

The fourth group is the most obvious and immediately threatening. In this group we find a growing number of hard-line Muslims who have defined martyrdom as their only goal. This is an army of young men whipped into a frenzy of suicidal violence by power hungry clergy. These clergy have public platforms and work with impunity from institutions untouched and often funded by national authorities.

The fifth group is largely ineffective and only threatening in their refusal to acknowledge the truth. Here we find the elite clergy who make a show of trying to reconcile Islam with modernity. They are motivated by self-preservation and have no interest in true reform. They take selective passages from the holy books to make a case for a peacefu