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

Song for All-Hallow's Eve: No, not "Witchcraft"--it's "That O-Bam' Magic"

That Obam’ magic has them in a spell

That Obam’ magic that we know so well.

Icy tingles up Chris Matthews' knees.

The same derangement of a brain disease.

That same old tingle captivates D. Frum.

His wife wants invites--gonna get them some.

And down and down they go, round and round they go, like it’s the Beatles in ’64.

They can’t help themselves, the pull is so strong.

And he’s such a handsome dude--how could they go wrong?

They hear his name and they’re all aflame.

Aflame with such a burning desire that only his win can put out the fire.

For he’s the leader they have waited for; The One that fate had him created for.

And every time they hear his voice, Bambi, down and down they go,

Round and round they go.

In a spell, a spell we know all too well, under that Obam’ magic called love.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:27 | link | comments

Caught on tape: The story so far: the L.A. Times has in its possession a video tape of Barack Obama attending—and speaking at—an event back in ’03 honouring his close pal, Arafatiste/anti-Zionist academic Rashid Khalidi. Word is that at this dinner a number of Palestinians got up and said some pretty hair-raising things about a certain entity they and the honouree all loathe, and that, not wanting to be the wallflower at the hate-orgy, Bambi got up and said a few choice things himself. Of course, we may never know what’s on the tape because, did I mention that the L.A. Times outright refuses to release it? Anyway, a FOX newshound managed to chase down Khalidi, who, for obvious reasons, was most reluctant to talk. Here’s the video clip of the encounter. And here’s part of the transcript:

GRIFF JENKINS, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Professor Khalidi? Hi, Griff Jenkins with FOX. Can I ask you a quick question?

(CROSSTALK)

JENKINS: Can you just tell me? What's your relationship with Senator Obama? Sir, you clarify it, sir? I apologize for interrupting but you have become the centerpiece of the election. Will you at least call for the "L.A. Times" to release the video? What was said? What was said at the speech?

RASHID KHALIDI, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR: Go away. Get this guy out of here.

JENKINS: Will you talk to us?

KHALIDI: I will not.

JENKINS: Were you the spokesman for the PLO? Will you confirm that?

KHALIDI: Get these guys out.

JENKINS: You're at the center of the election, sir. Just some quick clarifications then we'll leave.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

JENKINS: OK.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HANNITY: That's Arafat's former spokesman a little quiet there. So why is it every time we find one of these associates of Barack Obama they run away and refuse to say anything? Why do they all seem to look so guilty?

But that's not the only tape we obtained today of Mr. Khalidi. Now take a look at this speech. He gave this speech in 1998 and he is discussing how American foreign policy gets corrupted by domestic politics but the example that he uses, that's what caught our attention.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KHALIDI: The second thing to keep in mind about American foreign policy is that it is largely determined by domestic considerations almost all the time. There are many other things that go into it. But domestic considerations are always extremely important.

And these are often quite mundane, indeed these are sometimes appallingly crass interest. They are the kind of things that move domestic politics in Chicago — money, votes, corruption, bribery, influence peddling, back-door deals.

The kind of things that Cook County, the city of Chicago, the state of Illinois, the politics on the local level work through and because of. The kind of you scratch my back and I scratch yours kind of (INAUDIBLE) type of dealing, which we — which we — when it's talked about in the Middle East it's considered revolting and degrading and third world corruption.

It's actually what oils American politics. If you don't know this you're not living in the United States.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Now anybody know any politicians from Chicago? Now Khalidi makes it sound like corruption is just part of life in windy city politics.

Now, good thing Senator Obama doesn't know any one, let's see, like Tony Rezko? But that's not all. In just a few minutes, we're going to reveal some shocking and potentially explosive details about the unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers.

We have just confirmed — you see this book here — today and you won't believe what we're going to show you and who this book by Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn was dedicated to. That's coming up.

But joining us first tonight with more on these stories is former Democratic pollster Pat Caddell, columnist Ann Coulter.

You know here's a guy, the L.A. Times went — there is a tape that he is praising this man, former, you know, terrorist spokesman for Yasser Arafat. We know that he — you know, viewed the creation of Israel as a disaster.

ANN COULTER, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST & AUTHOR: Right.

HANNITY: And anti-Semitic things were said at this event and Barack Obama praised Khalidi.

COULTER: Right.

HANNITY: So, but of course, nobody cares.

COULTER: Right, I mean, even what little they reported about the event, it is shocking that a presidential candidate of a major party would be there. You have Ayers and Dohrn again, of course. You have this Khalidi. You have Obama who's apparently constantly having dinner with the Khalidis.

HANNITY: They ear (sic) dinner frequently. They were frequent dinner companions….

I’m sure, though, that at none of those dinners did Khalidi ever express his oft-stated opinion about Israel being a racist, apartheid state. And even if he did, I’m sure it’ll have absolutely no bearing on Bambi's dealings with Israel once most American Jews have voted for him and he’s safely ensconced in the Oval Office.

Right?

Update: American Jews living in Israel support McCain over Obama 3-1, whereas Americans Jews living in America support Obama over McCain by the same margain.

What do Americans living in Israel know that Americans living at home don't?

Update: A rhyme for Rashid:

Bambi’s buddy, Professor Khalidi

Is what you could call very needi.

It can’t be denied

That he needs to deride

Jewish sov’reignty: oh, yes, indeedi!

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:54 | link | comments

Trick or treat: This adorable little moppet wants all you kafirs to shell out. Or get out. Or something.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:27 | link | comments

Abandoning ship in order to jump on the Bambi bandwagon: Irrepressible satirist iowahawk does a hilarious impersonation of another irrepressible satirist—the scion of the Conservative icon who founded the National Review:

As a Conservative I must say I like the cut of this fellow Obama’s jib

By T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII
Columnist, The National Topsider
Membership Chairman, The Newport Club

When my late father T. Coddington Van Voorhees VI founded the iconoclastic conservative journal National Topsider in 1948, he famously declared that "Now is the time for all good conservative helmsmen to hoist the mizzen, pour the cocktails, and steer this damned schooner hard starboard." In the 60 years since he first uttered it after one-too-many Cosmopolitans at one of Pamela Harriman's notorious foreign policy black tie balls, father's pithy bon mot has served as a rallying cry for conservatives from Greenwich to Chevy Chase. Today, I say it's time for we conservatives to once again grab the rigging and set sail with the flotilla of the true conservative in this race: Barack Obama.

Trust me, I haven't taken this tack lightly. No Van Voorhees has supported an avowed socialist since great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandpapa Cragmont Van Voorhees lent Peter Minuet $24 and a sack of wampum to swing a subprime mortgage on Manhattan Island. Old dad himself often recounted how, as a lad, he would command the family chauffeur Carleton to drive the Duesenberg down to the Times Square Trans-Lux so he could hiss Roosevelt. But I've taken a good measure of this Obama fellow, and I must say I like the cut of the man's jib.

How can I say this, you ask? One look at this Obama chap is all the answer you need. Suave, tanned, unflappable, Harvard connections; it's obvious that here is a man to the conservative manor born. One imagines him at the helm of the Ship of State, basked in the sunlight diffusing through the seaspray over the bow, like some beautiful rugged Othello from a rapturous Ralph Lauren catalog, calmly issuing instructions to the deck crew in that magnificent mellifluous baritone of his. It's that easy-going, almost effortless grace that has all the A-list conservatives like David Frum and Kathleen Parker whispering Reaganesque in hushed tones. Even Peggy Noonan -- the Grand Dame of Gipperism -- has succumbed to Obama's undeniable conservative charms. Just last month I listened to her wax poetic about the Adonis of Chicago between chukkers at the Newport Club polo tournament final.  "Why Peggy, you old dowager," I quipped, "I believe you just had an orgasm."

Certainly, my endorsement has raised more than a few eyebrows around the National Topsider water cooler, particularly among the alumni of jejune cow colleges like Michigan or Dartmouth. They sometimes point to Mr. Obama's radical Rolodex and his hooey about "weath redistribution" and "dictatorship of the proletariat." But, as I patiently explain, this is precisely the point - it is hooey, over-the-top rhetorical flourishes obviously designed by Mr. Obama to win over benighted inner city hoi polloi (a feat, I might add, that even the Great Communicator himself was unable to accomplish). As for his so-called radical ties, who among us hasn't sent dinner party invitations to Gore Vidal and a leftwing terrorists or two to enliven the postprandial conversation? Leonard Bernstein loved hosting all manner of Weathermen and Black Panthers and Symbionese Liberation Army celebrities at his Park Avenue pied a terre, but it didn't mean the Maestro wasn't in favor of low taxes. On the contrary; I know for a fact he itemized every cent of the catering bills for his famous terrorist cocktail parties.

Just so, I have every confidence that Obama's true conservative butterfly will emerge once in office,  coaxed from its Maoist cocoon by conservatives like myself and Frum and Parker and Noonan -- all of whom I am pleased to report are already under consideration for the Obama Administration State Dinner shortlist...

Tee hee. Iowahawk demonstrates once again that the liveliest prose around is to be found not in the dead tree media but in the blogosphere.

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

The 1948 equivalent of "OBAMA DEFEATS McCAIN": A gal can dream, can't she?

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

“Tolerance” and its opposite: The Wiesenthalers have been dying to build another of their edifices devoted to “tolerance”—this time in Jerusalem. Unfortunately, they’ve run into a bit of a pickle. The site they were hoping to use has turned out to be the final resting place of some Muslims, and, well, the Arabs aren’t as keen as the tolerance machers about having a building on top of their bones. Here’s some background on the controversy, from a September ‘06 AP report:

The Museum of Tolerance started off with good intentions, over US$100 million in donations, an eye-catching design by architect Frank Gehry, a 2004 kickoff ceremony attended by Arnold Schwarzenegger, and a great piece of Jerusalem real estate.

But underneath that real estate, it turned out, there were Muslim graves. As a result, instead of bringing this contentious city's warring tribes together, the museum has sparked a fight with political, religious and historical dimensions between Muslims and Jews _ and all this before it has even been built.

Months of arbitration have ended in deadlock, the site is enclosed in aluminum walls, and the dispute is now before Israel's Supreme Court. Even if the court gives the go-ahead, however, the Museum of Tolerance could well remain permanently tainted by allegations of intolerance.

The museum was conceived by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, a nonprofit Jewish human rights group based in Los Angeles. It was to promote coexistence in a city holy to Muslims, Jews and Christians, and claimed by both Israelis and Palestinians as a capital.

The center's plan includes a conference center, a theater, and museums for adults and children with exhibits covering Jewish history and Israel's relations with its Arab neighbors.

The Jerusalem municipality gave the Wiesenthal Center a municipal parking lot in central Jerusalem on which to build the museum.

But in Jerusalem, a parking lot is rarely just a parking lot. Before it was turned into a four-story underground garage in the 1970s, the land had been a small part of a sprawling Muslim cemetery.

The cemetery fell out of use after the creation of Israel in 1948, but many of its graves are still visible, crumbling among trees in what has become the heart of the Jewish side of the city. Part of the cemetery is now known as Independence Park. Another part had been sold much earlier, in the 1930s, at the initiative of the top Muslim clergyman of Jerusalem, to become the renowned Palace Hotel.

The project's backers say they didn't know the lot contained graves when they got it, and cite the Palace Hotel precedent and a 1964 ruling by a top Muslim cleric permitting construction on the land. But this has not mollified critics, who charge that nothing justifies the desecration of graves.

When surveyors found human remains at the site early this year, two Israeli Arab groups got a court order freezing construction.

One of the groups fighting the museum is the Al-Aqsa Company, affiliated with Israel's Islamic Movement, a rising political force among the country's 1.2 million Arab citizens.

"Islamic law is very clear: You can't build on land that was once a cemetery," said Muhammad Suleiman, a lawyer for the group. The cleric who issued the 1964 ruling was corrupt, Suleiman charged, and the fact that Arabs were silent about the parking lot's presence for decades doesn't mean they should remain silent now.

The Wiesenthal Center's compromise proposal -- to move the graves, construct a memorial and fund the rehabilitation of the remaining gravestones nearby -- is not good enough, Suleiman said, insisting that the museum must be moved.

The Wiesenthal Center refuses, saying it has already spent millions. Rabbi Marvin Hier, who heads the center and conceived the museum idea, said the delays alone have cost more than US$1 million…

Here’s an update on the kerfuffle from Islam Online:

OCCUPIED JERUSALEM — An Israeli court ruling allowing the construction of a Jewish museum over graves of some companions of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) in Al-Quds is sparking a controversy.

"Israeli is declaring a global war on Muslims and Arabs," Sheikh Raed Salah, leader of the Islamic Movement in Israel, told a press conference on Thursday, October 30.

"A general of the [prophet's] Companions is buried in this cemetery."

Sheikh Salah noted that thousands of other Muslims have been buried in the cemetery, putting the number at 70,000 thousands until 1948.

Israel's High Court on Wednesday, October 29, rejected an appeal by two Muslim groups to halt the building of a Jewish museum on the site of a Muslim cemetery in central Al-Quds.

The court argued that the cemetery has been in public use since the municipality authorities put a parking lot over a small section of the graveyard in the 1960s.

It claimed that a proposal put forward by the museum planners to rebury the bones or cover the graves was "satisfactory" to resolve the issue.

The court said the construction of the museum, halted in 2006 after human remains were discovered during the digging, can resume immediately.

The Mufti of Al-Quds, Sheikh Mohammed Hussein, said the verdict was a "grave decision which harms the Muslim holy sites."

He described the construction of the $250-million museum by a Los Angeles-based Jewish group as "act of aggression."…

Now, bearing in mind that Islam Online is a Wahhabi mouthpiece and fully onside with the eliminationist agenda, and bearing in mind, too, that Arabs have never exactly respected Jewish sites in Jerusalem (an understatement of immense magnitude) and that they’re apt to cry foul no matter what the Jews do there, one cannot help but think that perhaps Wiesenthal may have erred here. So it spent a bunch of money on plans—so what? Isn’t it sending entirely the wrong message—a message of intolerance—to persist in trying to build a shrine to “tolerance” on this site?

For that matter, do we really need another such shrine at all, since Jerusalem already has Yad Vashem, its world-renowned Holocaust memorial and since, clearly, “tolerance” is a fiction which actually has very little to do with Judenhass or with the reason why eliminationists persist in wanting to rid the world of Jews?

Just asking.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:39 | link | comments

Life in “apartheid” Israel: This JPost report doesn’t really jibe with the upcoming conference’s whole “Zionism is racism” shtick:

The number of Arab-Israelis performing national service has quadrupled in the last two years and now exceeds a thousand, according to government statistics.

The figure had increased from 230 two years ago to 630 last year before already surpassing more than 1,000 volunteers for the 2008/2009 fiscal year. More than 80 percent of the Arab participants are women, officials said.

"The young Arabs - male and female - who have joined the national civic service in the last year or two have reached very high levels of satisfaction, a sense of accomplishment and a strong sense of helping their own community. And that has spread by word of mouth from one to another," said Dr. Reuven Gal, head of the Administration for Civilian National Service.

National service affords women the opportunity to "join open society" and connect with potential future jobs, Gal said. Arab men are much more interested in securing immediate full-time salaried positions, and thus furnished far fewer volunteers, he added.

But others attribute the increase in Arab participation to their desire to receive the financial and social benefits that civic service offers - equivalent to the benefits received by those who serve in the army. Volunteers living at home, as most Arab-Israelis do, earn roughly NIS 500 a month and are eligible for several thousand shekels in grants after completing one year of service.

"Arabs want to receive the same status as those who are released from the army... They receive all kinds of benefits [via national service]," said Sami Smooha, a University of Haifa sociology professor. "And also, they have the possibility - through this status - to connect to 'Israeliness' ... And that's also the reason that the [Arab] leadership is opposed."…

No kidding.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:57 | link | comments

Not to be missed: FrontPage Magazine’s David Horowitz rips Chris Hitch a new one for his hysterical evisceration of Sarah Palin:

“This idiot woman, this blind, short-sighted ignoramus, this pretentious clod, mocks basic research and the international research community.” Is this a description of Rosie O’Donnell explaining that metals don’t melt and 9/11 was an inside job? A swipe at Green Party presidential aspirant Cynthia McKinney explaining how the Jews were responsible? A shot at Gloria Steinem for defending partial birth abortion under the delusion that a living child is actually a disposable “fetus”? No, this is a psychotic attack on Governor Sarah Palin by an Obama supporter. Palin’s sin? Her opposition to earmarks, in particular an earmark for olive fruit fly research. The same earmark recently provided my good friend Christopher Hitchens to express his contempt for Palin and justify his endorsement of her opponents.

While not as vitriolic as his attacks on Mother Teresa and Princess Di, Hitchens’ assault on Palin is characteristically extreme. In a display of liberal snobbery in Slate  – “Sarah Palin’s War On Science: The GOP Ticket’s Appalling Contempt For Knowledge And Learning” – Hitchens explains to readers the benefits of fruit fly research (as though anyone – even a small town bumpkin like Alaska’s governor – wouldn’t have learned about fruit flies in high school biology). Fruit fly research allows us to study the DNA of living organisms, “which makes it useful in studying disease.” This ranks Palin as a hypocrite in Hitchens' eyes since her “signature issue” is disability and special needs: “She might even have had some researcher tell her that there is a Drosophila-based center for research into autism at the University of North Carolina.”

Thanks for the tip Hitch.

But when Palin attacked the earmark, she wasn’t campaigning against fruit fly research. She was campaigning against earmarks – the $18-billion-a- year scam under which forces taxpayers to underwrite personal favors that congressmen perform for their “constituents,” like giant agribusiness corporations. Such earmarks are transparent bribes since they are bound to encourage constituents who receive them to fund congressional campaigns. The fruit fly earmark was the project of a California congressman named Mike Thompson; the service provided was to the California agribusiness community, which was looking for taxpayer help with a fruit fly problem that threatened their designs to turn olive trees into a profit. The earmark was not about autistic kids. It was about a corrupt patronage system used to benefit one congressman and the olive oil industry.

Of course, Hitchens is smart enough to smell the rat in his own argument. Without exactly explaining what the earmark was for, he writes: “The fruit fly can also be a menace to American agriculture, so any financing of research into its habits and mutations is money well-spent.” Christopher! This isn’t about DNA, and not all research is fungible. This is a welfare handout to giant corporations. Instead of going to funding sources where projects are peer-reviewed, they can appeal to one pliable congressman, likely to appreciate their ability to help his re-election.

In an earlier Slate column (“Vote for Obama”), Hitchens described McCain’s selection of Palin as “the most insulting thing a politician” could do and therefore, apparently, a cause to throw the Iraqis and his country under the bus. Of course, the author of the religion-bashing book, God Is Not Great, is not really enraged at Palin because of her concern about earmarks. His contempt is for the fact that she believes in a Deity, and a moral law higher than a California congressman. Even this contempt coming from Hitchens is puzzling, since the chief sin Hitchens ascribes to the religious in his polemical book is presuming to speak in the name of God. Since Palin readily concedes her inability to read the Creator’s mind, she should get a pass.

But she doesn’t.

Instead, Hitchens suggests that with Palin “the contempt for science may be something a little more sinister… She is known to favor the teaching of creationism in schools….” Well, not exactly. As Hitchens himself explains, she has not advocated imposing Creationism on the schools. She merely wants to “smuggle” the doctrine through the door in “the innocent disguise of ‘teaching the argument.’” Oh. She wants students to be made aware of the discussion over evolution, whereas Hitchens wants the fact that some members of the scientific community believe in Intelligent Design to be suppressed –  and this in the name of “knowledge and learning”!

Hitchens is normally able to make the sharpest distinctions, but this ability is strikingly absent from these electoral ruminations. Perhaps his instincts have been blunted by the new company he is keeping among the bigoted hysterics of the political left, to whom distinctions appear as mere distractions from the righteous Path of Truth…

As one wag (okay, it was me) once opined re fanatical atheist Hitch (borrowing someone else’s quotation): There but for the grace of God, goes God.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:42 | link | comments

The need to believe: A friend e-mailed to tell me that when she read the words “mass manipulation” in the previous post, she immediately thought of Bambi. The same thought occurred to me as I was reading this line in Friedlander’s conclusion: “Hitler was surrounded by the hysterical adoration and blind faith of so many for so long…”

Blind faith; hysterical adoration: sounds a lot like the Bambi-soxers to me.

The other day on Ceeb radio, the talking head reading the news said Americans were “enchanted” with Bambi and I thought--exactly!  It’s like he’s cast a spell, bewitched them. With his voice, his promises, his presence—not unlike how Hitler bewitched the Germans. From Friedlander:

The major question that challenges all of us is not what personality traits allowed an “unknown corporal” of the Great War to become the all-powerful leader Adolf Hitler, but rather why tens of millions of Germans blindly followed him to the end, why many still believed in him at the end, and not a few, after the end.

Not that Bambi’s Hitler, of course.  But he does have that indefinable something, that “charisma,” that Hitler had, and at present Bambi’s “charisma” seems every bit as intoxicating to his followers (and as baffling to those immune to the swoon) as Hitler’s was to the Germans. Like Hitler, too, Bambi seems to satisfy from deep-seated need to believe in the redemptive power of one man, one leader. Friedlander again:

[We] are hard put to identify the importance of charisma in a modern society functioning along the rules of instrumental rationality and bureaucratic procedures. There remains one plausible interpretation: Modern society does remain open to—possibly in need of—the ongoing presence of religious or pseudoreligious incentives within a system otherwise dominated by thoroughly different dynamics.

Or, in the words of that oft-repeated quote by G.K Chesterton, "When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing -- they believe in anything."

Update: Melanie Phillips on the politics of mass hysteria.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:00 | link | comments

Why it can’t happen here: Well, I finally finished Saul Friedlander’s Nazi Germany and the Jews 1939-1945: The Years of Extermination—by no means a quick read or an easy read (far from it, in fact, given the grim contents), but for those who want to gain a clearer understanding of the whos, hows and whys of the Holocaust, might I say, an essential read.

These lines from the final chapter are particularly pertinent for Canadians, as they explain the two primary factors that facilitated the Holocaust:

Propaganda and all the trappings of mass manipulation were an essential part of the emotional-psychological mobilization that took hold of the German population. However, without Hitler’s uncanny ability to grasp and magnify the basic urges of such a mass craving for order, authority, greatness, and salvation, the techniques of propaganda alone would not have sufficed. In that sense National Socialism could not have arisen and taken hold without Adolf Hitler on the one hand, and without the German response to Hitler on the other.

So the idea that “hate speech” gave rise to the Holocaust and that, left unchecked, Nazi "hate speech" could cause the same thing could happen here in Canada (the rationale behind playing “gotcha” with basement Nazis wearing their gotchies, and for depriving all Canadians of their right to free speech) is nothing more than a bunch of ahistoric hogwash. I wonder, though—how much if any of that crucial point will get out during this year’s Holocaust Education Week, which begins on Monday?

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:35 | link | comments

Doctor in the house: Ezra Levant has a post about Dr. Zijad Delic, national executive director of the Canadian Islamic Congress (he’s #2 to Elmo’s #1). Delic will be speaking to whoever cares to listen at Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs headquarters in Ottawa. As Ezra comments

That's right: the Jew-hating, terrorist-condoning Canadian Islamic Congress will be lecturing Canadian diplomats and bureaucrats, on government property and the taxpayers' dime.

And we voted for the Conservatives because….could someone please remind me because when I read stuff like this the reason plum escapes me.

No word yet on the subject of the “lecture,” but the event is being held in conjunction with Islamic History Month, so it’s bound to offer some of the CIC’s all-too-imitable insights into the historical record. For those unable to attend, here’s a taste of another Delic “talk”—one near and dear to the hearts of Ezra and other free speeches, as well as anti-blasphemy types like Delic and his boss (my bolds):

The fact is that a discussion of free speech cannot be divorced from a discussion of who in our society has the power to express themselves and through which medium. The limitless free speech model -- which posits that the solution to harmful and hateful speech is more and better speech -- does not work for minority communities, and our complaints illustrate that: Maclean's still refuses to publish a response to just one of more than 20 articles that even the Ontario Human Rights Commission recently condemned as contributing to Islamophobia. And that is why free speech is not limitless in our democracy.

See what I mean about the CIC’s insights being all too imitable? Why, they’re being imitated at this very moment by the CJC, the BB, and the Wiesenthalers. Too bad that Delic’s claim that we have “limitless” speech is a crock; our speech is limited to the variety that isn’t criminal or tortious. But you can see where Zijad is coming from (i.e. from an Islamic understanding of “freedom” and what “works”).

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:23 | link | comments

Tie me Internet down, sport: Australia is about to join China as the second nation that has resolved to censor Internet access.

Um, shouldn't that be a clue to the Aussies that it's a hell of a crappy idea?

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

Plain speaking in the Globe and Mail: "Jihadist found guilty of terrorist crimes." How refreshing--a headline that neither minces words nor beats around the bush.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:24 | link | comments

Razor sharp: A letter-writer in today’s National Post scales the seemingly insurmountable pile of troofer “proof” for a seemingly overwhelmed J. Kay (my bolds):

Re: Humbled By The Truthers, Jonathan Kay, Oct. 28; The Week In Letters, Paul Russell, Oct. 27.

I prefer to think that Jonathan Kay is too sensible to fret over losing his "intellectual self-esteem amidst the Truther onslaught" and that his passion for journalistic objectivity has, in this instance, gotten the better of him. Just as Paul Russell is impressed by their "rational and well-constructed" notes, Mr. Kay is inexplicably wowed by the skeptics' mastery of the "minutiae of 9/11-ology." Why is he concerned about an "informative imbalance" when that only indicates that he has a life and Truthers don't?

It's no secret, no conspiracy: Most people go to work for their families; the unbalanced spend their time positing alternative 9/11/UFO scenarios.

Mr. Russell frowns that it is "derisive" to label the conspiracists as "nutbars." Mr. Kay repents his "blithe dismissal" of them by his earlier use of the term. Why the gushing politeness?

Instead of his acquiescent silence during his aunt's dinner party, when a cousin said, "I don't buy the official [9/11] story," Mr. Kay should have replied: "Do you really ascribe to the belief that democratically elected American officials were part of a sinister cabal, capable of machinating the murder of thousands of fellow citizens in the furtherance of some murky, right-wing plot? If you do, then you need professional help."

Gary McGregor, Ladner, B. C.

You nailed it, Gary—you and Friar Occam.

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

And then my head exploded: The CJC hails its “Jews mentoring Somalis” initiative (so not my bolds):

Canada's largest Somali and Jewish community organizations chose a local high school with one of the city's largest Somali student populations as the setting for a 'groundbreaking' announcement this week.

The Jewish-Somali Project, a joint partnership between the Canadian Somali Congress (CSC), the United Jewish Appeal of Greater Toronto (UJA), the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) and the Canadian International Peace Project, will pair established Jewish professionals with young Somali university students to provide mentoring.

"Many Canadians might be surprised the Muslim and Jewish communities are coming together for this project, because often when we talk about the issues, sadly it becomes political, which only leads to strife," Bernie Farber, CEO of the CJC, said at the launch at Kipling Collegiate on Tuesday. "But today, with the Canadian Somali Congress and the Canadian Jewish Congress, the stress is on the 'Canadian' part of our names... Together, we are trying to forge a path and make a statement we haven't been able to make before. This is more than just a dialogue."

"This project is a microcosm of Canadian values. It's very Canadian, very appropriate and very urgent," added Howard English, VP Corporate Communications for UJA.

As a relatively new immigrant community, Canadian Somalis, like Jewish Canadians in years past, have been undergoing a number of growing pains as they adjust to life in Canada, said Mark Persaud, president of CIPP. "Being poor, black and Muslim only adds to those challenges," he said, noting the necessity of developing a cadre of Canadian Somali professionals to aid in the integration process.

To address the issue, the CSC invited other Canadian communities to assist Canadian Somalis in their efforts to successfully integrate into Canadian society, and the Jewish community responded to that call, Persaud said.

"Canadian multicultural policies and practices have traditionally focused on individual communities being accepted and respected in Canada.

The Jewish-Somali Project presents a paradigm shift in our approach to multiculturalism wherein two very different and diverse groups are working together to assist in building stronger communities," he said of the project, which will start in Toronto, then branch out nationally, to Ottawa first, then Edmonton, then beyond. It's a project all sponsoring organizations hope will be held up as an ideal.

"We hope this type of mutual understanding is adopted in abundance by other communities. This project is an example of what is possible in a country like Canada," said CSC's Digal Hiao.

"Today, we bring together the Muslim and Jewish communities in the Canadian context. We're not here as Muslims, we're not here as Jews. We're here as Canadians, and that's incredibly important," added James Morton, governor of the CIPP.

May I just say that several of my least favourite jargon-y phrases are embedded in the above, including “paradigm shift and “in the Canadian context.” Now that that’s out of the way, I might note that, in this world of competing universalisms—the sharia one and the man-made one—there’s no such thing as a “Canadian context”. To those who truly believe—and I’m not certain how devout the Somalis in question are, or where they stand on the issue of the Zionist entity (you might want to ask them, Bernie)—a kafir is a kafir and a dhimmi is a dhimmi whether you mentor them or not. So go ahead and mentor away, Jews and other useful idiots. It ain’t going to erase all those problematic passages in the Koran (apes and pigs, etc.); all the Hadiths (the one about the Gharkad tree--a personal fave); all the intrinsic supremacism of Islamic jurisprudence. As long as it helps you sleep better at night--dreaming sweet dreams of multiculturalism and bridge-building and mentorship and, down the road, maybe even marching arm-in-arm to Queen's Park to get the province to pay for your schools--well, I guess it's worth it, eh?

Update: Please do read Kathy Shaidle on the subject. The money sentence:

Another pathetic waste of time, as Jews once again hope against hope that by embracing their sworn enemies, they won't get killed this time around.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:00 | link | comments

He slices, he dices, he even juliennes: Mark Steyn watched the O-tel infomercial so I didn’t have to. Thanks, Mark. I owe you:

For what it's worth, I don't think the night worked for him. The last time anyone did this — Ross Perot — it was so weird a world unto itself (strange-looking guy with pie charts) that, beached between Cybill and Murphy Brown (or whatever it was back then), it had a kind of integrity and distinctiveness. This time round, The O Show followed by the Phillies followed by Jon Stewart cumulatively undermined the candidate.

For a start, the show itself was slick only in a drearily generic way. The waving wheat and music made it seem like a standard campaign commercial, only longer — "It's Morning, Noon And Night In America," which is a big enough problem thanks to the media's Obama cultists without the candidate himself piling on. As for the King Barack Meets [Insert Name Of Downtrodden Subject Here] stuff, aside from the fact that I don't recognize the hellhole this country apparently is, there's something faintly ridiculous in doing it in the middle of the Phillies winning the World Series. Maybe on Super Bowl Sunday, instead of Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunctioning, Obama could come out and interview people about how our entire rotten society is malfunctioning. And then The Daily Show kibbitzing stepped all over the infomercial even more.

This is an amazing race. The incumbent president has approval ratings somewhere between Robert Mugabe and the ebola virus. The economy is supposedly on the brink of global Armageddon. McCain has only $80 million to spend, while Obama's burning through $600 mil as fast as he can, and he doesn't really need to spend a dime given the wall-to-wall media adoration. And tonight Chris Matthews' doctors announced that his leg tingle has metastasized leaving his entire body like a vibrating cellphone whose ringtone is locked on "I'm In Love, I'm In Love, I'm In Love, I'm In Love, I'm In Love With A Wonderful Guy."

And yet an old cranky broke loser is within two or three points of the King of the World. Strange.

Let me guess, it went something like this: blather, blather, blather, “let’s all come together.” Blather, blather, blather, “a brand new day for America.” Blather, blather, blather, “hope ‘n’ change ‘n’ peace ‘n’ love ‘n’ ain’t I adorable?”

Am I close?

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:06 | link | comments

Durban II—the long and the short of it: Apparently unwilling to tackle the Matterhorn of troofer “proof,” the National Post’s Jonathan Kay has a go at decoding another pile of nonsense—the Durban II “Programme of Action”:

...The five-part "Draft Outcome Document" contains 88 pages and 646 provisions. Most of it consists of boilerplate repetition of the same small handful of themes (encapsulated well in this UN Watch report): (1) Racism is everywhere, (2) The fault for this lies with the West, because of its "genocidal" legacy of slavery and colonization, (3) "Islamophobia" and discrimination against "people of African descent" are especially prevalent and pernicious, and (4) Israel is a blight upon nations (Paragraphs 114-117 of Section 1, for instance, are dedicated exclusively to bashing the Jewish state. No other country comes in for singling out in the whole document). In many cases, whole paragraphs are repeated several times over (such as a lengthy Jimmy Carteresque screed about Israel promoting "a new kind of apartheid").

Yet buried amidst all this are some weird, and sometimes welcome, non sequiturs.

One section singles out Europe's Roma population as being especially vulnerable (true). In other parts, anti-Semitism and "Christianophobia" (a word I've never heard before) are described as serious problems. "Tribal" violence is deplored -- an implied (and deserved) knock on Africa of the type that this sort of tier-mondiste UN body typically stays far away from. There is full-throated advocacy for the rights of women and children -- despite the obvious clash with traditional Muslim social practices.

And then there's Paragraph 109 of Section 1, which calls for nations to address the memory of the "trans Saharan slave trade and the slave trade in the Indian Ocean" -- a clear reference to the Arab and Muslim contribution to the slave trade, which is usually taboo at this sort of anti-Western confab.

Even more shocking (given the number of radical Muslim states that had a hand in this document) was Paragraph 292, which "Affirms that the Holocaust, which resulted in the murder of one third of the Jewish people, along with countless members of other minorities, will forever be a warning to all people of the dangers of hatred, bigotry, racism and prejudice and recalls again that the Holocaust must never be forgotten."

Amen to that. Didn't think I'd find it here, though.

On my pet subject, freedom of speech, the document is a contradictory mess. Section 1, Para. 30 warns us, Canadian Islamic Congress-style, that Islamophobia "takes cover behind the freedom of expression" -- but then, 11 paragraphs later, the document laments, Ezra Levant-style, that the "fight against racial and religious hatred" is "being used as a pretext legitimising impermissible limitations to freedom of expression."

And then, later on, this somewhat confusing -- but not altogether censorious -- take on the subject: "285.Stresses that, as human rights are universal, interdependent, interrelated, and mutually reinforcing, the coexistence of rights does not only imply that a particular right should be seen in a restrictive manner because of the existence of another right; 286.Stresses that the right to freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society, as it ensures individual self-fulfillment and a pluralistic, tolerant society with access to multitudes of ideas and philosophies."

Sadly, that is not the document's final say on the subject. Section 5, Para. 100 "Urges States to take serious steps to address the contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and in this context to take firm action against negative stereotyping of religions and defamation of religious personalities, holy books, scriptures and symbols." (In other words, no pix of Mohammed.)

And then, in Sec. 5, Para 142, comes this especially creepy one-world-government "universal" approach to censorship: "National laws alone cannot deal with the rising tide of defamation and hatred against Muslims, especially if such trends are spreading to the grass root communities. A framework is needed to analyze national laws and understand their provisions. This could then be compiled in a single 'universal document' as guidelines for legislation – aimed at countering 'defamation of religions.'"

At other points, the text is weirdly esoteric. Paragraph 276 of Section 1, for instance, invites "the Fédération Internationale de Football Association, in connection with the 2010 Football World Cup tournament to be held in South Africa, to introduce a visible theme on non-racism in football." And then there's Sec. 1, para. 227, which is almost enough to make a reader laugh outright. It warns "that a failure of the Durban review process would, above all, pave the way for intensification of worrying racist and xenophobic trends."…

I could have saved Jonathan the trouble and boiled down the entire “programme” into two succinct statements. Statement #1: Israel has got to go. Statement #2: The world must kowtow to the universal faith of Islam—now!

There, now, that wasn’t so hard.

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:51 | link | comments

How I spent my $150 million: Bambi will shortly blitz/hijack three out of four American networks with a last minute half hour pitch.

Money talks, and the Bambino has scads of it, unlike poor, old (and I mean that literally) John McCain.

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

120: The number of children--children!--on Iran's death row.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:28 | link | comments

Enough, already: The Ceeb still wants us all to feel really awful about the travails of Maher Arar and his wife, even though they’re now swimming in moolah courtesy Canada’s guilt-ridden taxpayers:

"I lost trust in humanity, I lost trust in the system and I lost trust in myself," says Monia Mazigh, the wife of Maher Arar and author of a new book called Hope and Despair, about her struggle to free her husband from a Syrian jail.

In an exclusive interview with CBC's The Current and The National, Mazigh said she wished she could better understand what her husband went through.

"I feel the ghost of that [episode] along our lives at home, and how do I react to this? Sometimes I try to ignore it. Sometimes I'm so mad, I just want to, you know, that I can't wait ... [to] put it behind me," she says speaking from Ottawa where she lives with her husband and two children.

Mazigh's book documents her ordeal after her husband was arrested and how she campaigned to clear his name.

Mazigh worked tirelessly to free her husband from a Syrian prison, where he was held on suspicion of terrorist activity and tortured.

She became the face and voice of a campaign that attracted international attention. Her efforts led to Arar being released and ultimately vindicated.

Though her fight was very public, privately she struggled to balance her commitments as a mother with the task of fighting for her husband.

Arar emerged from the saga a changed man. And Mazigh's ordeal left profound marks on her, too…

Surely $10 million is enough to restore one's faith in the system and help heal the pair’s wounds.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:25 | link | comments

"I love arachanids": That's a line from Discovery Canada's delightful theme song--a tribute to our awesome planet. Boom dee ya da, indeed.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:55 | link | comments

"If I had a million dollars..." : I'd buy lots of cocaine, get caught red-handed (white nosed?) and get off without having to face any jail time or a criminal record.

It sure pays to be a buck nekkid lady.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:58 | link | comments

Bambi’s signature “duality”: This is Bambi’s John Hancock:

A graphologist on the JWR site claims, among other things, 

The particular graphics in his signature hint at symbolism both religious and tribal, assuming the role of a coat of arms. The signature is well balanced looking as if it could have begun on the right or left side. This facility one has if you are raised writing Arabic — moving right to left, and English — moving left to right. A duality is carefully crafted in the upright line of the O: it forms a Christian cross, it is the first letter of the Arabic alphabet the Alif, which is representative of the Islamic prophet Allah and hints at the Crescent, the symbol of Islam.

Interesting. Kind of nutty (isn't Mo the Islamic prophet?), but interesting all the same.

Update: Amir Taheri analyzes Bambi's and the Bambi mishpacha's names:  

Note that Obama wouldn't be the first politician with Muslim roots to lead a major non-Muslim country. Carlos Menem, a Muslim of Syrian descent, served as Argentina's  president from 1989 to 1999. But he dropped his Arab-Islamic first name and adopted his baptismal Christian name before entering politics.

Obama, by contrast, has retained his Arabic-Islamic names. (Barack means "blessed" and Hussein means "beautiful.") His family name is Swahili, an East African lingua franca based on Arabic. Arab commentators note that his siblings also all have Arabic Muslim names. His sister is called Oumah, Arabic for "the community of the faithful. His older daughter, Malia, bears the name of a daughter of the Caliph Othman, who commissioned the compilation of the first edition of the Koran. That Obama's stepfather was also a Muslim (from Indonesia) strengthens the empathy that many Arabs feel for him.

His sister's name is "Oumah"? Hilarious!

Update: Oumah, meet Uma (a Sanskrit name).

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:38 | link | comments

Yoga fatwa:  No more "Downward Dog" for you, spandexed kafir!

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:18 | link | comments

“The annihilation of the Jews in Palestine is the most splendid blessing for Palestine”: No, that’s not the slogan of the Duban II conference on "racism" (although it might as well be). They’re the words of a very holy personage--a righteous terror--from Gazastan.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:10 | link | comments

Whassup with the holy terror?: Out of concern for President Ahmadinejad’s precarious, er, “health,” I perused some Iranian sites, searching for clues.

Hmmm. Looks like there’s nothing in the Tehran Times. Nothing, either, in Fars News. And, go figure, IRNA is keeping mum, too.

Three strikes, he’s out?

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:00 | link | comments

Coming today: A judge will announce the verdict in the Khawaja terrorism case. Stay tuned.

Update: Guilty!

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:46 | link | comments (1)

Doe a dear: Liberal Canadians are dying to swoon for their very own Bambi, and Trudeau spawn Justin, who was just elected to his first stint in Parliament, suits them fine. According to a new poll, the untried, untested and undeniably vacuous M.P. (as one wag--okay, it was me--opined "he has his mother's looks and his mother's brains") is topping the list of Liberal leadership candidates: in its own distinctly northern way, an idea as gaga as handing the reigns of a superpower to an untried, untested and undeniably vacuous first-term senator.

There is one area in which Justin resembles Bambi, though--in the looks department. See for yourself. Here's Justin. And here's Bambi.

Dead ringers, no?

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:23 | link | comments (3)

Head shot: Ron Rosenbaum, a writer I admire and whose books I have read, claims that Barack Obama has—wait for it—“a yiddische kop”. (For those unfamiliar with tribal lingo, that means he “thinks like a Jew”):

Excuse me for caring about what might seem a parochial issue, but you don’t have to be Jewish to believe that the survival of the most democratic state in the Middle East is important. And as editor of an anthology about anti-semitism Those Who Forget the Past:The Question of Anti-semitism (Random House, 2004), I feel some responsibility to address the question, since a number of my co-religionists have raised it. (I don’t believe in God, I’m an Isaac Bashevis Singer Jew–I believe against God) but I just love the Jewish people He’s constantly abandoning, and the beautiful culture they’ve created, and I think the people of Israel are in danger of suffering a second Holocaust, because soon those who believe they don’t have a right to exist will have the means to put them out of existence).

I wonder how many anti-semites claiming only to be “anti-zionists, will join the racists commenters claiming they’re bilious hostiity has nothing to do with skin color?

Anyway I came across what I think is the best answer to the question about Obama and the Jews in this essay by Rep. Howard Berman the Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs committee in The Jeruselem (sic) Post.

I especially like the throwaway line about tough Chicago Jews knowing Obama. And I’ve always thought he had what my grandmother called a yiddische kopf (translation: savvy, nobody’s fool) to accompany what I earlier identified as the characteristic, most persuasive thing about him, his self-possession, the ability to think for himself regardless of who’s around him.

I wonder how many anti-semites claiming only to be “anti-zionist”, will join the racists commenters claiming they’re bilious hostiity has nothing to do with skin color?

I left the following comment on Ron’s site (by mistake I called him Roger, thinking of Roger L. Simon, another pajamas express writer, one who, thankfully, hasn't swooned):

The guy who, for twenty years, sat in a pew listening to the wild and occasionally antisemitic rants of Rev. Jeremiah Wright has “a yiddische kop”? The guy who likes to hang out with the likes of rabid anti-Zionist/Arafatiste Rashid Khalidi has “a yiddische kop”?

Oh, Roger. I fear you have succumbed to the swoon, and, like many in that condition, you have substituted wishful thinking for rational thought. I hope I won’t be considered “racist” if I venture that you and all the other Jewish swooners concerned about Israel’s future are in for a mighty rude awakening.

Update: This Jew for McCain.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:46 | link | comments

Troofer triumphant: Jonathan Kay’s concession that he feels daunted by the mountain of data assembled by those who believe someone other than al Qaeda (the Jews, the CIA, the Mossad, the FBI, the Trilateral Commission, Dick Cheney, the Jews, etc.) is behind 9/11 has prompted this “skeptic” to come out and have a good crow:

As Jonathan Kay notes, 9/11 skeptics have done their homework and what they read in the "official explanation for the 9/11 attacks" is what makes them skeptical. It's good to hear that Mr. Kay will be reading the 9/11 Commission Report, but it is obvious that he starts with a preconception when he calls the Popular Mechanics magazine report "authoritative" without having read it.

This is a good time to remember Mahatma Gandhi's words: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." With 39% of Canadians skeptical about the official version of 9/11, a win (full disclosure) for skeptics is on the horizon.

T. Trei, Toronto.

It is also a good time to remember the words of the Czarist police who confabulated the “troofer” tract of its day, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion: “The Jooos did it!” And let’s not forget the words of Mahatma Gandhi who, during the early going of what would become the Holocaust (a catastrophe inspired in no small measure by that troofer tract), urged the Jews to lie down and die, since “pacifism” is always better than combat.

Bearing that in mind, I think we can safely discount the “sceptics” (“true believers,” more like), no matter how much “proof” they manage to amass.

And anyway, I know for a fact that the imam with the ugly forehead icky planned the whole thing on a grassy knoll.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:04 | link | comments (1)

Talking to terrorists: Leaders of Pakistan and Afghanistan have decided that things aren’t working out so well and that it’s time to “talk to the Taliban.” And you know what that means—you can shortly expect to hear calls for us to realize that our efforts to defeat the extremists will “Dolittle,” and it's time for us to talk to them, too:

If we could talk to the Taliban,

Just imagine it,

Chatting with jihadis in Pashto.

Imagine intellectual wrangles,

Discussing all the angles.

Who knows just how far it all could go?

 

If we could talk to the Taliban,

Sit and chew the fat,

Find a way to put ‘em off their game.

They could read stuff from the Koran,

You know it won’t be borin’.

In essence, isn’t everyone the same?

 

We could converse with clerics who despise us,

And they would curse our presence in their land.

If they should ask, “Do you like the caliphate?”

Say for the helluvit, “It’s grand!”

 

If we could talk to the Taliban,

Open up that door,

Think of all the thing we could discuss.

If we could talk to the Taliban,

Flock to the Taliban,

Jaw and squeak and squawk to the Taliban,

No way they’d flock and squawk and talk to us.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:45 | link | comments (1)

The stealth jihad: Frank J. Gaffney explains yet again why we must remain on guard against the encroachments of sharia financing (and sharia in general). From FrontPage Magazine:

News item:  On Sunday, Arab News reported, “The U.S. government is currently studying the salient features of Islamic banking to ascertain how far it could be useful in fighting the ongoing world economic crisis, Robert M. Kimmitt, US deputy secretary of the Treasury, said at a press conference held at the US Embassy here yesterday.”  The newspaper went on to note that “[Kimmitt] said that experts in the US Treasury Department are currently learning the important features of Islamic banking.”

As it happens, for the better part of a year, we at the Center for Security Policy have spent a fair amount of time trying to teach U.S. Treasury Department and other government “experts” about what is euphemistically called “Islamic banking,” but better known as Shariah-Compliant Finance (SCF).  In meetings with Secretary Kimmitt and other top Treasury officials, my colleagues and I have presented them with all they really need to know about the “important features” of this growth industry.

Specifically, we shared with them a detailed legal memorandum written by one of our experts – David Yerushalmi, an attorney specializing in securities law who is deeply knowledgeable about the comprehensive theo-political-legal code that authoritative Islam calls Shariah.  Mr. Yerushalmi’s memo makes a compelling case that there is both civil liability and criminal exposure associated with SCF.

This is so because, at its core, Shariah is sedition: It explicitly espouses the violent overthrow of all secular governments and constitutions – including those of the United States – in favor of a global Islamic theocracy. The Yerushalmi memo makes clear that Shariah advisors – who play a central role in this industry as it falls to them to determine whether transactions are Shariah-compliant or not – and/or the companies that employ them appear to be involved in one or more of the following: racketeering, anti-trust violations, consumer and securities fraud or material support for terror...

No, no, no, sharia is love and peace and hearts and flowers and widows and orphans and raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens and…Okay, let’s get real: there's no such thing as a "little bit" of sharia. When it comes to God's flawless law, it's pretty much an all or nothing deal. So as soon as we allow in a "little bit" of sharia--financial, family, ritual, what have you--you can be sure that, eventually, all the little bits are going to recombine into the totality (totalitarianism) that is the indivisible, unchanging whole. At that stage our own law (man-made, democratic, subject to change) will be vanquished, and become a relic of the past.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:58 | link | comments (2)

And again: Ezra Levant has been SLAPPed with another lawsuit. This time he’s being sued by a legal eagle who works both sides of the street, offering his expertise to the Canadian Islamic Congress and the Canadian Jewish Congress.

What a guy!

Ezra claims to be as keyed up as ever, but I detect a sense of weariness in his latest post, if not at being the target of all these nuisance suits, then at having to put out his cap yet again and ask for help to defray the cost of defending them.

I left him the following mordant message:

You know what your trouble is, Ezra? You’re not a Somali. If you were a Somali, the CJC would treat you very well,  and might even be trying to “mentor” you.

Jews “mentoring” Somalis: this really is a multiculti Trudeaupia.

Update: Since the CJC and the CIC seem to be so sympatico these days, and since Canada's foremost Jewish advocacy group now feels the need to advocate on behalf of Somalis, I have a modest proposal. Why not merge the two groups into a new entity--the Canadian Jewish-Islamic Congress? Of course, given his supremacist proclivities, Elmo could insist that the "Islamic" come first, but given their proclivities, the Jews in question should have no problem with that.

Update: Welcome to the (crazy, mixed-up) World According to Farber (dar-al-Bernie)--a world in which Ezra is the enemy, but Somalis are our friends.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:39 | link | comments (7)

Coming soon to a multiplex near you: The "Redistributor". He robs from the rich and redistributes the wealth to the poor. It's Robbin' Obama--and he doesn't even wear tights.

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:06 | link | comments

A video you'll probably never see: Bambi attending a 2003 Israel-bash (in the Durban sense of the phrase) in the company of "glancing aquaintances" Rashid Khalidi, that noted Arafatiste, and the radically chic Ayers-Dorns.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:58 | link | comments

Why wait till election night?: Let's imagine Bambi West Winging it in throught the corridors of the White House right now.

On second thought, let's not.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:07 | link | comments

Jews flambé?:  Belgian broadcaster pulls Hitler-themed food show episode. It would have entailed the preparation of the Fuhrer's favourite dish.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:52 | link | comments

Lynching Palin: Some Halloween jesters have strung up an effigy of Sarah Palin.

One can do that, of course, to a white chick from Alaska and be thought "clever" and "edgy". The same would definitely not apply, though, were one to fasten a noose around the neck of a Bambi effigy.

Double effigy standards, I guess.

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

“Unity, duty, destiny”: That’s the motto of a group of Bionicles,  an ever-expanding army of spiny, spiky LEGO characters that my son has been obsessed with for several years: The army has “conquered” my rec room and is now threatening to take the upper floors. The slogan popped into my head when I read this Beeb report about how Bambi is calling for “unity” (in the wrong hands, a pretty terrying concept).

Hey, maybe he could “borrow” the slogan for his next campaign (like he “borrowed” “Yes, we can” from Sammy Davis Jr. and/or Bob the Builder for this one).

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:38 | link | comments

Hamas calling the shots (it thinks): Hamas is against Israelis going to the polls just now (because it “means the peace process has failed”) but is calling for a swift election in the West Bank.

Who died and made Hamas king?

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:11 | link | comments

Abu Dhabi do: A story about some big concert in the emirate attended by Jeremy Irons. No biggie, really; I just wanted an excuse to say "Abu Dhabi do."

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:58 | link | comments

Guess Who?: Drudge has dredged up a tape of Bambi in 2001 telling a Chicago radio host how he longs to see a “redistribution of wealth”. Whereupon the host did not—but probably should have—played this old Guess Who number. (Is it just me, or does the 70s Burton Cummings kind of look like Ugly Betty sans the bangs, braces and specs?)

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:51 | link | comments

Coming soon?: A “landslide” for Bambi? Yikes. This is the only “Landslide” I care to contemplate on this chilly morn.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:22 | link | comments

Mixed messages: This New York Times piece provides a lot more info about the hairy terror’s supposed “illness”. It seems, despite our fondest hopes for change, Ahmadinejad is not yet swimming with Big Pussy and the fishes. However, it does sound like he may be on the outs with the real powers in the land, and may never return. Could it be that the "illness" is the mullahs' way of trying to head off an impending attack by the Zionists? Guess we'll just have to stay tuned for further developements.

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

Winning hearts and minds in Hamastan: Globe and Mail stringer Carolynne Wheeler (Malarkey MacKinnon’s missus) reports from a “refugee camp” in Gaza (begging the question: how can you be a "refugee" in a land your own people control?), where one young Gazan is doing his darndest to influence the outcome of the American election:

NUSSEIRAT REFUGEE CAMP, GAZA STRIP — For every point that U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama gains ahead of the Nov. 4 election, a young student in a sparsely furnished room an ocean away is taking enormous satisfaction.

For months, Ibrahim Abu Jayyab has been working through the night, telephoning American voters at random to plead in broken English that they support his favourite candidate.

Never mind that most of the people Mr. Abu Jayyab calls don't even know where the Gaza Strip is, much less understand why this man with heavily accented English crackling down the phone line should care about the U.S. presidential race.

"Obama is the best candidate. He has leadership qualities, he is charismatic. Once he said the Palestinian people are suffering most in the world," Mr. Abu Jayyab says, his eyes heavy after another late night, already back at the computer that is his pride and joy in a life otherwise dominated by poverty. On screen is an enormous photo of Mr. Obama in a classic pose - which has, perhaps, inspired Mr. Abu Jayyab's recurring dreams, of Mr. Obama putting a hand on his shoulder and promising peace.

A media student at Gaza's al-Aqsa University, Mr. Abu Jayyab, 23, has chafed at the strict religious rule enforced since the Islamist Hamas organization took control 17 months ago. A heavy economic embargo, imposed by the international community after Hamas's refusal to recognize Israel and renounce violence, has collapsed Gaza's economy and squelched any hope of finding a decent job after graduation.

Like most in Gaza and across the Arab world, the young man blames U.S. President George W. Bush for the mess, in part for his unwavering support of Israel. So when a young, black American senator emerged as the front-runner in the Democratic primaries, he found himself hoping for change, even here in the never-changing Middle East.

Mr. Abu Jayyab, who speaks little English and at first left only practised messages on telephone answering machines, has since enlisted the help of 15 friends to use computer VOIP programs, including iCall, to randomly call U.S. telephone numbers. They frequently meet in a nearby Internet café, where they work in fear that Hamas forces or even more radical groups will burst in.

Of the dozens of calls they'll make each night between midnight and 4 a.m. - early evening in most of the United States - Mr. Abu Jayyab and his friends say they may only speak to one out of every 10 households. They've encountered answering machines, small children, and often people impatient with their Arabic-accented English.

But they press on, encouraged by small victories from people who promise to consider the request. Last week, they intensified their campaign, selecting area codes to target the swing states of Ohio and Pennsylvania. "We think if Barack Obama wins, maybe he will make a difference here for the better," said Omar Tawil, 25, a friend and computer science student who set up the computer programs necessary for their nightly mission.

It's possible that their efforts - entirely volunteer and completely unsanctioned by the Obama campaign - may do as much harm as good. Mr. Obama's campaign team has publicly distanced itself from these campaign calls, after rival John McCain's charges that Hamas supports Mr. Obama.

And in neighbouring Israel, where the Democratic Party has had a difficult time selling a man named Barack Hussein Obama, the chairman of their Israel for Obama campaign cannot quite praise Mr. Abu Jayyab's earnest efforts.

"I suppose they can say what they like," Yeshiya Amariel said, before worrying out loud about the smear campaign insinuating that Mr. Obama had ties to radical Islam. "Most people will say a Palestinian endorsement will definitely be harmful."

Mr. Obama landed himself in hot water with the powerful American Jewish lobby last year when he told a small Iowa audience that "nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people." Since then, he has worked hard to court the pro-Israel vote….

Let me get this straight: a bunch of Palestinians in Gaza are phoning random Joe the Plumbers in Ohio and Pennsylvania and leaving “vote Obama” messages in heavily Arab-accented English? Yeah, that should really help boost Obama’s fortunes. Why, if one didn’t know any better, one might think that the “powerful American Jewish lobby”—or maybe even the Mossad—is actually behind these calls, since such efforts are far likelier to help “swing” these states for John McCain.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:08 | link | comments

Quel bummer: "Peace process may be derailed by Israeli election."

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:07 | link | comments

Twitter critters: Ezra Levant has a long blog post about the apparent implosion going on over at Jen Lynch’s “human rights” Stasi. In one part  he paints a poignant—dare one say pathetic?—picture of some Jews, still clutching their tattered security blanket even as the building disintegrates around them. As Ezra points out (and not for the first time), gone are the days when a Jew could feel “secure” by playing Whack-a-Nazi and getting the CHRC to get the whacked one to cough up mucho dinero to the Jews’ self-appointed proxy, He Who Must Not Be Named; such efforts have been rendered obsolete by the Internet, an entity as big as a tsunami and as impossible to control. By coincidence, not long after reading Ezra’s post I happened to come across this. It’s a story on CNet about Twitter, technology that allows people to communicate without ever being detected (even by a Stasi).

Micro-blogging tool Twitter could be used by terrorists to coordinate attacks, according to a purported draft Army intelligence report posted on the Web.

The report--present by the 304th Military Intelligence Battalion and posted to the Federation of the American Scientists Web site--examines the possible ways terrorists could use mobile and Web technologies such as the Global Positioning System, digital maps, and Twitter mashups to plan and executive terrorist attacks.

The presentation (PDF), which was first presented earlier this month, was reported Friday by Wired magazine's Noah Shachtman. A chapter titled "Potential for Terrorist Use of Twitter," presents general , introductory information on Twitter and how it works, the report describes how it was used to report details of a recent earthquake in Los Angeles and by activists at the Republican National Convention.

"Twitter has also become a social activism tool for socialists, human rights groups, communists, vegetarians, anarchists, religious communities, atheists, political enthusiasts, hacktivists and others to communicate with each other and to send messages to broader audiences," the report said.

Twitter is already used by some members to post and/or support extremist ideologies and perspectives. Extremist and terrorist use of Twitter could evolve over time to reflect tactics that are already evolving in use by hacktivists and activists for surveillance. This could theoretically be combined with targeting. The report describes hacktivists as politically motivated hackers….

One more reason to drop the silly blankie, I’d say.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:54 | link | comments

A novel suggestion: Canada is once again in the middle of an angst-fest re its role in sending Arab-Canadians to be tortured in Syria. Here’s the Ceeb on the subject, and, to add insult to injury, here’s Harpoon Siddiqui. In the midst of the hysteria (which, admittedly, isn't quite as over the top as it was during the Arar affair) there’s one still small voice of reason—Tarek Fatah—who suggests that instead of tearing out our hair and rending our garments over our supposed culpability, we blame the torturers.

Blame the people who actually did the torture? What a concept! I doubt it'll catch on, though, since there's nothing Canadians love more than being told they're "bigots" so they can take a good, long wallow in Lake Guilt.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:02 | link | comments (2)

Behold the alternate reality: spectrezine--an offiical publication of Europe's looniest moonbats.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:31 | link | comments

Self-loathing in the Times: Having visited a number of vacation spots and witnessed first-hand the ugly spectacle of rude, vulgar, drunken, loutish Brits enjoying themselves a wee bit too much, I can understand the viewpoint of Times columnist Minette Marrin. She’s embarrassed and revolted by the behaviour of her two countrymen who defied sharia law when they almost-but-not-quite indulged in a shag on a Dubai beach:

…I have absolutely no sympathy for them but I do think that given the permissive culture of the country in which they grew up – they were born only a few years after 1968 – it is understandable, if depressing, that they themselves didn’t see much wrong with their behaviour.

From their perspective it is apparently quite normal for two strangers to meet at a hotel brunch, drink themselves silly and proceed to perform sex acts on each other in public. It is normal to insult a policeman who has the effrontery to caution them, regardless of the law, and to carry on. That is what Britons do at home and abroad. They belch, vomit, copulate, litter and barge their way through public spaces, dressed like hookers and louts, defying the police without shame or modesty. British expatriates are some of the worst: overpaid, oversexed and all over the place.

Palmer and Acors are appealing against their convictions. Yet by Palmer’s own admission, she was drunk and they were kissing and cuddling. “We didn’t have sex together,” she insisted. “I was lying on top of him.” This is rather to miss the point.

No one cares much whether DNA evidence proves that there was no exchange of bodily fluids. What went on was an affront to the standards and laws of Dubai, which all expatriates are well aware of. If you don’t like the law or the culture of another country, you should stay away. If you go there anyway, you should keep your views to yourself and when in Rome behave as the Romans.

That is not only common sense and a way of staying out of nasty foreign jails. It is more importantly an ancient moral obligation, which all healthy cultures have observed. As a guest, you must respect your host and his feelings. Everyone knows that Muslim cultures believe strongly in modesty and privacy; it is simply rude to go about half-naked or drunk and snogging and shagging in public in an Islamic country, an insult to the host culture as well as a disgrace to our own. I can’t help secretly sympathising with the senior prosecutor in Dubai who said he wished the couple had been given a longer sentence.

Is it surprising that so many Muslims around the world despise us for our decadence when we express our sympathy with British men and women who behave like this? There is something clearly despicable in the permissiveness and hyper-sexualisation of western culture; the result is broken families, unwanted children, sexual diseases and a state of agitation which drives the young into chaos and crime.

This might seem a long way from a fumble on a beach and certainly I would agree that many Muslim cultures take their modesty to extremes of repression. But the connection is there and Muslims, including British Muslims, are right to make it.

PC Plod in this country, however, does not make it. Last week a senior officer recommended that the police should turn a blind eye to sex in public, to avoid offending or distressing people seen doing so, and to protect the human rights of those who frequent open spaces to have sex, particularly those in pursuit of dogging and cottaging, who might easily be alienated or humiliated. His advice is contained in 21 pages of guidance on policing sex in public.

This is the kind of attitude that gives freedom a dirty name. No wonder so many Muslims here look down on the host culture and try to isolate their sons and daughters from its unthinking libertinism.

If we expect ethnic minorities here to respect the host culture, we should make sure it is worthy of respect. If we expect them to behave according to our standards (such as they are) when they are here, so should all British citizens respect their standards when over there.

The careless cultural imperialism of British expatriates abroad – their selfish, insensitive, sluttish behaviour – must be partly to blame for the cultural hostility and separatism that are growing among Muslim minorities at home here today. That is one good reason, among many, for not doing it in the road, either home or away.

I’ll grant that public displays of al fresco jiggery-pokery are icky no matter where they occur, and that it was foolish of those two Brits to comport themselves in that way in a land ruled by sharia. But surely there’s a happy medium between all-out drunken hedonism and forcing chicks to wear a burqa. Also, I find Ms. Marrin’s complete disdain for a culture that allows for such freedom—and her unquestioning admiration for one that doesn’t—to be more than a little disturbing. And if she thinks that "the careless cultural imperialism" of Brit expats is the reason for Muslims' "hositility," she knows squat about Islam, jihad and sharia. After all, it was the sight of a chaste dance in post-war America--and not drunken beach-snogging--that motivated Sayyid Qutb to turn against the kafirs once and for all and write the words that that would help spark the Islamic revival.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:04 | link | comments

Love’s young bomb: The Beeb has an interview with a wannabe shahida—a recent bride—who’s waiting for just the right time to transform herself and as many Zionists as possible into tiny bits of flesh and viscera:

There is a ceasefire in Gaza, but the BBC has found evidence of militant groups preparing for a return to violence. One group, Islamic Jihad, is training female suicide bombers.

Middle East correspondent Paul Wood went to meet a Palestinian woman who has volunteered.

The young, veiled woman was sitting quiet and still as the room bustled around her.

The black flag of Islamic Jihad was pinned on the wall behind her and two Kalashnikovs were carefully placed in camera shot. Her husband, an Islamic Jihad fighter himself, tied on her "martyr's" headband.

Umm Anas - not her real name - had just graduated from a programme to train female suicide bombers in Gaza.

Our meeting was a highly-orchestrated propaganda event laid on by Islamic Jihad. It was almost theatre - and certainly Israel accuses the Palestinian leadership of manipulating young women like 18-year-old Umm Anas.

Yet, although she nervously twisted her wedding ring, Umm Anas did not appear to be a cipher.

She was articulate - more so than the men staging the event - and she knew her own mind.

Secret ambition

When she spoke of becoming a suicide bomber, Umm Anas's voice was strong and steady: "This is a gift from God.

"We were created to become martyrs for God," she continued, her eyes burning behind the full face veil.

"All the Palestinian people were created to fight in God's name. If we just throw stones at the Jews they get scared. Imagine what happens when body parts fly at them."

The bomb belt which she hopes will end her life - and kill many Israelis - rested on the table next to us.

Her main motivation in becoming a suicide bomber appears to be religious rather than nationalistic - the fulfilment of a long-held ambition. Even getting married recently hadn't changed her mind.

"When my husband married me, he knew my way of thinking. He knew exactly who I am and based on this he decided to marry me. Marriage doesn't give me a second's doubt."

I asked if that would alter if she became pregnant.

"I would wait until I delivered the baby," she said. "I would give him to my parents and ask them to look after him... Then I would leave them and the baby would remain behind as a piece of me."

Her parents, brothers and sisters did not know.

"Martyrs - male or female - have to work in secret. No one can know about it. We have to be careful not to give our parents any sign of what we are about to do.

"Sometimes, maybe, they can tell and see on your face the signs of martyrdom. They are suspicious but they don't know for certain."

Ready for death

Umm Anas thinks she knows the manner of her death, but she doesn't know the timing.

She is waiting for the collapse of the Egyptian-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, the Islamic movement which rules Gaza…

Must be a real beeyotch having to sit around and wait.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:08 | link | comments

See the “multi” become “unity”: The great thing about the social doctrine of multiculturalism is that it offers a little something for everyone. It allows guilt-ridden kafirs, burdened by wealth and a history of imperialism, to feel virtuous about being so tolerant and inclusive. At the same time, it provides Islamists the opportunity to introduce sharia into the lands of Dar al Harb—under the guise of tolerance and inclusiveness. So you see, everyone is happy—for now anyway. (Once sharia gains more traction, it isn’t as much fun for the kafirs, who find themselves changed into dhimmis.) Islam Online has a report about revellers—happy Muslims and happy dhimmis—who are happily attending a huge multicultural fete in London (my bolds):

CAIRO — Bringing together thousands from all around the world, Europe's largest Muslim event opened in Britain on Saturday, October 25, with the focus of promoting multiculturalism.

"Global Peace and Unity conference is by far the largest event of its kind in Europe and may be in the West as a whole," GUP Chairman Mohamed Ali told IslamOnline.net.

The two-day conference, held at Excel Conference and Exhibition Center, brings together luminaries and celebrity guests from around the world.

Leading among attendees are Danish Imam Abdul Wahid Pedersen, American Muslim scholar Yusuf Estes and British Muslim singer Yusuf Islam.

Also attending British Secretary of Justice Jack Straw, Muslim MP Shahid Malik and Lord Nazir Ahmed.

"We at the GPU do strive every year to have some addition, at spiritual level we are having one of the Imams of the holy mosque and the muezzin of prophet's mosque, and of course the Kiswah (curtains) of the Ka`bah, and the two models of the two holy mosques," said Ali.

"We are also expanding on awards especially friends of Islam awards and education awards."

The conference is organized by the free-to-air, English language, Islamic-focused Islam Channel for the fourth consecutive year.

Multiculturalism

Themed "Working Towards A Multi-cultural Society", this year's conference aims to promote peaceful coexistence between Muslims and non-Muslims.

"It has a yearly theme this year being towards a multicultural society," Ali told IOL.

Organizers seek to make the conference a platform for an effective dialogue with non-Muslims.

A number of major interfaith groups have been invited to address the conference on promoting dialogue and building bridges across faiths, communities and societies.

"Our aim is always to build confidence among our Muslim Ummah and to be proud being Muslims," he said.

"We also want to engage with the wider society in a positive way."

The Muslim population in Britain is estimated at nearly two million.

"The Muslim community, so rich and diverse in itself, makes an enormously valuable contribution to our society," Straw said in a statement ahead of GUP opening.

"Those of us who are not Muslims but have the privilege of knowing and working with Muslims can testify to that.

"This event is a great opportunity to demonstrate this contribution, whilst challenging stereotypes and reasserting shared values. It is through unity that we will achieve peace."

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:47 | link | comments (2)

Little Mahmoud swimming with the fishies?: There’s still no sign of the hairy terror, although a “close associate” says he isn’t ill, as has been previously reported, but is suffering from a bad case of exhaustion. From The Press Association:

A close associate of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says the Iranian president has fallen ill under the strain of his position.

Mohammad Ismail, a parliament member and close ally of the Iranian president, said Mr Ahmadinejad was sick "but will eventually heal".

The Iranian president reportedly works a 20 hour day and has not appeared in public since Tuesday.

State television said he participated on Saturday in the funeral ceremony for recently discovered remains of soldiers from the 1980s Iran-Iraq war, but showed no images of him.

My take: Either he really is exhausted due to his punishing work sched and will re-emerge in due course, or the mullahs have sent him to visit Big Pussy, if you catch my meaning.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:16 | link | comments

Standing pat: William Kristol explains why he will not be joining the putative right-wingers who have hitched a last-minute ride on the Bambi bandwagon, but agrees that the Bambi “narrative” is awfully compelling:

It's always darkest before it goes totally black. This is one of John McCain's favorite remarks, ascribed (apocryphally, it seems) to Chairman Mao. Well, with 10 days to go before the election, it's getting pretty dark out there.

Still, we hope for a McCain-Palin victory, for the sake of the country. And also for the pleasure of seeing the dejection of the mainstream media, the incredulity of the leftwing triumphalists, and the humiliation of the pathetically opportunistic "conservatives" who've been desperately clambering on board the Obama juggernaut. We're proud to stay off that juggernaut. We're proud, in our modest way, to stand with John McCain and Sarah Palin against it.

An Obama-Biden administration--working with a Democratic Congress--would mean a more debilitating nanny state at home and a weaker nation facing our enemies abroad. We, of course, have confidence that the nation would survive such an interlude, and we would even hope that a President Obama might adjust course from the path he's advertised, especially in foreign policy. But the risk of real damage is great, especially when compared with the prospect of a tough-minded center-right McCain-Palin administration that could lead the country sensibly through these difficult times.

Reading the endorsements of Obama in the liberal media should strengthen the determination of all believers in American self-government and greatness to fight this election campaign to the end. Time magazine's Joe Klein tells us that Obama "seems a grown-up, in a nation that badly needs some adult supervision." To the contrary, we are a nation of adults. We don't need the "supervision" of a conventionally liberal and totally untested junior senator whose most impressive lifetime achievement has been the construction of an effective narrative about himself…

I think I read that narrative. It was called What Makes Bambi Run?

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

Boo!: Just in time for Halloween, the Toronto Star’s Lynda Hurst raises fears about a terrifying spectre—crypto-bigots who may be messing with the pollsters and skewing their results:

It's the elephant that's been moving in and out of the room all year: To what extent will Barack Obama's skin colour affect the outcome of the U.S. election?

Ten days before the vote, the history-making black Democrat has a substantial lead in the polls. If he were white, victory would now be seen as likely, if not a sure thing. But no matter how good it looks, Obama's strategists aren't counting their political chickens just yet.

Only on the night of Nov. 4 will they know if the polls were inflated by white Americans lying about their voting intentions. Only then, how many Obama supporters got cold feet inside the polling booth, or how many young people, so vociferous in their approval of him, didn't bother turning out.

If Obama goes into election day significantly ahead of Republican John McCain and then loses, the reason almost certainly will be tagged as racism.

Sociologists say about 10 per cent of the U.S. electorate is out-and-out, unapologetically racist. Obama's staff has factored them into the equation. The Big Unknown, however, is the impact of voters who are closet racists and those who are subconsciously prejudiced.

Closet racists know who they are, but don't publicly admit it. "It's not cool to be racist," says Phillip Goff, a social psychologist at the University of California (Los Angeles). In post-civil rights America, discrimination keeps itself hidden – he calls it "racism without racists."

Conversely, subconscious racists have no idea they're anything of the sort and would vehemently deny the charge. Yet a mass of research suggests at least 50 per cent of Americans are unwittingly biased.

"Subconscious racism is a huge problem," says Goff, who, like Obama, is biracial. "No one knows the extent of it, not the social scientists, not the pollsters, not anyone. I'm talking about white liberals, well-educated people who've grown up in multiracial urban centres, the `some of my best friends' types."

Two leading U.S. researchers in the field coined the term "aversive" racism after a series of experiments showed how unconscious bias affects whites' decision-making in hiring and school admissions. When a black applicant has superior qualifications, aversive whites have no problem choosing him. But when a black and a white candidate are equally qualified, the white one is picked 76 per cent of the time.

"The outcome is exactly the same as old-fashioned racism, though the bias is more subtle," says Yale social psychologist John Dovidio. "Racism is like an old virus that has mutated into a new form."

Aversive racism doesn't mean hatred or hostility toward blacks, he says, but "uncertainty, doubt, anxiousness. People automatically identify with their own group or tribe; it's how we've evolved. Race, like sex, is a tribe marker."

Dovidio's co-researcher, Sam Gaertner of the University of Delaware, says aversives are "people who look at themselves in the mirror and think, `I'm a good guy.' They couldn't maintain their self-image if they thought they discriminated."

They may see Obama as the superior candidate, but at the back of their minds, they worry about the "black baggage" he might bring with him into the White House. The idea of controversial race activists such as Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton getting jobs in an Obama administration scares them.

"You can see the fear existing in some people that he'll bring `other ones,' " says Gaertner…

Nothing like manufacturing a phantom menace—something we here in Canada know a lot about, what with all our “scary” basement Nazis. If by some chance Bambi loses, though, you just know you’re going to be hearing the words “aversive racism” over and over again.

Posted by: scaramouche at 23:35 | link | comments

Elmo AWOL?: There hasn't been a new entry on the Canadian Islamic Congress's website since August 22. Have the Islamists gone into hiding?

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:59 | link | comments (1)

Binks’ query:  The enigmatic presence behind the freemarksteyn site asks

[Do] you know anybody remotely like Obama? I’ve been lucky to know and work with some fine politicians on the local and provincial level (and if you count Ezra, nationally, I suppose), but never came across anybody with such a scary past, and so many bad friends– (outside the Chretienites, but I didn’t know any of them). As somebody below asks, did Obama ever meet a bad idea or a creep that he said ‘No!’ to? It goes back to what I said a week or two ago: here’s a rootless, semi-unparented soul adrift, and picking up barnacles, and drifting into whirlpools. He needs therapy and supervision, not a Presidency.

That line about him being rootless and semi-unparented is one of the best—and probably the shortest—explanations of who and what Bambi is that I’ve ever read.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:33 | link | comments (4)

Same old song: Is there any significant difference between what's about to occur at Durban II, with its calumnies about the Jewish state, and age-old Judenhass which, in Medieval times, manifested itself as calumnies about "the Jews" contaminating the water supply? I--and Ms. Eydie Gorme--think not:

Seems they were the first

To have a single God.

As the idols fell,

Pagans thought it odd.

Afterwards came more

Confirmed monotheists,

And soon enough the Jews endured their fists.

 

Blame it on the Chosen People

With their magic spells.

Blame in on the Chosen People;

Poisoned all the wells.

Oh, it all began with just one little Abe

But then it ended up with lots of graves.

Blame it on the Chosen People

When all else fails.

 

Now, was it the Jews?

(Yes, yes, the Chosen People)

Or the irrational?

(Who slew the Chosen People)

Who had the most to lose?

(Yes, yes, the Chosen People)--

Scapegoat of choice.

 

Now I’m sad to say

Nothing’s changed at all.

They’re still blaming Jews.

Want ‘em all to fall.

Even though we shout:

“No, not e’er again.”

The crazies still all want to do us in.

 

Blame it on the Chosen People

With their magic spells.

Blame in on the Chosen People.

Poisoned all the wells.

Oh, it all began with just one little Abe

But then it ended up with lots of graves.

Blame it on the Chosen People

When all else fails...

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:00 | link | comments

Diametrically-opposed brunettes: The Sarah who was Miss Wasilla; and the Sarah who (maybe) misses Jimmy and who wants to shlep everyone’s Bubby and Zaidy away from the early-bird special to vote against MissWasilla.

I always get those two mixed up.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:26 | link | comments

Have some sharia, m'dear?: Yes, please.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:08 | link | comments

Easier to swallow: Given a choice been the unpalatable and the uneatable, Mark Steyn opts for the latter:

Across the electric wires, the hum is ceaseless: Give it up, loser. Don't go down with the ship when it's swept away by the Obama tsunami. According to newspaper reports, polls show that most people believe newspaper reports claiming that most people believe polls showing that most people have read newspaper reports agreeing that polls show he's going to win.

In the words of Publishers' Clearing House, he may already have won! The battleground states have all turned blue, the reddest of red states are rapidly purpling. Don't you know, little fool? You never can win. Use your mentality, wake up to reality. Why be the last right-wing pundit to sign up with Small-Government Conservatives For The Liberal Supermajority? We still need pages for the coronation, and there's a pair of velvet knickerbockers with your name on it.

Yes, technically, this is still a two-party state, but one of the parties is like Elton John's post-Oscar bash and the other is a church social in Wasilla. As David Sedaris put it in The New Yorker:

"I think of being on an airplane. The flight attendant comes down the aisle with her food cart and, eventually, parks it beside my seat. 'Can I interest you in the chicken?' she asks. 'Or would you prefer the platter of s--t with bits of broken glass in it?'

"To be undecided in this election is to pause for a moment and then ask how the chicken is cooked."

Well, to be honest, I've never much cared for chicken...

I heard a “comedian” on Ceeb radio this morning describe it as being a choice between a handsome young dude and an ugly old “gargoyle”. No question as to who’s more appealing: I’ll have the roast gargoyle, please.

Posted by: scaramouche at 16:47 | link | comments

Not so easy peasy: According to the most recent Nobel Peace Prize laureate (some guy from Finland), it’s scandalous that the world has not yet managed to “solve” the Israel-Palestine problem. He attributes the lack of a resolution to a failure of “will”. From the Jerusalem Post:

Nobel Peace Prize winner Martti Ahtisaari said Saturday it is a disgrace that the international community has not managed to resolve the conflict in the Middle East, blaming the failure on a lack of political will.

In an interview with Swedish Radio, Ahtisaari said he was ashamed that neither Europe nor the US have been capable of reaching a solution yet.

"How can we, year after year, seriously say that we are trying to reach a solution when we aren't?" he asked. "I'm ashamed, I have to admit that."

The broadcaster also quoted him as saying he hoped the next US president would use his first year in office to try find a permanent solution in the Middle East.

"If the political will is there, we can solve anything. It is clear a Palestinian state is needed," Ahtisaari said, adding that the Israelis need to be guaranteed peace.

"If people would sit down and negotiate we would quickly reach a plan," he said.

A former Finnish president and an international peacemaker, Ahtisaari won the 2008 peace prize for three decades of working to resolve international conflicts around the world.

In the interview, Ahtisaari criticized the Western boycott of Hamas, and said it may soon be time to admit that "we have to speak with the Taliban" in Afghanistan instead of just sending troops to the country.

Now I’m hardly in the same category as this distinguished gentlemen, and will likely never win a Nobel Prize, but after years of investigation and cogitation I have arrive at the following conclusion which I am happy to share: there is no “solution” that will satisfy those both those who believe that the Jews are entitled to have their own state (the Muslims, after all, have 57) and those who want to see “justice” for the Palestinians. I would also note that “peace” means different things to Westerners and followers of Islam—perhaps the biggest impediment to arriving at a “solution”.  My message to the august—and intrusive—Finn: the “peace process,” to borrow a phrase from the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, could definitely benefit from a period of benign neglect.

Posted by: scaramouche at 16:29 | link | comments

Jewsical: Some years ago I penned what I assumed was an unproducable musical version of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. I called it Elders! After reading this timesonline article about a soon-to-open West End Holocaust musical, though, (it is not, you’ll be relieved to know, called Ovens!) I’m thinking seriously of shopping it around:

A few questions: can an unknown new musical with no big stars be a hit? Can an unknown new musical with no big stars be a hit as the West End in London copes with the recession? And, perhaps most importantly, can an unknown new musical – set in the Warsaw ghetto in 1942 – with no big stars be a hit as the West End copes with the recession?

This is the challenge that the team behind Imagine This has embraced. In a small Southwark rehearsal studio the ensemble is going through an intense sequence set near the ghetto walls. Old furniture is piled up at the side of the room. About 20 blue plastic pistols litter the floor. The smell of sweat fills the air. If perspiration sold tickets Imagine This would be booking beyond the next Olympics. But, all things considered, they have a mountain to climb.

For the people behind the show this is clearly a labour of love. The director, Tim Sheader, is currently the artistic director of Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre. After helming Gigi this is anything but a walk in the park, but he does not feel that the subject is particularly controversial.

“In terms of subject matter it starts from where Cabaret left off. We don’t go into Auschwitz, but we start with the incarceration. Cabaret was provocative and new when it opened, but since then there have been plenty of movies that have covered this area – Schindler’s List, The Pianist, Life is Beautiful – so we are following in the footsteps of commercial work.”

Stage, however, is very different from screen, as Liam Steel, the choreographer, acknowledges: “Theatre doesn’t have the luxury of film. We have to work really hard covering a very long time-span very quickly and still hit the gut. The very first song, The Last Day of Summer, starts with freedom in 1939 and ends in imprisonment in 1942.”

The action draws on Jewish history with the bulk of it taking place in a play-within-the-play. The ghetto inmates decide to act out the 2,000-year-old story of the siege of Masada, when 936 rebels committed mass suicide rather than be captured by the Romans. The resonances do not need to be spelt out. Meanwhile, a resistance fighter is hiding from the Nazis and a young woman falls for him. Can love bloom with tragedy looming?

Imagine This was due to be staged on Broadway in 2005 but a financial hiccup intervened. It had a brief run in Plymouth last year, when backers were impressed enough to finance this West End opening. Sheader is excited at the prospect of a meaty show. “I’m sick to death of seeing another rehash: Take That, Rod Stewart. Hen night theatre has its purpose but there is more to musicals than having a laugh.”

The team all cite Sweeney Todd and Les Misérables to argue that dark subject matter and massive success are not mutually exclusive. They may have a point. In Spain earlier this year an Anne Frank musical was a hit, while American Psycho: The Musical is Broadway-bound. But regardless of subject matter, Imagine This has its work cut out. When cash is tight theatregoers may opt for escapism. And there is no real bill-topper. The biggest name is Peter Polycarpou, who starred in Phantom of the Opera and can certainly belt out a tune, but who lacks a Michael Ball/Crawford fanbase.

Sheader is determined: “It’s a gamble, but it has to work on the strength and integrity of the piece. It is a celebration of the human spirit. I’d find it far more difficult to sit here and convince you that The Producers would be a hit,” he argues. “That kind of pastiche and irony is tougher, this is honest and on the nose.” But can being on the nose put bums on seats?..

Must. Resist. Temptation. To turn that delightfully skewed metaphor—“Can Being on The Nose Put Bums on Seats?”—into a “cheeky” show stopper.

Update: And now, a number from Elders! (Note: the penultimate verse is new):

Consider all historical calamity;

The war, the pain, the fear and insanity.

We like to claim, with no trace of vanity—

It’s ours, ours, ours!

 

Seven Years, Hundred Years, ev’ry duration

Of warfare and strife throughout ev’ry nation,

Conduct a little investigation—

It’s ours, ours, ours.

 

Behind revolutions, both French and Russian,

Populations we’re fond of crushin’,

Wells that are poisoned and johns that ain’t flushin’

They’re ours, ours, ours!

 

Wars between States and ‘tween Roses—ours!

The Cold War we suppose is—ours!

Some war we can’t even disclose is—ours!

It’s ours, ours, ours.

 

Unrest in southern Albania—ours!

The onset of mania in Spain-ia—ours!

The sinking of the Lusitania—ours!

It’s ours, ours, ours!

 

Trouble that’s murky and vague—ours!

Civil unrest in The Hague—ours!

A little old thing like the Plague—ours!

It’s ours, ours, ours!

 

Turkish synagogue bombings—we plotted for hours.

Silence and subterfuge—part of our powers.

And somehow we toppled those big ol’ Twin Towers.

It’s ours, ours, ours.

 

Sub-prime mortgages that lured the unsuspecting;

A burst Wall Street bubble—Depress’ resurrecting;

Egregious greed is what you’re detecting.

It’s ours, ours, ours!

 

There’s nothing you can do to please us

Nothing that can e'er appease us

And don’t forget, we also killed Jesus.

He was ours, ours, ours!

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:30 | link | comments

York warfare: Don't miss glossy, upscale mag Toronto Life's article about York University (a little piece of Gaza in the Hogtown 'burbs) and the fecklessness of its administrators in dealing with festering campus hostilities between the Arabs and the Jews.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:49 | link | comments

Life imitates me: Coming soon to a former superpower near you (maybe)--a "Department of Peace". (link via LGF)

Or as I called it "the Department of Hugs and Smiles" (to be headed up by Bambi-revert Colin Powell?).

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:39 | link | comments

The Beeb pussyfoots, obfuscates and makes things a whole lot worse:  PM’s Mike McNally writes about something that has been obvious for a long time but which has been conceded only recently—the Beeb’s inclination to tread extra gently when it comes to Islam:

The head of the BBC, Mark Thompson, has finally admitted what many of us have long known: that his organization treats Islam more respectfully than it does other religions. In a speech to a religious think tank, Thompson claimed the BBC has to treat Islam with greater sensitivity because Muslims are a minority in Britain and aren’t fully integrated into society.

The BBC’s “sensitivity” has for several years manifested itself in news reports that offer excuses for Islamist terrorism, most commonly by linking radicalization to British and American foreign policy. The failure of many Muslims to integrate, while acknowledged by Thompson, is invariably blamed by the BBC on poverty, injustice, and racism on the part of less enlightened sections of the British public. And the words “Muslim” and “Islam” are invariably omitted from stories about honor killings and forced marriages; such crimes are instead framed as issues for Britain’s “Asian community” to address, to the consternation of reform-minded Muslims and non-Muslim British Asians alike.

The BBC’s kid-gloves approach to all things Islamic isn’t limited to its news coverage — it informs the corporation’s fictional output too and stands in stark contrast to its apparent eagerness to offend Christians. So, while viewers are treated to Jerry Springer: The Opera and numerous shows in which Christians are portrayed as either idiots or villains, the producers of a popular hospital drama last year scrapped a storyline about a Muslim suicide bomber for fear of causing offense.

Few of the BBC’s critics would seriously suggest that the broadcaster should refrain from satirizing religion (the obvious solution for people who think they’re going to be offended by a program is not to watch it); they ask only that the BBC be as “fearless” in dealing with issues surrounding Islam as it is in its treatment of Christianity. But of course that’s not going to happen.

Thompson attempted to justify the BBC’s blatant double standard in his speech, telling his audience:

What Christian identity feels like it is about to the broad population is a little bit different to people for whom their religion is also associated with an ethnic identity which has not been fully integrated.

There’s no reason why any religion should be immune from discussion, but I don’t want to say that all religions are the same. To be a minority I think puts a slightly different outlook on it.

Thompson is certainly right to assert that Muslims are not “fully integrated” into British society. And one of the reasons why many Muslims feel no obligation to assimilate is that the BBC, along with other proponents of multiculturalism, has for years been telling them that they don’t have to integrate…

Kind of ironic, no? But then abject fear can often make one do some foolish things.

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

 The election isn’t over until the moose-hunting beauty pageant contestant sings: The Toronto Sun’s Salim Mansur is dubious about the polls and thinks “Middle America” will end up putting McCain and the Alaskan over the top:

…The only thing certain about the 2008 election, as with previous ones, is its close finish and the vote from Middle America again will be decisive.

Middle America is the last redoubt of freedom, protective of the first two amendments to the U.S. constitution, and egalitarian while rejecting the equality of the socialist ant heap.

Here Americans instinctively understand the words Thucydides put in the mouth of Pericles, the great Athenian hero, "Happiness depends on being free, and freedom depends on being courageous."

Middle America in this 2008 election has the face of Joe the Plumber alongside Sarah Palin. Joe the Plumber has become the everyman of American politics and with his simple question to Obama he unmasked the Democratic nominee's hidden Marxian economic policy -- from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs -- to "spread the wealth around."

Middle America is the flyover country for the coastal left liberals. Here resides the vast silent majority that has witnessed for the past 40 years radical Americans such as the unrepentant terrorist and self-confessed anarcho-communist Bill Ayers trash their country. The New York Times on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001 quoted Ayers, an associate of Obama, saying "I don't regret setting bombs. I feel we didn't do enough." Middle America on its part has voted for the Republican ticket in seven of the past 10 presidential elections.

Joe the Plumber representing Middle America will not vote for Obama and his far left liberal views. He understands without prompting Obama's foreign policy is what the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan -- the highly respected Democratic senator from New York and a great patriot -- noted in referring to president Jimmy Carter's foreign policy, "Unable to distinguish between our friends and our enemies, he has essentially adopted our enemies' view of the world."

Middle America watched the collapse of Soviet Communism in 1991 while extending the frontiers of freedom in distant lands.

ILLOGICAL

It is far fetched and illogical to expect Middle America to deceive itself to vote a candidate into the White House whose worldview acknowledges at a minimum the validity of Karl Marx's destructive ideology…

I’d say it all depends on who ends up heading to the polls on election day. If there are more Joe the Plumbers than Tinsel Town lefties; more NASCAR fans than Sarah Silverman/Tina Fey/Jon Stewart fans; more alter cockers than little green sprouts, then McCain has a shot. If not, then not.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:56 | link | comments

Justice postponed: Omar Khadr’s day of judgement has been put on hold for now, and his family couldn’t be more pleased by the news. From CP via the Edmonton Sun:

TORONTO — Family members of Canadian detainee Omar Khadr said Friday that yet another delay in his war-crimes trial beyond the installation of a new U.S. president bodes well for him.

Reacting to news that a military commission judge hearing pretrial motions had set a start date of Jan. 26, 2009, Khadr’s mother expressed delight.

“Oh good,” Maha Elsamnah said from her home in Toronto. “His lawyers kept asking us to pray (for the delay).”

Both U.S. presidential candidates have said they would shut the prison at Guantanamo Bay if elected, though it remains unclear what might happen to Khadr if that happens.

Speaking from Parliament Hill where she’s on a hunger strike, Khadr’s sister Zaynab Khadr was upbeat about the delay.

“It’s a good thing,” she said. “The Bush administration is not going to be able to use Omar to justify their detention centre.”

Zaynab Khadr, 29, has been consuming only water and fruit juice for the past three weeks in an effort to press Prime Minister Stephen Harper to repatriate her brother.

Harper has steadfastly refused, saying the internationally maligned legal proceedings against Khadr, who was just 15 when captured by U.S. forces, have to run their course.

“I’m hoping (the delay) will give the Canadian people and government more time to do the right thing and bring him home,” Zaynab Khadr said.

 “If he has to be tried, it should be in a Canadian court.”…

Why? Did he allegedly kill a Canadian soldier? Does a Canadian court have jurisdiction over something a “Canadian” (by virtue of his passport, not his domicile or allegiance) is said to have done to an American over in Afghanistan? Of course not.  In any case, it appears that Sissy and Mama are pretty sure it’s never going to come to that since “President” Obama is going to spring the lad sans court time.

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

On censorship, blasphemy, Durban II and doggedly clueless Jews: The National Post has an interesting report about Durban II, the upcoming UN “racism” conference that dresses up the OIC’s eliminationist agenda (Israel’s demise being top of mind with these Muslims) in the sheep’s clothing of “human rights.” The most intriguing part of the piece—at least for someone like me who’s been disgusted by the Canadian Jewish Congress’s reaction to the Danish ‘toon controversy, its ongoing commitment to state censorship via HRCs, and its desire to “build bridges” with false friends like Harpoon Siddiqui—are these words by the CJC’s fearful leader (ever on the prowl for scary, cellar-dwelling Hitler-idolizers in small town Alberta):

…Bernie Farber, CEO of the Canadian Jewish Congress, says, "It is everything we had thought it was going to be, and more. What it proves is that the decision reached by Prime Minister [Stephen] Harper months ago to pull out of Durban 2 was a sound one. He was very much a man ahead of his game on this."

Different this time from Durban 1, which concluded only days before the 9/11 attacks, is the conference's focus on what delegates perceive as worldwide, endemic "Islamophobia ... and the worsening of the situation of Muslim minorities around the world" since 2001.

It labels "counterterrorism or national security" and "freedom of expression" in Western countries as "obstacles in hampering progress in the collective struggle against racism." The draft demands "binding international standards" to "take firm action against negative stereotyping of religions and defamation of religious personalities, holy books, scriptures and symbols" and wants states to "encourage objective and balanced" portrayals of "people, events and history, especially in the media." It wants governments to adopt laws "preventing and punishing" intolerance in "public and private life."

"This is the new dimension of Durban 2, which in many ways makes it a greater threat than Durban 1," says Anne Bayefsky, a York University professor and human rights lawyer who attended last week's Geneva conference.

"It's really setting up a war of ideas, that has rough implications, between Islamic states and everybody else.... Durban 1 was called an assault on Israel; a demonization of Israel as racist and analogous to Apartheid South Africa." Durban 2 looks as if it will have all that, too, she says. "But in addition, Durban 2 is an assault on freedom of expression and other essential democratic rights and freedoms."

The irony, she says, is that Asian and Middle Eastern countries pushing for tougher restrictions are often the world's worst rights abusers. Even Mr. Farber, a vocal supporter of Canada's own hate-speech laws, calls the draft's speech codes "hugely troubling" as they appear to severely tilt the balance of rights; an "attempt to criminalize anything seen to be offensive."…

Tell me, Bernie, what will it take for you to have that “eureka” moment, that epiphany that hits you—kapow!—smack in the middle of the forehead so that the lights finally, finally, go on and you can see without a glimmer of a flicker of a doubt that what’s occurring at the international level is exactly the same as what’s happening here in Canada—i.e. that Muslims pushing the eliminationist agenda are endeavouring to shut us up because they want to be able to control the conversation? And, cleverly, they are doing so not by saying, “Hey, you dhimmis, knock it off with the blasphemy and let us, the true believers, take the lead”—because that would tip off even the most clueless multiculti bridge-builder to their totalitarian intentions. They are claiming that it's a matter of “human rights” (their rights, naturally) to force us to put a sock in it and to never, ever, take it out.

Get it? Capiche? Anybody home?

Now can we get rid of our “human rights” commissars and stop rewarding obsessive-compulsive “Nazi”-trolling weirdos?

Update: Kathy Shaidle 'splains it--think Gov. William Lepetomane in Mel Brooks' Blazing Saddles.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:40 | link | comments (5)

Dief is the Chief: For all those who are stirred by John George Diefenbaker’s words about freedom in Canada pre-Trudeaupia, here’s Stingband’s immortal tribute to the old blue-eyed be-dewlapped Saskatchewaner. Scroll down to the bottom of the page and you can hear the entire song; if you want to follow along, these are the lyrics (it has bits that would now be regarded as being poltically incorrect, but that's part of its charm:

In nineteen hundred and fifty-seven,
When you was just a kid in school,
And Cassius Clay was an amateur,
Boxing down in Louisville,
Dief come out of Prince Albert,
And he said he was a man with a dream,
Now in seventy-four Clay's the champ once more,
And I know Dief will be the Chief again.

[Chorus:]
Dief is the Chief, Dief is the Chief,
Dief will be the Chief again,
Everybody's happy back in '57,
And nobody's happy since then,
There was law in the land, order in the home,
Swimming in the river back then,
But I know in my heart, that Dief will be the Chief,
And a dollar worth a dollar again.

Well he lost in '25, and he lost in '26
And '29, but he never lost heart,
He lost in '33 and he lost in '38,
And the '40s was mostly dark,
But in '53 he married Olive,
And together they ruled the land,
And with Olive by his side, the queen of his heart,
Deif will be the Chief again.

[Chorus as above]

Now we got a man up in Ottawa,
He got cold water in his veins,
You know that he don't give a shit about you,
And he don't hear when you complain,
But Dief come out of Prince Albert,
He was raised in the prairie grain,
And he always had a hand for the working man,
Dief will be the Chief again.

[Revised Chorus:]
Dief is the Chief, Dief is the Chief,
Dief will be the Chief again,
Everybody's happy back in '57,
And nobody's happy since then,
There's a famine in the land, a mortgage on the home,
And strikes without any end,
But I know in my heart, that Dief will be the Chief,
And a dollar worth a dollar again.

He's Chief Walking Buffalo to the people of the Sioux,
Honorary Chief Eagle to the Cree,
He's a customary colonel up in Saskatoon,
And a personal acquaintance of the Queen,
He's about to stand a Kinsman, a Kiwanis man too,
And he's 80 on September 18,
And he always had a hand for the working man,
Dief will be the Chief again.

Posted by: scaramouche at 01:09 | link | comments

False advertising: In 100% cotton:

Obviously, a t-shirt that has never encountered a Canadian "human rights" apparatchik.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:35 | link | comments

The usefulness of Grammy 'Bama: When he ran into a spot of bother about his "spiritual leader," he had no compunction about throwing the white woman who raised him under the wheels of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright express. (Grammy was described as being a "typical" white person in that she was expressed some hesitation about encountering large large African-American gentleman when she was out and about on her own (a trait her ever-loving grandson portrayed as evidence of the inherent racism of all light complected persons--which is kinda, sorta racist itself, when you think about it). Now that Grammy is ailing, Bambi is racing to be at her side in Hawaii (the state where he was raised), and the Bambi-besotted media is playing up the reunion for all its worth.

Here's hoping the old gal manages to stick around until her beloved grandson wins the White House, but if you go by the media, at the moment things are looking mighty grim for Grammy.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:47 | link | comments

Virtual murder (revenge for virtual divorce): You knew it was bound to happen sooner or later. From the timesonline:

A Japanese piano teacher has been arrested for the murder of her virtual husband after an abrupt but messy online divorce.

The 43-year-old from Kyushu province in southern Japan faces a maximum sentence of five years in jail if she is found guilty of killing off her digital partner.

She is accused of hacking into the profile of a 33-year-old office worker from Sapporo 620 miles away, whose avatar on the Maple Story computer game was married to her character until he unexpectedly demanded a divorce.

The spurned make-believe wife was so angry at being jilted that she logged into the game using her partner’s password and destroyed the character that he had spent a year creating.

She was arrested at home in Miyazaki yesterday on suspicion of illegal access on a computer and manipulating electronic data, according to police in Sapporo where she is being detained. The woman has not been formally charged. If convicted she could be jailed or fined up to £3,100.

An official in northern Sapporo reported that she confessed to the crime when questioned, allegedly telling police: “I was suddenly divorced, without a word of warning. That made me so angry.”

The woman had not plotted any revenge in the real world, the official said…

It could have been worse. Her real husband could have text messaged “I divorce you” three times.

Posted by: scaramouche at 15:53 | link | comments

Poetry in motion: The Canadian Arab Federation cordially invites you to attend the Palestinian Film Festival. This year’s fête will feature the poetic stylings of the lovely and talented Suheir Hammad, a Hip Hip Emily Dickinson with a definite anti-Zionist vibe. Here’s some info about her:

Poetry has always been a big part of Suheir Hammad's life.

Born in 1973, Hammad was raised in a culture where the Quran was considered to be God's epic poem.

"As a child I had this sense that God was a huge poet," she said. "We can all be part of this larger narrative because of the scripture."

Hammad combined her cultural beliefs with the hip-hop influences of her hometown of Brooklyn to become a celebrated poet who has performed on HBO's Def Poetry Jam.

She was raised with traditional family values and the idea to keep "looking for the other side of the story" by her parents who are Palestinian refugees.

She grew up with family stories of grandparents owning roasted nut shops and selling candies in Palestine; stories of heartache about her pregnant grandmother forced to give birth in a refugee camp in the Gaza Strip after being expelled from her home in Lydda in 1948.

"I grew up with a sense of loss, that you can work generations to build something and suddenly lose it all," she said.

Her family's experiences come across in her writing, including her first two books, "Born Palestinian, Born Black" and "Drops of this Story," a memoir detailing her experiences growing up as a Palestinian-American. Hammad is known to tackle issues like sexism, violence and the challenges facing women in her writing.

Her post-9/11 work called "First Writing Since," received rave reviews for its chilling commentary and observations about a country changed overnight.

I do not know how bad a life has to break in order to kill.
I have never been so hungry that I willed hunger
I have never been so angry as to want to control a gun over a pen.
not really.
even as a woman, as a Palestinian, as a broken human being.
never this broken.

The piece caught the attention of hip-hop mogul Russell Simmons who signed Hammad to join the Def Poetry Jam. She read her words on tour in front of more than 15,000 people and across the airwaves of HBO for two years.

"Each step of the way my audience has surprised me," she said adding that "anytime a Palestinian American can get past the silencing of the dominant narrative about Israel" it is a success.

Hammad's work has since been read on the BBC World Service and National Public Radio. She was also the first Palestinian featured in a Broadway show and has read her work at universities and prisons across the country...

I can see why her  poem grabbed Russell—it’s so...heartfelt. Hmmm. Think I’ll have a go and see if it gets me any Def Poetry Jam action:

They hate my people ‘cause the Book says we’re apes.

They hate the Zionist entity--a case of sour grapes.

They want the Jew state gone; the UN’s been helping.

So they'll shake their keys and keep on yelping.

Hey, at least mine rhymes.

Posted by: scaramouche at 15:32 | link | comments

Hairy terror on the way out?: According to reports, President Ahmadinejad's "health" is said to be "deteriorating" and he may not make it, but he can't speak to the media about it because he's way too, um, "ill".

Posted by: scaramouche at 15:00 | link | comments

Pervy shahids: On the FrontPage magazine site, Stephen Brown writes about the disturbing—and ultra-creepy—correlation between the penchant for martyrdom-through-terrorism and the penchant for kiddie porn:

…Muslim extremists’ attraction to child pornography has been attributed to cultural factors. An Italian magistrate involved in the Milan mosque case said possession of child porn by Islamists did not necessarily indicate paedophilic tendencies, but rather was the result of cultural differences. Girls, he stated, often become wives in the Muslim world at age 11 and 12.

The Islamists’ interest in boys as sex objects is generally owed to their beliefs and social milieu. Their strict religious convictions do not allow them to be with a woman outside their own families, let alone touch one, before marriage. Moreover, in some Muslim countries, males can’t even catch a glimpse of the demonized female form because of the body-encompassing clothing she is forced to wear. In such a gender segregated environment, homosexual behavior develops, especially towards boys.

Even the Taliban, which executed homosexuals when it ruled Afghanistan, could not eradicate the sexploitation of boys, even in its own ranks. Among the 30 commands it issued to its fighters, Rule No. 19 forbid them from taking young boys without facial hair into their barracks. After the Taliban regime fell, a Fox news report indicated pederasty in Afghanistan returned to its previous place as an accepted social norm.

Sexual exploitation of boys in Muslim countries also has a long history. The Asia Times columnist, Spengler (an anonymous pseudonym), wrote in his column, Sufism, Sodomy and Satan, that, in the High Middle Ages, Sufism, Islam’s mystic branch, “is the only case in which a mainstream current of a major world religion preached pederasty as a path to spiritual enlightenment.” He then cites a German historian who claims this Sufi practice “persisted in many Islamic countries until very recent times.” The 2007 movie, The Kite Runner, located in Afghanistan, showed a “last vestige” of Sufism’s pederast side when dancing boys appeared in female dress.

Perhpas not altogether insignificant in this grotesque phenomenon is that the Koran itself promises to put pre-pubescent boys at the service of jihadi martyrs not interested in the female virgins awaiting them in paradise. The boys will be like “scattered pearls” of “perpetual freshness” (Suras 52:24, 56:17, 76:19).

The consequences of Islamist misogyny, gender segregation and sexual abuse of Muslim boys are far-reaching. Besides growing up to be sexual deviants who collect child pornography and may victimize other children, such sexually traumatized Muslim boys are predisposed to become involved in terrorism as a way of expressing their sexual rage. It therefore comes as no surprise that one anti-terror source told the Times: “A way of finding who the extremists and terrorists are is to go through the child porn sites.”…

Brown seems reticent to the mention an obvious “religious” factor: the example of Islam’s founder, who is said to have wed one of his wives when she was a child of six, but held off consummating the union until she’d matured to the more womanly age of nine.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:50 | link | comments (2)

Hyper-vigilant basement Nazi nabber draws raves: He Who Must Not Be Named (‘cause to name him is to defame him) gets a glowing tribute from the B’nai Brith’s Jewish Trib.

Barf.

Posted by: scaramouche at 22:25 | link | comments (1)

Liberal loser as clueless as ever: After being the guy who led the Liberals to their worst-ever defeat since, well, since Canada first became a nation in 1867, Stephane Dion says he “detected not an inch of defeatism” in his caucus.

That’s because more than a few members of your caucus (Bob Rae, Iggy, Joe Volpe) hope to be the “victor” who’ll get to replace you, Stephane.

Meanwhile, the Ceeb, which is reporting the story, claims that Dion was done in by Conservative "attack ads." Yeah, I'm sure that's what did it, and it had nothing to do with the fact that Canadians didn't buy that preposterous Green Shift.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:46 | link | comments

Dhimmi work: Foreign Policy has a fascinating photo essay about the Zabaleen—the lowest of the low in Egyptian society who collect Cairo’s gargantuan piles of garbage. The caption of the third photo explains

Zabaleen, most of whom are Coptic Christians, rank decidedly at the bottom of Cairo’s social hierarchy. They work with garbage and raise pigs, a forbidden food in Islam, rendering them to be considered unclean by many from Egypt’s Muslim-majority population. Here, men sift through one of the great trash pyramids of Cairo on Oct. 20.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:31 | link | comments

A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma: Victor Davis Hanson tries to unwrap the cipher that is Bambi. From RealClear Politics:

Lame-duck Republican President Bush's dismal poll ratings have descended to those of Harry Truman's when he left office. The Democratic majority in Congress will probably widen after the election. Republican nominee John McCain has not run a dynamic campaign. Gen. Colin Powell, George Bush's former secretary of state, has now enthusiastically endorsed Barack Obama.

The country is in two unpopular wars -- amid the worst financial panic of the last 80 years. Not since prophet of change and newcomer Jimmy Carter ran against Gerald Ford (post Watergate and the lost Vietnam war) have voters been so eager for a shake-up.

Why then is the charismatic Barack Obama not quite yet a shoo-in?

Easy. Voters apparently still don't know who Obama is, or what he wants to do -- and so are still not altogether sure that Obama is the proper antidote to George Bush. After more than a year of campaigning, he still remains an enigma.

Obama promised to be the post-racial candidate who would bring us together. But when asked in March 2004 whether he attended regularly Rev. Jeremiah Wright's Trinity United Church of Christ, Obama boasted, "Yep. Every week. 11 o'clock service."

The healer Obama further characterized the racist Wright as "certainly someone who I have an enormous amount of respect for." And Obama described the even more venomous father Michael Pfleger as "a dear friend, and somebody I interact with closely."

Obama can dismiss his past associations with Bill Ayers as perfunctory and now irrelevant. But why then did an Obama campaign spokesman say Obama hadn't e-mailed with or spoken by phone to Ayers since January 2005 , suggesting more than three years of communications -- in a post-9/11 climate -- after Ayers said publicly he had not done enough bombing?

Obama's campaign shrugged when legal doubts were raised about the sloppy voter registration practices of ACORN -- an organization that Obama himself has both helped and praised.

Yet Obama once was a stickler for proper voter documents. In 1996, he had all of his Democratic rivals removed from the ballot in an Illinois state primary election on the basis of sloppy voter petitions.

Many of Obama's surrogates, from congressional leaders like Rep. John Lewis to his running mate, Joe Biden, have suggested that the McCain and Palin candidacies have heightened racial tensions. Do such preemptory warnings mean that one cannot worry about Obama's 20-year relationship with Rev. Wright or long association with Father Pfleger?

It's also unclear exactly what Obama's message of "hope" and "change" means. The hope part turned a little weird when Obama, in prophetic fashion, proclaimed, "We are the ones we've been waiting for," and later put up Greek-temple backdrops for his speech at the Democratic convention.

If we didn't get that supernatural message, Obama also promised of his election that it would be the "moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal."

And change? Obama himself has changed positions on FISA, NAFTA, campaign public financing, town-hall meetings with McCain, offshore drilling, nuclear and coal power, capital punishment and gun control, his characterization of Iran, the surge in Iraq, and the future of Jerusalem. So change from what to what?...

From the U.S. to the EU, apparently.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:26 | link | comments

Pound’s savage “racism”: Dick Pound, Canada’s man on the IOC (not to be confused with the OIC, a whole ‘nother bunch of chuckleheads) says he’s sorry if his French (which is not his first language) was misapprehended by sensitive First Nationers. From The Province:

Richard Pound said he was sorry for causing offence, but would not be stepping down as chancellor of McGill University or leaving the International Olympic Committee over controversial comments he made to a Montreal newspaper.

In an August interview with La Presse about the Olympics in China, Pound referred to Canada as "un pays de sauvages" 400 years ago.

Pound was responding to criticism about the IOC's involvement in China despite that country's checkered history on human rights.

Various First Nations organizations said they took offence to the comment because it implied that Canada was a land populated by savages before Europeans settled it. A native group, LandInSights, wrote the IOC's ethics commission calling for Pound's suspension over his comments.

The IOC, however, decided not to open a file on the complaint, said Pound, adding that the comments were misinterpreted.

Pound was surprised at the ferocity of some of the attacks directed his way. He said much of it has been based on a mistranslation of the French word sauvages into the English word savage.

"(Sauvages) is basically living free in what was to the Europeans a sort of large, unknown territory," said Pound.

"The IOC looked into it and my explanation of it and said it's not a racist comment as far as they are concerned they are not going to open a file," said Pound.

Pound also said he would not be stepping down from his position as chancellor because his comments had nothing to do with his role at McGill.

He is also considering legal action over some statements directed his way.

"I have no desire to make anything into a war. If it goes that way that is fine. If people are out there referring to me as a racist that is a little different," said Pound. "I can be inept, clumsy or wrong, but I am not a racist, I never have been, I never will be.

"I have been involved in more than half a century in the Olympic movement in which I have played a leading role in trying to cut down and attack discrimination based on politics and gender and I have a pretty good record on that."

Pound said he was "disappointed" with British Columbia Prime Gordon Campbell who also waded into the controversy Tuesday with a criticism of Pound's comment.

"The premier of a province, I think, has a special responsibility to make sure he knows, in this case, knowing this interview was in French and to understand that there is a huge difference between sauvages and savage," said Pound.

Pound said he has tried to get in contact with Assembly of First Nations national chief Phil Fontaine and the Assembly of First Nations for Quebec and Labrador Ghislain Picard, but received no response.

Might that be because they’re too busy filling in their complaint form about Pound’s “racism” to the Commission des droits de la personne et des droit de la jeunesse (Quebec's "human rights" body) and the BCHRT? Just speculatin’ (and jestin’).

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:45 | link | comments

A clarification: Iran's Laranji says that, reports to the contrary, the idea that the mullahs are planning to be lenient on Israel is "a joke".

I'll say. There's nothing terribly lenient (or funny) about nuking the Jews (and any non-Jewish "collateral damage" that happens to be around at the time) to smithereens.

In other Laranji news, the speaker of Iran's parliament says his nation is pulling for Bambi to win the U.S. election because he's "more flexible and rational."

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:16 | link | comments

Feeble equivalency: 1) The Bambi campaign raises $15 mill in September to shill for THE ONE; the GOP spends $150 g’s on Sarah Palin’s “makeover. 2) Barack Hussein Obama is Muslim (not); Sarah Palin is Jewish. (That last one is currently making the rounds on the 'net.)

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:51 | link | comments

"Kunta Kinte" Powell: The former Secretary of State belatedly discovers his, er, roots.

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:34 | link | comments

The “human right” not to blaspheme Islam:  The Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) applauds the Danes for putting that unfortunate “caricature” incident behind them and maybe even channelling their inner dhimmi (which he was certain was there all along); with the pivotal lines in bolds and italics:

The OIC Secretary General, Professor Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, has paid a visit to Denmark to attend the international conference on the role of education for intercultural understanding and dialogue which was inaugurated on Tuesday, 21 October 2008 in Copenhagen. The Conference has been co-organized by the Danish Centre for Culture and Dialogue, Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, UNESCO, the OIC General Secretariat, ISESCO, ALECSO, UN Alliance of Civilizations Secretariat, Anna Lindth Foundation and Council of Europe.

This follow up Conference was hosted by Denmark in continuation of the Rabat Conference of April 2005 and aimed at building upon the Rabat Commitments through special focus on the role of education, which is one of the core pillars of the Alliance of Civilizations project.

In his statement to the Conference, the Secretary General highlighted the initiative of the Danish government to host the Follow-up Conference in Copenhagen as being a constructive step in light of the ramifications of the caricature crisis. He expressed his belief that hosting the Conference by Denmark would serve as an effort at confidence building on the part of the Danish government and people towards dispelling the tension and mutual misunderstanding which snowballed into an amalgam of divisions and disagreements at the international level. He voiced his hope that the Copenhagen Conference would help usher in a new phase for collective efforts to promote inter-cultural and inter-religious understanding and constructive dialogue.

The Secretary General also touched upon the role of education in promoting human rights, and the role of non-violent conflict resolution in fostering a culture of peace, tolerance and mutual understanding and in diminishing misperceptions and intolerance among peoples of diverse religions, beliefs and cultural backgrounds. He emphasized that in the exercise of the fundamental right of freedom of expression, one should act with responsibility. He called for the development of an internationally accepted code of ethics within UNESCO, which would reflect a broad-based consensus and common understanding.

The Secretary General stated that the OIC General Secretariat was guided in its efforts by the existing international human rights documents and particularly the provisions requesting all governments to take measures against incitement to religious hatred. He clarified that the OIC has no problem with freedom of expression; on the contrary, it regards this freedom as a fundamental value and advocates it in the Muslim world within the new vision of the Organization. He underlined that the main argument of the OIC was that the abuse of this right should not be allowed in a way to contradict and violate the international human rights provisions. He called on the EU and OIC Member States to reach a consensus at the UN General Assembly and the Human Rights Council in this regard.

In his meeting with the Danish Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr. Per Stig Moller, prior to the Conference, on Monday, 20 October 2008, the Secretary General conducted an exchange of views took place on various international issues and challenges as well as on the ways and means of cooperation with a view to fostering dialogue and mutual understanding…

“Fostering dialogue and mutual understanding”—sounds so much more appealing than grovel, grovel, scrape and bow.

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:28 | link | comments

Pearl the cherry-picker: In her authoritative whitewash of Canada’s “human rights” industry in the current issue of Maisonneuve magazine, “human rights” diva Pearl Eliadis quotes Mark Steyn as referring to Muslims as “sheep-shaggers”. That, she suggests, is merely one of the many, many “dangerous” utterances which prompted the Hosiery Three to launch complaints against Maclean’s Magazine with three of the nation’s “human rights” bodies. In my post about Pearl’s article, I commented that, if indeed Mark had written such a thing, I was certain it had been “cherry-picked”—i.e. taken out of context (like so many of those Meccan-era passages—“there’s no compulsion in religion” and the rest—that those who wish us to have only warm ‘n fuzzy feelings toward Islam often pluck, willy-nilly, from the Koran). Turns out I was right. Here’s the sheep-shagging comment in context--a Steyn column about Oriana Fallaci--which Pearl plucked like a ripe, "Islamophobic" cherry (I’ve taken the liberty of bolding the pertinent ovine passages):

…Signora [Oriana] Fallaci then moves on to the livelier examples of contemporary Islam -- for example, Ayatollah Khomeini's "Blue Book" and its helpful advice on romantic matters: "If a man marries a minor who has reached the age of nine and if during the defloration he immediately breaks the hymen, he cannot enjoy her any longer." I'll say. I know it always ruins my evening. Also: "A man who has had sexual relations with an animal, such as a sheep, may not eat its meat. He would commit sin." Indeed. A quiet cigarette afterwards as you listen to your favourite Johnny Mathis LP and then a promise to call her next week and swing by the pasture is by far the best way. It may also be a sin to roast your nine-year-old wife, but the Ayatollah's not clear on that.

Kinky as this is, it has nothing on Fallaci's next circle of cultural diversity -- the weirdly masochistic pleasure European leaders get out of talking themselves down and talking Islam up. Beginning with the German foreign minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher at the 1983 Hamburg Symposium for the Euro-Arab Dialogue, Signora Fallaci rounds up a quarter-century's worth of westerners who've insisted that everything you know was invented by Islam: paper, medicine, sherbet, artichokes, on and on and on . . .

"Always clever, the Muslims. Always at the top. Always ingenious. In philosophy, in mathematics, in gastronomy, in literature, in architecture, in medicine, in music, in law, in hydraulics, in cooking. And always stupid, we westerners. Always inadequate, always inferior. Therefore obliged to thank some son of Allah who preceded us. Who enlightened us. Who acted as a schoolteacher guiding dim-witted pupils."

This, it seems to me, is the most valuable contribution of Oriana Fallaci's work. I enjoy the don't-eat-your-sexual-partner stuff as much as the next infidel, but the challenge presented by Islam is not that the cities of the Western world will be filling up with sheep-shaggers.

So it appears that it was that late, great holy rollah, Khomeini, who brought up the subject of sheep-shtupping and whether or not, having had one’s way with lambikins, it was appropriate to then ingest him/her for lunch. The idea was not, as Pearl Eliadis would have you believe, something that suddenly popped into Steyn’s mind, “flagrantly Islamophobic” though she and the sockies may consider that mind to be. Steyn was merely riffing (and goofing) on the Ayatollah. In which case, maybe the Socky triad should consider hauling the late Ayatollah’s mouldering carcass in front of the HRCs, since, clearly, he’s the one who had the "dangerous" ideas.

Update: Mark Steyn comments on Pearl's cherry-picking, and on the way the humourless "human rights" types have set themselves up as the arbiters of comedy/satire/joking in the Great White North. (Wasn't it the perceptive Ayatollah Khomeini who once noted "there's no fun in Canada"? How right he was!)

Update: Further to Mark's comments, it occurs to me that Canadians are notoriously leery about putting weapons in the hands of regular folks--the reason we have gun-control and, now it seems, joke-control.

Update: Let's give credit where it's due. At least the Ayatolloh cleared up the vexacious matter of whether it's possible to have one's sheep and eat it, too.

Update: Exercising tremendous self-restraint, I have decided not to do a parody of a Marvin Gaye classic, the chorus of which would have gone "I heard it through the grapevine/That your concubine is ovine."

You're welcome.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:02 | link | comments

Sharia on the march: A writer for Muslim World Today explains that the West's best attributes--tolerance, pluralism, freedom--are being used against it to enable sharia, a religious law that incorporates none of the above, to insinuate itself into our body politic:

Have you seen the little old lady who passes out Jehovah's Witness literature in your neighborhood? Some people stop and show interest. Others roll their eyes, and keep walking. But, would you ever expect anyone to threaten her? Call her a racist, and try to get her arrested?

Islamists would. And that is exactly what happened to two English Christian ministers who had the nerve to proselytize on a street corner in a predominantly Muslim immigrant area in the UK in 2007.

Such freedom of speech violations won't be an anomaly if the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), which has a permanent delegation to the United Nations, succeeds in passing a UN resolution against "Defamation of Religion" Noboby in a western country will be able to discuss the socio-political consequences of Muslim immigration, for fear of being labeled "Islamophobic" and slapped with a fine, or even jail time.

Islamists are increasingly using lawful Islamism, or non-violent and legal strategies to spread Sharia, (Islamic law) in the West, encroaching on non-Muslim life everyday. Other examples include:

1.    Sharia Finance;

2.    Islam in public schools;

3.    Violations of basic hygiene policy by Muslim medical staff;

4.    Workplace violations in the name of religious freedom;

5.    Censorship of literature.

Under the banner of "religious freedom," Islamists attack the very fabric of democracy in favor of Islam in the public sphere. The above examples are not examples of pluralism, but a violation of the separation of church and state doctrine meant to keep people of all faiths, or no faith, equal under the law. Liberals have forgotten that secularism is not a free-for-all, but has boundaries in order to remain meaningful…

In short: boundaries are good; "balance"--an in attempting to "balance" free speech vs. "hate" speech--is bad (in no small part because it is assisting the encroachment).

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:28 | link | comments (1)

Israel's death wish: The Jews are sending clueless bumbler Shimon Peres to Egypt to discuss the Saudi "peace" proposal with Hosni Mubarak (a man who, according to reports, has been sending out feelers to Hellzbollocks' Nasty Nasrallah).

Way to go, Jews!

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:52 | link | comments (2)

Troofers come out: They’re here; they’re weird; get used to it. From the National Post:

The spreading ripples of conspiracy to silence those dismissing the official version of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, got one ring larger recently: this newspaper was dragged into the subterfuge when an article on 9/11 conspiracy theories in the federal election campaign was delayed due to space limitations.

It did not take long for the missing story to add to an already complicated plot for a number of 9/11 skeptics who had been contacted for the story -- and who were already deeply mistrustful of the mainstream media.

"Who got to you?" one wrote to the reporter after the story was not in the newspaper the next day. He then suggested the reporter was never really working on a story but rather gleaning information on the movement for some unspoken purpose.

"It would not surprise me in the least if the article was pulled. The lid is nailed down very tightly on this topic," wrote another. A sympathetic skeptic simply said: "Thanks for trying."

That a reporter is simultaneously branded as both a perpetrator and a victim of a non-existent plot speaks to the complex passions and downright twitchiness of Canadian 9/11 skeptics and to the surprising reach of their circle.

When the Liberal party dumped a candidate in Winnipeg over writings that championed 9/11 conspiracy theories and an NDP candidate in B. C. was chastized for related statements, it was a bizarre and unexpected twist in the middle of a rather predictable election campaign.

While the 9/11 election scandals were short-lived, soon buried by the stock market meltdown, it served to ignite-- or perhaps reinvigorate -- a cross-country campaign to get 9/11 conspiracy theories on to the Canadian public's agenda. On newspapers' letters pages, on Web sites and in blogs, 9/11 skeptics burst out of the closet and urged others to follow suit, apparently convinced they formed a silenced majority.

"There is enough evidence across the board here to suggest there were more hands in the pot to stir it up than what meets the eye," said Andrew Moulden, a medical doctor and candidate for the Canadian Action Party in the Ontario riding of Nipissing-Timiskaming, when asked about 9/11 by the National Post.

"There are a lot of things that scream foul," he said. "There are too many holes and gaps in the middle and too many inconsistencies…. They needed a Pearl Harbor and it happened."

While that kind of talk gets you kicked out of the Liberal party, it brought Dr. Moulden more than a dozen campaign workers who travelled to North Bay on an outing organized by the Ottawa 9/11 Truth group. For 9/11 skeptics, it sent hope soaring.

"Success in this riding will bring the real issues into Parliament" organizers told supporters. "Enough shouting from the street corner, now we get into the government!"

Conspiracy theories of all sorts have long resonated in Western society…

In Eastern ones, too.

 

Update: I KNEW a Jew had to be behind it!

And I bet he got Ralph bin Malph and Potsie bin Webber to help.

Update: Now here's a conspiracy theory that's really a grabber--Somali pirates accentally give themselves radiation poisoning after hijacking an Iranian vessel and opening a "dirty bomb" intended for Israel.

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:23 | link | comments

Investing in sharia: There’s a good reason why capitalism is fated to fail: it is a man-devised system that lacks the, er, supernatural authority of an economy grounded in God’s law.  As such, it is subject to instabilities and fluctuations that do not affect Godly banking.  And don’t think that, in the wake of the latest capitalistic let-down, a kafir or two hasn’t noticed. From Islam Online:

LONDON — On a recent Friday afternoon, the Islamic Bank of Britain (IBB) branch in West London was bustling with a large number of customers, including non-Muslims.

At a time many conventional banks have gone bust in the credit crunch and financial crisis, the IBB is reporting a growth of 5 percent in customer numbers and 13 percent in customer financing.

The reason is that the bank "has been better protected from the credit crunch affecting mainstream banks," Sultan Choudhury, the commercial director at the IBB, told IslamOnline.net.

A financial crisis swept the US last month after the collapse of Lehman Brothers, the fourth-largest investment bank, and the financial woes of a number of Wall Street giants.

This triggered a domino effect across the world leaving conventional banks, lending each other on the money markets, short of credit.  

Western government have since pumped billions of dollars into their troubled banks to keep credit flowing and prevent a complete financial meltdown.

The British government recently unveiled a massive the £37bn bank bailout of taxpayer' funds to rescue Lloyds TSB, HBOS and Royal Bank of Scotland from liquidity shortage.

Choudhury said the IBB does not take interest-based loans from other banks, and has high quality, asset-based investments.

"That means that the bank avoided the instability the other high street banks have suffered," he explained.

Islam forbids Muslims from usury, receiving or paying interest (known as Riba) on loans.

Transactions by Islamic banks must be backed by real assets -- not shady repackaged subprime mortgages.

Shari`ah-compliant financing deals resemble lease-to-own arrangements, layaway plans, joint purchase and sale agreements, or partnerships.

Investors have a right to know how their funds are being used, and the sector is overseen by dedicated supervisory boards as well as the usual national regulatory authorities.

Increasing

Choudhury cited a rise in the number of IBB’s customers "looking for a safer option for their money."….

Safer and Godlier—a win-win proposition.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:48 | link | comments

Come into the Turtle Bay parlor, Maude: Lefty yenta Maude Barlow has won a plum assignment. She’s been tapped to become the UN’s first water prima donna. From CP via the Ceeb:

Canadian activist Maude Barlow has been appointed as the United Nation's first senior adviser on water issues, a role she hopes to use to establish water as a human right and to convince Canada to "change its shameful position" on the issue.

Barlow, chair of the citizens' advocacy group Council of Canadians, will work with the current president of the UN General Assembly, Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann.

"This is a wonderful opportunity to advance a more democratic and transparent method of policy making around water at the global level than now exists," Barlow said in a press release. "Water is a commons, a public trust and a human right."

Barlow said there's "growing momentum" in the international community for water justice but will focus some of her attention on her home country.

"I also plan to take this opportunity to get the Canadian government to change its shameful position, and to finally join the international community in recognizing water as a human right," said Barlow.

D’Escoto extolled on Barlow’s ability to “combine humanitarian vision with a practical approach to problem solving” and has expressed support for her crusade, calling water a "human right as basic as the air we breathe."

Barlow holds six honorary doctorates and has written or co-written 16 books. She is also co-founder of the Blue Planet Project, a group that works to protect fresh water from trade and privatization around the world.

The United Nations estimates 42,000 people die every week from diseases related to bad water and poor sanitation.

Water and air as a “human right”? What an odd way to look at substances that are essential for life on planet Earth (surely they're also an "animal" and "vegetable" right, too). You can bet all five Great Lakes, though, that Maudie’s going to find a way to “internationalize” Canada’s water (of which he have scads) in the name of “water justice.”

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:03 | link | comments (1)

Balancing act: This talk is being offered during Toronto’s Holocaust Education Week (November 2-8):

HATE SPEECH VS. FREE SPEECH: FINDING THE BALANCE

To what extent do evil words lead to evil deeds? What is the responsibility of government to protect vulnerable communities from the effects of hateful speech? How can this responsibility be discharged while being mindful of the need to maintain freedom of speech as an essential element of our democratic society?

LEN RUDNER, Ontario Regional Director for Canadian Jewish Congress, will address these questions. Mr. Rudner represents the concerns of the Jewish community on issues, including antisemitism, war criminals in Canada, Holocaust denial, reasonable accommodation, and the manner in which the Internet is used to spread hate messages. He has worked with police services across Ontario on matters relating the security of the Jewish community and has helped develop strong relationships with major school boards in the area of anti-racism education and in the development of policies for the use of these materials in the classroom.

To “balance” the above I offer this, from Mark Steyn’s intro to THE TYRANNY OF NICE, the Kathy Shaidle/Pete Vere exposé of the human rights racket (a racket which Len champions and to which he genuflects on behalf of Canada’s supposedly “vulnerable” Jews):

[The] Canadian state no longer believes in freedom of speech. Instead, it increasingly believes in government-regulated speech, which (as we’ll see in the pages that follow) isn’t the same thing at all. In an important sense, Canada, one of the oldest constitutional democracies on the planet, is no longer a free society. Oh, I don’t mean there are jackboots goosestepping though Cornwall, and razor wire along the 49^th parallel. If there were, even the most lobotomized multiculturalist drone might notice. But I do mean that, in its determination to enforce a dubious government-mandated “niceness,” key elements of the Canadian state have taken a jackhammer to the cornerstone of a free society; freedom of expression, freedom of ideas, freedom of belief, freedom to engage in the whole messy rough’n’tumble of vigorous debate that distinguishes open societies from lesser, stunted, insecure ones…

What say we show up at Len’s talk clutching tattered security blankies and scales of justice weighted down on one side, and with duct tape over our mouths, to symbolize the lesser, stunted, insecure, un-free place Canada has become as a direct result of Len and his hyper-vigilant confreres?

Posted by: scaramouche at 16:31 | link | comments

Don’t want to live like a refugee: A friend (h/t FH) sent me this, from “the Manitoba Herald”:

   A flood of American liberals sneaking across the border into Canda has intensified in the past weeks, sparking calls for increased patrols to stop the illegal immigration.

   The possibility of a McCain/Palin election is prompting the exodus among left-leaning citizens who fear they'll soon be required to hunt, pray, and agree with Bill O'Reilly.

   Canadian border farmers say it's not uncommon to see dozens of sociology professors, animal rights activists and Unitarians crossing their fields at night.

   'I went out to milk the cows the other day, and there was a Hollywood producer huddled in the barn,' said Manitoba farmer Red Greenfield, whose acreage borders North Dakota.

   'The producer was cold, exhausted and hungry.  He asked me if I could spare a latte and some free-range chicken.

   'When I said I didn't have any, he left. Didn't even get a chance to show him my screenplay, eh?'

   In an effort to stop the illegal aliens, Greenfield erected higher fences, but the liberals scaled them. So he tried installing speakers that blare Rush Limbaugh across the fields. 'Not real effective,' he said. 'The liberals still got through, and Rush annoyed the cows so that much they wouldn't give milk.'

   Officials are particularly concerned about smugglers who meet liberals near the Canadian border; pack them into Volvo station wagons; drive them across the border and leave them to fend for themselves.
   
   'A lot of these people are not prepared for rugged conditions,' an Ontario border patrolman said. 'I found one carload without a drop of drinking water. 'They did have a nice little Napa Valley cabernet, though.'

   When liberals are caught, they're sent back across the border, often wailing loudly that they fear retribution from conservatives.  Rumors have been circulating about the McCain administration establishing re-education camps in which liberals will be forced to shoot wolves
from airplanes, deny evolution, and act out drills preparing them for the Rapture….  

   …Canadian citizens have complained that the illegal immigrants are
creating an organic-broccoli shortage and renting all the good Susan
Sarandon movies.
   
   'I feel sorry for American liberals, but the Canadian economy just
can't support them,' an Ottawa resident said. 'How many art-history and English majors does one country need?'

The above may be tres amusing, but everyone knows that, since “mean” Stephen Harper pulled off a win (despite the best efforts of the media, especially the Ceeb, which claims that that “nice” Stephane Dion was done in by “Conservative propaganda”) and since it looks like the man who was shaped by friendships with such radicals as former Weatherguy Bill Ayers and Black supremacist Rev. Jeremiah Wright is all but a shoe-in come November, the story should really go something like this:

American borders have been flooded in recent days by Canadians attempting to escape the “mean” regime of Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper and reach safe haven in Barack Obama’s “nice” U.S. Since claiming victory in the November election, the President-elect has vowed to turn the  U.S., until now,the wallflower of world’s nations, into the most popular man on campus, that campus being Berkeley, California. That promise is attracting thousands of Canadians who like the cut of Obama's jib. Vegans, Green Shifters, zombies, starving artists, employees of the CBC who haven’t yet managed to land a job at al Jazeera, York University  professors,  “human rights” workers and others have all jumped at the chance to pull up stakes and move from “Meanland”—as they have come to describe their former home and native land—to “Shangi-L’O”—as they like to call Obama’s America.

“I couldn’t possibly continue to live in a country that balks at participating in a UN conference on racism,” said Clay Bernstein, a journalism professor at Toronto’s Ryerson University. “Why, that’s so…racist. Along with being imperialistic, colonialist and extremely hegemonic, to boot”

Rose Pushover, an active member of the Mennonite Church, would agree. “Stephen Harper is so mean. He would never have given Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a big hug, like that nice UN person did. We need to open doors and build bridges—and hugging people is an excellent way to start.”

Rose was convinced it was time to make the move when she heard that President-elect Obama would be establishing a new department—the Department of Hugs and Smiles—and that former Secretary of State Colin Powell had agreed to head it up…

“Oh sure, I’ll miss the Canadian brewski and my morning double-double at Timmie’s,” said Doug Thompson, a car mechanic from Windsor, who was persuaded to leave by his wife Fern, a yoga instructor. “But as long as I can get Hockey Night in Canada (that new theme song—sucks, eh!) on the rec room big screen, I’ll be okay.  Me? I don’t pay much attention to politics, but Fern says Stephen Harper thinks yoga is the Devil’s workout (or the work of the Devil, or he’s the Devil, or something), so when the missus said we had to go, we had to go.”…

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:26 | link | comments

Zombie time: I’m something of a Grinch when it comes to Halloween. Not that I mind schlepping my kid around the neighbourhood to collect some teeny-weeny chocolate bars one night a year; he doesn’t like to eat them, but I sure do. And not that I don’t enjoy seeing the moppets gotten up as Little Mermaids and Batman (men?). It seems to me, though, that the whole season starts way too early—I spied Halloween paraphernalia in the Hallmark shop back in August—and that what should really be a kiddie event has been hijacked by grownups, many of whom are suffering from a clear case of arrested development. (I’ve noticed, too, that the festivities have become increasingly gruesome, in a Jeffrey Dahmer kind of way, and that the usual ghosties, witches, cobwebs and coffins are now accompanied by (and I’m not making this up, since I saw it with my own eyes at a “party” store) fake human internal organs packaged like grocery meat, and bloody, severed fingers packaged like McDonald’s fries. Gah-ross!

The Toronto Star has a story about some immature adults who are obsessed with Halloween and it's more grotesque aspects—and who seem to have styled themselves as a brand new victim group:

Yesterday the city of Toronto was taken over by zombies.

Cross-dressing zombies, vegan zombies, chef zombies, zombie babies, zombie dogs and zombies in love.

Zombies carrying rolling pins, heads of bloody cauliflower and signs that read, "I kissed a ghoul and I liked it," and "Zombies were people, too."

But if Toronto's annual zombie walk has any political statement to make, it is that, with a little fake blood and some creative accessories, anyone can reach beyond the political to a place where anything goes.

And (almost) anything did go as more than 1,000 undead Torontonians crawled out of Trinity Bellwoods Park and roamed the city yesterday afternoon.

"Here's the rules," a deep-throated zombie with a megaphone yelled, haltingly, over the crowd as departure time neared. "Given to us. By the Toronto. Police Department."

Boo!

"All zombies must stay on the sidewalk," continued Adam Pearson, a 1920s-era zombie with a brown fedora.

"If you're on the road. The cops. Are going. To be really mad. And send us back to our graves."

Ughh.

And out of the pit they stumbled.

Organizer Thea Munster expected a turnout of 2,000 to 3,000 for this 6th annual zombie walk.

But as she scanned the crowd leaving Trinity Bellwoods she counted roughly 1,000 zombies.

"Some of them are stuck in traffic," she said.

The zombie walk has become part of a bona fide subculture here in Toronto, where zombies roamed at Nuit Blanche, Evil Dead: The Musical took to the stage, and George A. Romero, director of Night of the Living Dead and Dawn of the Dead, is said to be filming his next zombie movie this fall.

Robin Frolic, a 28-year-old mother of two little zombies, thinks zombie culture is a way to confront the un-confrontable.

"You take something you're afraid of and it's not scary any more," she said.

What exactly are we afraid of?

Death, in general, and the possibility of an apocalyptic future where all social rules disintegrate, she said. "Dystopia."

Clutching a disembodied arm, a tea-party zombie named Julia Gordon has a similar outlook on zombies and the horror movies from which they've sprung.

"Becoming what you are afraid of is one way to come to acceptance," she said…

Wise words indeed, but, sadly, lost on one such as I since—confession time—I am a flagrant “zombiephobe.” I don’t care for the undead, the been-dead, or the living dead. My preference is for the alive and kicking—so complain to the thought cops about my zombie “hate” if you must, aggrieved zombies. It won’t change my mind about your flagrant immaturity and self-absorption.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:19 | link | comments (2)

Elites vs. the hoi polloi: The NYT’s token conservative pundit William Kristol endeavours to explain why the elitists so despise the vulgar, unwashed masses:

…Most of the recent mistakes of American public policy, and most of the contemporary delusions of American public life, haven’t come from an ignorant and excitable public. They’ve been produced by highly educated and sophisticated elites.

Needless to say, the public’s not always right, and public opinion’s not always responsible. But as publics go, the American public has a pretty good track record.

In the 1930s, the American people didn’t fall — unlike so many of their supposed intellectual betters — for either fascism or Communism. Since World War II, the American people have resisted the temptations of isolationism and protectionism, and have turned their backs on a history of bigotry.

Now, the Pew poll I cited earlier also showed Barack Obama holding a 50 percent to 40 percent lead over John McCain in the race for the White House. You might think this data point poses a challenge to my encomium to the good sense of the American people.

It does. But it’s hard to blame the public for preferring Obama at this stage — given the understandable desire to kick the Republicans out of the White House, and given the failure of the McCain campaign to make its case effectively. And some number of the public may change their minds in the final two weeks of the campaign, and may decide McCain-Palin offers a better kind of change — perhaps enough to give McCain-Palin a victory.

The media elites really hate that idea. Not just because so many of them prefer Obama. But because they like telling us what’s going to happen. They’re always annoyed when the people cross them up. Pundits spent all spring telling Hillary Clinton to give up in her contest against Obama — and the public kept on ignoring them and keeping her hopes alive.

Why do elites like to proclaim premature closure — not just in elections, but also in wars and in social struggles? Because it makes them the imperial arbiters, or at least the perspicacious announcers, of what history is going to bring. This puts the elite prognosticators ahead of the curve, ahead of the simple-minded people who might entertain the delusion that they still have a choice.

But as Gerald Ford said after assuming the presidency on Aug. 9, 1974, ”Here the people rule.”…

One noticed much the same phenomenon during the Canadian election, when elitists, especially those in the media, tried to persuade the hoi polloi that Stephen Harper was a “mean” Conservative, and that his ""nice" leftist opponents, including Stephane Dion, whose campaign was in the dumpster, had a chance to make great gains, and maybe even unseat the meanies. Wishful thinking on the elitists’ part, a function of their inability to come to  terms with the idea of having a church-going Albertan as their Prime Minister: It simply doesn’t fit with their concept of who should be in charge---a smooth sophisticate like Barack Obama or Pierre E. Trudeau who knows which fork to use when dining with EUnuchs in Davos and who shares their Kumbaya-ish world view.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:25 | link | comments (1)

Sony more afraid of offending Muslims than Christians: This isn’t the first time Sony has “apologized” for including an inappropriate religious reference in a video game. Last time it happened, though, an apology sufficed, and the company didn’t feel the need to withdraw the game and excise the offensive bits. From the Beeb (my bolds):

Entertainment company Sony has postponed the global release of a much-anticipated video game because of concerns that it may offend Muslims.

Copies of LittleBigPlanet are being recalled from shops worldwide after it emerged that a background music track contained two phrases from the Koran.

Sony says it apologises for any offence caused, and that a modified version is due to be released next month.

The game is expected to be a hit for the PlayStation 3 games console.

A contributor to an online games forum reported the presence of the phrases from the Koran, adding that mixing music and words from Islam's most holy text could be considered deeply offensive by Muslims.

'Sincerely apologise'

A statement on the LittleBigPlanet website said: "We're sure that most of you have heard by now that one of the background music tracks that was licensed from a record label for use in the game contains two expressions that can be found in the Koran.

"We have taken immediate action to rectify this and we sincerely apologise for any offence this may have caused."

In June 2007, Sony apologised to the Church of England after setting scenes in a violent video game inside Manchester Cathedral. On that occasion the game was not withdrawn. ..

Manzoor Moghal, of the Muslim Forum think-tank, explained that words from the Koran should not be set to music because the words are seen to have come directly from God.

He added: "We must compliment Sony for taking decisive action by withdrawing these games immediately, and releasing a version that is not offensive to Muslims."

Obviously, Sony wasn’t worried that seething hoards of aggrieved Anglicans were going to set its headquarters on fire.

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:51 | link | comments

Turncoats: Victor Davis Hanson ponders the phenomenon of putative conservatives leaping onto the Bambi bandwagon:

This is becoming a very strange campaign.

On CNN recently both David Gergen and Ed Rollins echoed the current mantra that the “old” noble McCain is gone — and a “new” nastier one has emerged, largely because of his attacks on Ayers, perhaps his planned future ads on Wright, and a few unhinged people shouting at his campaign stops.

Recently Christopher Buckley endorsed Obama, likewise lamenting the loss of the old noble McCain. New York Times columnist David Brooks dubbed Palin a “cancer,” and he suggested that Obama’s instant recall of Niehbuhr sent a tingle up his leg as Obama once did to Chris Matthews as well.

A couple of thoughts: the George Bush, Sr./Willie Horton campaign was far tougher; so were the Bush 2000/2004 efforts. If anything, McCain’s campaign is subdued in comparison to what we’ve seen on both sides in past years. Indeed, McCain as a vicious campaigner is a complete fabrication, but, again, a brilliant subterfuge on the part of Team Obama that, in fact, has run, via appendages, the far more vicious race.

Obama and his surrogates have repeatedly engaged in racial politics (as Bill Clinton lamented when in fury he denounced the “race card”). When there was never evidence that McCain was using race as a wedge issue, it was clear Obama most surely was — preemptively, on at least two occasions, warning Americans he would soon be the victim of opposition racial stereotyping.

His surrogates like Biden and those in the Senate continue to link legitimate worries about Obama’s past with racism. Second, for about 3 months all we’ve heard are references to McCain’s age, with adjectives and phrases like confused, can’t remember any more, disturbed, lost his bearings, etc.

Moreover, so far, McCain supporters have not broken into Biden’s email, or accused Biden of being a Nazi, or accused anyone of not bearing one of their own children, or photo-shopped grotesque pictures of Obama on the Internet (as in the Atlantic magazine case). I don’t think deranged McCain supporters in Hollywood or television almost daily are quoted as damning Obama in unusually crude terms. Nor are white racist ministers calling McCain a ‘messiah’ or McCain operatives fraudulently swarming voter registration centers. And on and on.

Instead I think what we are seeing again is an interesting phenomenon of the old nice/now mean McCain. A great many moderates and conservatives are worn out and tired of Bush and Bush hatred, the European furor, serial charges of racism and illiberalism, and finally, in their weariness, think that Obama will, in a variety of ways, just make all the ickiness go away — as if he will make all of us be liked abroad and end racial and red/blue fighting at home. They should ask themselves whether Jimmy Carter restored American popularity with his human rights campaigns, praise of left-wing dictators, dialogue during the hostage crisis (cf. “The Great Satan”), boasts of no more inordinate fear of communism, etc., or whether Obama, in his Trinity/Acorn/Pfleger years, brought racial healing and understanding to Chicago...

Silly turncoats. Don't they know that Bambi won't make the ickiness go away; he'll only bring on a whole new and entirely different kind of ickiness?

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:38 | link | comments

 The Republican Jewish Coalition's latest ad: Those Jewish conservatives--they're so mean!:

 

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:21 | link | comments

Cool on “cold inserts”: A bunch of alleged jihadi-wannabes go on trial in New Jersey on Monday, and the L.A. Times, for one, disapproves of the tactic that landed them there:

…One of the original six defendants has pleaded guilty to lesser gun-related charges. Now, Dritan, Shain and Eljvir Duka, all in their 20s, potentially face life in prison, along with Mohamad Shnewer and Serdar Tatar.

All five are charged with attempted murder and conspiracy to murder military personnel [at Fort Dix], and all but Tatar also face weapons charges. They were arrested in May 2007 after two of the Duka brothers allegedly bought automatic weapons in a deal set up by Omar.

Legal experts say the trial will test the use of "cold inserts," informants who insinuate themselves into a group of suspects, usually for money or in exchange for making legal or immigration problems disappear. It is a controversial tactic that has been used with increasing frequency and some success since Sept. 11. Critics say it has the potential for far more abuse than the traditional law enforcement tactic of "flipping" someone who is already part of a conspiracy.

And if the cops had engaged in “flipping” (a tactic that’s unlikely to make much headway in cells comprised of ardent jihadi laddies) you can bet that “critics” would dub that tactic “controversial,” too.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:00 | link | comments (1)

Bambi’s moolah: He’s drowning in the stuff. From the Washington Post:

Sen. Barack Obama shattered, by a country mile, the record for dollars raised in a single month, pulling in $150 million in September, according to an e-mail the campaign sent out this morning.

"In the month of September, we raised over $150 million and added 632,000 new donors for a total 3.1 million donors to date," the campaign announced.

"The average donation for the month was less than $100."

The previous record, also set by Obama, was $67 million.

The number explains why Obama has been able to saturate the airwaves in swing states, and afford luxuries such as the half hour infomercials he plans to run later this month.

It also answers definitively the question of whether it was strategically shrewd to forgo public funds.

Republican National Committee officials have expressed concerns about the potential for abuse with small dollar fundraising on this scale. They have noted examples of fake names used to donate through the Internet. The Obama campaign has said it has vetted donations as fast as possible and would return any questionable contributions.

The number of questionable contributions identified at this point is tiny in the face of the kind of money the campaign reported today.

Plouffe describes the haul as evidence of the power of ordinary people.

"When Barack entered this race, he put his faith in the power of ordinary supporters like you coming together and building a movement for change from the bottom up," his e-mail said.

"That's exactly how we got this far -- and you should feel proud of all we have accomplished together."

Yeah, I’m sure it’s the “ordinary people” who dug deep into their pockets and sent Bambi the nickels and dimes that added up to the whopping $67 mill—ordinary Joes like, say, “Joe” Soros.

Update: And speaking of whopping, despite the oodles of shekels, Bambi's "whopping" lead has slipped to a scant three points. Time to hit up "Joe" Soros for some more cash, I think.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:40 | link | comments

David Warren’s message to the power-hungry thought cops: Get your damn fool mitts off the Internet!:

The assault on free speech and press in Canada continues on many bewildering fronts. While our "human rights" kangaroo courts have suffered recent setbacks, from having overreached in their attempts to prosecute mainstream conservative journalists, their retreat is an illusion. In Ontario and other provinces, the system of "human rights" star chambers is being quickly expanded, along with the Kafkaesque investigative machinery that lies behind them. They continue their daily, quasi-legal work of undermining a free society, by suppressing "politically incorrect" thought, speech, and behaviour -- under the radar of the mainstream media.

"Human rights" tribunals have been, recently, the preferred means of the radical left to advance activist agendas by extra-democratic means. It is a way for them to get around the limitations of legitimate courts, in which their chosen victims still enjoy the ancient protections of the common law -- in which both laws and precedents are fixed and researchable, due process is honoured, the truth is a defence, and the very idea of "human rights" has not been inverted by Orwellian Newspeak.

But the method of using regulatory commissions to silence opposition to an activist agenda is hardly restricted to "human rights."

The latest power grab is through the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, the antiquated regulatory authority for broadcasting and telephony. It was established in its present form, with a social-engineering mandate to promote "Canadian unity," by the Trudeau government in 1976. Such decisions as its recent one to deny broadcast rights to two Ottawa-area Christian radio stations, 11 days after approving a new "Canadian-content" pornographic TV channel in Alberta, are typical of the commissioners' judgment.

This week, the CRTC announced its intention to break the promise made by its then-chairperson, Françoise Bertrand, in 1999: "Our message is clear. We are not regulating any portion of the Internet." In a "notice of consultation and hearing" on Wednesday, the commission suddenly gave Dec. 5 as its deadline for submissions about expanding the CRTC's jurisdiction into "new media."

That this announcement was made by the CRTC, rather than by Parliament, is an indication of the degree to which the CRTC is a law unto itself.

In the time-honoured, mealy-mouthed way, the CRTC will soon be explaining that its intentions are innocent, that it is merely trying to keep up with the convergence of broadcast and Internet technologies. Only a naive fool will believe that. The regulator has created a strict broadcasting environment in which Christian and all other views that do not conform to political correctness are effectively kept under siege. The left hungers for the ability to create a similar tightly regulated environment on the Internet, to bring the free reporting and opinions of bloggers and other citizen-journalists under its ideological jackboot.

The citizens' response to this imposture should be short and sharp: "We were not born yesterday. We know your game, we know where you are going with it. Do not try to insult our intelligence. This is Canada, this is a free country, and to keep it free we must stand on guard against commissars like thee. Take your filthy stinking hands off the Internet."…

Oh, and while you’re at it, “bite me.”

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:21 | link | comments

Video dhimmitude: Sony grovels after receiving complaints that its new game is blasphemous.  From Islam Online:

CAIRO — The world's giant video game maker Sony has withdrawn millions of copies of a new computer game after drawing fire from Muslims for mixing music with verses of the Noble Qur'an, reported The Chicago Sun-Times on Saturday, October 18.

"We sincerely apologize for any offense that this may have caused," Patrick Seybold, director of communications for Sony Computer Entertainment of America, said.

Sony's LittleBigPlanet game, scheduled to hit the markets next Friday, features a mixture of a song with two verses of the Noble Qur'an.

The game Sony's most significant PS3 game till date.

In LittleBigPlanet, players control small characters nicknamed Sackboy, owing to their material and appearance, each of which can run and jump, as well as hang onto and drag objects.

Players use these abilities in a number of ways: to play and explore the environments that come with the game, which feature platforming elements such as jumping, pushing, grabbing and running.

To their own content, players place stickers into levels, as well as using the level editor to create, destroy, edit and manipulate levels and finally to share creations.

Offense

The new game has drawn fire from Muslims as offensive.

"We consider the mixing of music and words from our Holy Qur'an deeply offending," a game player said on an Internet messageboard.

"We hope you would remove that track from the game immediately."

This is not the first time to withdraw a game from the markets for offending Muslims.

Japanese Nintendo has altered post-release shipments of "The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time" after discovering the game featured Islamic chanting.

Last month, a computer game featuring an American hero sent to "wipe out the Muslim race" has sparked outrage among in Britain.

British Muslims were furious over a corporate war game in which men in camouflaged military gear battle an enemy distinguishable only by shemaghs, a traditional men headdress in several Arab countries.

Looks like the kafirs may be losing the virtual jihad, too.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:51 | link | comments

In defence of an ordinary Joe: The normally tongue-in-cheeky iowahawk suspends his rollicking satire for a moment in order to pen this cri de coeur:

First, a pre-emptive apology for the intentional non-humor to follow. I promise that all future non-humor will be strictly unintentional.

We've all witnessed a lot of insanity in American politics over the last few years. Up until the last few days, none of it has seriously bothered me; hey, just more grist for the satire mill. But after witnessing the media's blitzkreig on Joe 'the Plumber' Wurzelbacher, I can only muster anger, and no small amount of fear.

Politicians -- Sarah Palin, Bill Clinton, et al. --  obviously have to put up with some rude, nasty shit, but it's  right there in the jobs description. Joe the Plumber is different. He was a guy tossing a football with his kid in the front yard of his $125,000 house when a politician picked him out as a prop for a 30 second newsbite for the cable news cameras. Joe simply had the temerity to speak truth (or, if you prefer, an uninformed opinion) to power, for which the politico-media axis apparently determined that he must be humiliated, harassed, smashed, destroyed. The viciousness and glee with which they set about the task ought to concern anyone who still cares about citizen participation, and freedom of speech, and all that old crap they taught in Civics class before politics turned into Narrative Deathrace 3000, and Web 2.0 turned into Berlin 1932.0.

Godwin's Law! you say? if the jackboot fits, wear it.

If it's meta-memes and meta-meta-narratives these media headlice want, so be it. I hope you will join me in expressing a simple bit of solidarity with this guy, Spartacus style. I AM JOE. I am a Wal Mart schlub in flyover country who changes my own oil and unclogs drains without a license. I smoke and drink beer and toss the football in the front yard with my kid, and I figure I can fend my way without handouts from some Magic Messiah's candy bags. Most everyone in my family and most everyone I grew up with is another Joe, and if you screw with them, you screw with me.

Are you a Joe? Say it proud. Leave it on every goddamn newspaper comment section and online forum. Let these pressroom and online thugs know you won't stay silent when they try to destroy the life of a private citizen for speaking his mind -- because for every one of them, there are a million Joe Wurzelbachers. And for that we should all be thankful.

Will do, iowahawk. I may be a Jewish chick with literary leanings who lives in a big Canadian city and who shops at Winners, not Wal-Mart, but I am Joe. And damn proud of it.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:33 | link | comments (1)

PC social workers put the kibosh on reverts' adoption plans: As an adoptive parent (our son, who we’ve had since his birth, is now 10) I well know about the intrusiveness of social workers. (The one huge flaw of the movie Juno, I thought, was that there wasn’t a single social worker in sight, which made the unfolding story truly unbelievable.) As annoying as they were, though, they were nowhere near as bothersome as the social workers in a real life adoption story reported in the timesonline:

When Robert and Jo Garofalo decided they wanted to adopt a child in Morocco they knew it would not be easy. Although the law in the Muslim state had been changed to allow foreign adoptions, the couple were required to convert to Islam first.

But in the end it was not the Moroccan authorities that proved the biggest hurdle for the film director and his wife — it was their own local social services. For three months, during which Mrs Garofalo lived with their adopted son in a rented flat in Tangier, the couple were subjected to a series of what they believe were unecessarily harsh and intrusive interviews in which every aspect of their lives was scrutinised. Finally they were approved and were able to bring young Samuel back to their home, where he has thrived.

So when, earlier this year, they approached Surrey social services for approval to adopt again from the same Moroccan orphanage, they were surprised to discover that they would have to go through the whole process again. The couple were particularly concerned that, in order to assess Samuel’s “attachment” to them, he would have to be monitored and even filmed while playing.

Equally disconcerting was that even though social workers indicated in an initial report that they would be prepared to support the second application, the couple were left with the impression that they were being asked to do more to show they were living a Muslim lifestyle.

“The Moroccan orphanage felt it would be good for Samuel to have a brother and were very positive and encouraging. They were happy with the way we dealt with Samuel’s cultural and religious needs,” Mrs Garofalo, a 40-year-old actress, said. But this was not enough for Surrey, who made clear that an assessment would go ahead only if the couple proved that they were making enough effort to live a Muslim lifestyle.

In their report, social workers noted that although the couple had stated their religion was Islam “there is no outward sign that this is a Muslim family . . . Joanne and Robert are aware that the socio-religious element is an aspect of Samuel’s identity and heritage which this agency takes very seriously.” It recommended that “particular attention be given to sharing techniques and strategies with Joanne and Robert that will enhance their children’s sense of identity and legacy, particularly in view of their very public statement they made deciding to convert to Islam in order to adopt”.

Mrs Garofalo said: “The social workers made it clear that we should be seen to be ‘keeping Samuel’s culture alive’ by showing signs of it in our house. But what does that mean? He has to know about English life, as well as knowing where he comes from.

“Did they really expect me to be covered up, sitting on a prayer mat? When we’d converted to Islam so that we could adopt Samuel, there’d been no clause in the paperwork saying we had to put the Koran in our entrance.

“We might not be leading an outwardly Muslim lifestyle, but we are sensitive and respectful to Samuel’s background. We remain close friends with the orphanage manager, Naima, and next year are even flying out to her daughter’s wedding and taking Samuel with us. Surely this shows we are sensitive to his roots?”

The couple have since abandoned their plans to adopt again…

Good thinking. I was going to suggest they get a puppy, but I don’t think that would go over too well with the social service busybodies, dogs being considered haram and all. (Here's what our beast looked like when he was a puppy; prepare to go "ah!"):

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

Rendering unto the seizers: Eye on the UN has the Organization of the Islamic Conference’s statement about how it sees the UN moving ahead and finally arriving at a legal definition of “terrorism”. The UN has been unable to come to grips with the term for reasons which will become obvious when you read the following (my bold):

…5  The OIC affirms that terrorism should not be associated with any religion, race, faith, theology, values, culture, society or group. There is no religion or accepted religious doctrine which could be portrayed as encouraging or inspiring acts of terrorism. In this increasingly globalized world, we need more than ever before, understanding and harmony and building of bridges among all cultures and groups…

…7  The group reiterates the need to make a distinction between terrorism and the exercises of legitimate rights of people to resist foreign occupation and would like to stress that this distinction is duly observed in International Law, International Humanitarian Law Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations  and the General Assembly Resolution 46/51 2 which also endorses this position…

...The General Assembly remains seized to the pending issue of the Draft Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT).  The OIC group reaffirms its commitment to the process of negotiations and underscores the need for progress in this process. We reiterate our previous proposal on the scope of the draft Convention.  The group is seriously considering the proposal of the coordinator. We reaffirm our determination to make every effort to reach an agreement on and conclude the draft convention, including by resolving the outstanding issues related to the legal definition of terrorism, particularly on the distinction between terrorism and peoples’ acts of self-determination and against foreign occupation, and on the scope of acts covered by the draft Convention...

So if I understand these sly diplomats correctly, they want the world to pretend there’s no such thing as jihad; ignore the fact that some “terrorists” are embroiled in holy war because they believe they are following the example of their religion’s founder and have been assured that should they perish during warfare, their reward will be a raunchy afterlife of boozing and shtupping; and perhaps most crucially, allow Hamas, an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood whose raison d’etre is the annihilation of the Jews and the Jewish state, to continue eviscerating Israelis via self-detonating shahids and shahidas because the Jews are “ foreign occupiers” and Hamas is engaged in internationally-sanctioned “self-determination.”

I’d say “seized” is the operative word alright, since the OIC (the UN's largest voting block, 57 nations strong) has “seized” the UN’s agenda and substituted its own eliminationist one.

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:54 | link | comments (1)

Alinsky’s son: Toronto Sun columnist Salim Mansour writes about Bambi’s close association with an American who despised America, and did his utmost to tear it down:

Nineteen months or seemingly an eternity ago, in March 2007, the Washington Post published a long background piece by Peter Slevin on senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama, and the relationship that connected both to Saul Alinsky (1909-72) of Chicago.

The life experience Obama brings as his credentials for the White House is of a community organizer in Chicago. Slevin reported Alinsky's disciples hired Obama to "organize black residents on the south side, while learning and applying Alinsky's philosophy of street-level democracy."

In 1985 Obama moved to Chicago and there discovered Alinsky through his disciples and writings. It is the Alinsky connection that compellingly reveals Obama's career.

Among those with whom Obama worked in Chicago's corrupt politics were the radical preachers Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Father Michael Pfleger, the unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, and the convicted felon Antoin Rezko.

Alinsky was a radical socialist. He invented community organizing as a political camouflage for subverting America's democracy and capitalist economy.

In Rules For Radicals, Alinsky described the means and ends of his politics as did Karl Marx in the Communist Manifesto. Alinsky wrote, "Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity."

This is the Trojan horse principle of destroying the enemy -- capitalism and democracy -- from the inside. And democracy, as the French political philosopher Jean-Francois Revel observed from lived experience, is vulnerable to subversion because of "its eagerness to believe in its own guilt" and "devising arguments to prove the justice of its adversary's case and to lengthen the already overwhelming list of its own inadequacies."

The associations Obama denies, and the mainstream media dissembles on his behalf, have the shared experiences of practitioners of Alinsky's politics.

Associations matter, for it is the network of relationships cultivated in an individual's career that discloses the private and public world of that person.

It is not simply the voting record of Obama that makes him the most left-leaning Democrat since the Democratic party, beginning in 1968, gradually erased the line separating it from the fringe radical left in American politics. It is his voting record based on a political view of the world grounded in the teachings of Alinsky that places Obama at odds with Middle America…

Given that, it is baffling how the likes of Margaret Wente, Christopher Buckley and the Kays, mere et fils, could endorse Obama. I. Just. Don’t. Get. It.

Update: Sam Shulman in The Weekly Standard argues that Bambi's appeal is largely a matter of "class" and snobbery; the reason, too, why so many find McCain and Palin unappealing--i.e. their decidedly downscale, Wal-Marty demeanor and provenance.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:36 | link | comments (1)

Another swooner: Colin Powell is getting set to endorse the Bambino.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:26 | link | comments

The return of Mark Steyn: I’m so glad that Mark Steyn is back in circulation again. The spew on my computer screen—the result of my reading his take on the most famous toilet technician in America in the OC Register—gave me a good excuse to wipe off months of accumulated dust:

Give a man enough rope line, and he'll hang himself. There was His Serene Majesty President-designate Barack the Healer, working the crowd at some or other hick burg, and halfway down the rope up pops a plumber to express misgivings about the incoming regime's tax plans.

Supposedly, under the Obama tax plan, 95 percent of the American people will get a tax cut. You'd think that at this point the natural skepticism of any sentient being other than 6-week-old puppies might kick in, but apparently not. If you're wondering why Obama didn't simply announce that under his plan 112 percent of the American people will get a tax cut, well, they ran it past the focus groups who said that that was all very generous but they'd really like it if he could find a way to stick it to Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, Karl Rove and whatnot. So 95 percent it is.

By the way, like the nightly news shows, this column now has an exclusive lavishly funded Fact Check Unit set up at great expense (a colorful graphic with the words "FACT CHECK ALERT!") in a lame attempt to pass off our transparent political bias as some sort of scientific exercise. Our accredited credentialed licensed expert Fact Checkers from the University of Factology in the Czech Republic are standing by to rigorously Fact Check the candidate's claims. We check facts so you don't have to. All you have to do is sign up to our Fact-Check-Me-Now! Service, and we'll send you a daily Fact Check on your Facts Machine, which costs only $79.95 from Radio Shack (sorry, no checks).

Anyway, our Fact Check Unit ran the numbers on the Obama tax-cut plan and the number is correct: "95." It's the words "percent" immediately following that are wrong: that's a typing error accidentally left in from the first draft. It should read: Under the Obama plan, 95 of the American people will get a tax cut.

Joe the Plumber expressed his misgivings about the President-in-waiting's tax inclinations, and the O-Man smoothly reassured him: "It's not that I want to punish your success," he told the bloated plutocrat corporate toilet executive. "I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success, too. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

In that sentence about you spreading the wealth around, there's another typing error: that "you" should read "I, Barack." "You" will have no say in it. Joe the Plumber might think he himself can spread it around just fine, but everyone knows "trickle-down economics" don't work. So President-presumptive Obama kindly explained the new exquisitely condescending "talking-down economics." Put that in your pipe and solder it.

Evidently the O-Mighty One was not happy after his encounter with Joe. He's still willing to talk to Ahmadinejad without preconditions. But never again will he talk to Joe the Plumber without preconditions. Outraged at the way the right-wing whackos were talking up Joe the Plumber as if he were an authentic regular Joe, like Joe Biden, the O-Bots of the media swung into action. Vast regiments of investigate reporters were redeployed from the Wasilla Holiday Inn back to the Lower 48.

"We need you down here checking out this Joe the Plumber," editors barked to journalists.

"But I'm this close to wrapping up the Wasilla Town Library banned-book investigation!"

"Forget it! The Atlantic Monthly is claiming Joe the Plumber is Trig's real father. We can't get behind on this. Get to Minneapolis Airport. Joe the Plumber was seen in the bathroom with Sen. Larry Craig."

"Yes, but he was installing a stopcock."

"Look, you went to Columbia School of Journalism. This is what we bold, courageous journalists do. We're the conscience of the nation. We speak truth to plumber."

"Er, shouldn't that be 'Speak truth to power'?"

"That's the old edition of the handbook. Now we speak truth to power-tool operators. Joe the Carpenter, Joe the Plasterer, Joe the Electrician … . When you're building utopia, you don't want any builders getting in the way."

Alas, as a result of this massive investment of journalistic resources, no investigative reporter will be free to investigate ACORN voter-registration fraud or Obama's ties to terrorist educator William Ayers until, oh, midway through his second term at least…

Stop it, Mark, you’re killing me!

Update: One man's Mark Steyn is another man's Bill Maher--or why what one finds funny is purely a function of one's political orientation.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:29 | link | comments

Pearl’s world:  Former head of the Ontario Human Rights Commission and full time member of the “human rights” community Pearl Eliadis (Ezra Levant wrote about her here, and the Canadian Human Rights Commission profiles her here) has a long article in the Fall 2008 issue of Maisonneuve Magazine. The piece—THE CONTROVERSY ENTREPRENEURS—details the travails of three little sock puppets and their struggle to make big, bad Maclean’s stop saying all those nasty things about every single Muslim around (even though as anyone who doesn’t live in Pearl’s world—dar-al-Pearl—knows, it did no such thing), and argues that Canadians must allow Human Rights Commissions to get on with this difficult but crucial task. (Sorry, no linky as yet online.) The article is adorned with a some ‘toons of some of said “entrepreneurs—Ezra, Mark Steyn and Barbara Amiel. Ezra is got up like a Saudi Saudi; Mark is wearing a turban a la Islam’s founder in those “controversial” Danish ‘toons; Barbara is dressed as, well, Barbara, with pearls and designer sunglasses. As in real life, each wields a large threatening writing implement (even though they probably do most of their “dirty work” on a keyboard). Pearl and Maisonneuve (a magazine with a fraction of Maclean’s readership which bills itself as an “ECLECTIC CURIOSITY—or, er, maybe that’s a trait it regards its readers as having) want us to know that “the Maclean’s hate speech debate has turned into the biggest false issue in the country today—and obscured more troubling threats to free speech.” What are these more troubling threats? As far as I can tell, they’re the threats to the entire Human Rights apparatus which have arisen as a result of the aggrieved sock triad’s complaints.

Since I have neither the sitzfleish nor the wherewithal to sum up the whole thing (which includes a rousing tribute to a “crusading” Nazi hunter who’s single-handedly been keeping the Section 13 apparatchiks in business for years now, until  the socks and their sting-puller, Elmo discovered the censorship provisions, that is), I’ve decided to give you a taste of Pearl's "wisdom" by posting the article’s opening few paragraphs. Here goes:

By all accounts, Khurrum Awan, Naseem Mithoowani and Muneeza Sheikh had had enough. Over a two-year period, starting in 2005, the Osgoode Hall law students had read twenty-two articles in Maclean’s by columnists Barbara Amiel and Mark Steyn that, they felt, painted a portrait of Muslims that “went well beyond simply being offensive and became dangerous.”

The students met with Maclean’s in March 2007 and asked that the magazine print a “counter article.” Editor-in-chief Kenneth Whyte refused, preferring, according to the students, to “go bankrupt.” Julian Porter, Maclean’s lawyer, syas the student’s request—space for a 5,000 word rebuttal—went too far. The students appealed to Maclean’s parent company, Rogers Publishing and in late May CEO Brian Segal reaffirmed Whyte’s initial refusal, hinting that the students should consider the Letters page.

In December, Awan, Mithoowani and Sheikh—a fourth complainant has since dropped out—filed human rights complaints against Maclean’s with the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC). The complaints singled out Steyn’s article “The Future Belongs to Islam,” which predicts a Muslim global takeover, and Maclean’s refusal to provide space for a rebuttal, as discriminatory. (Steyn clarified that he was not trying to say that “the cities of the Western world will be filling up with sheep-shaggers.”) In another article, “Celebrate tolerance, or you’re dead,” Steyn describes Ayatollah Khomeini’s instructions about sex with nine-year-olds and bestiality as “livelier examples” of “contemporary Islam.” The students also targeted statements like this one by Amiel: “Normally, a people don’t willingly acquiesce in the demise of their own culture, especially one as agreeable as Western democracy, but you can see how it happens. Massive Muslim immigration takes place…”

Dot, dot, dot, indeed. Now, I don’t know about you, but since I don’t happen to live in dar-al-Pearl, the above examples of “dangerous” speech don’t strike me as being particularly, well, “dangerous”. Funny, scathing, caustic—to be sure. But “dangerous,” as in  “likely” to promote hate dangerous? I can’t see it. (Did Mark really make that comment about “sheep-shaggers”? If he did, Pearl must be engaging in something which apologists for the contents of the Koran often accuse others of doing—i.e. “cherry-picking”.) And Pearl seems to want to have it both ways—to make a case that the trio really had grounds to feel offended and seek redress for it, and, at the same time, claiming that the media went way overboard in reported this, after all, small little case, thereby needlessly turning it into a firestorm. (Again—in Pearl’s world, it’s a firestorm. In reality, most mainstream media avoided the story like the plague, reporting on it as rarely as possible. Where the whole thing really took off was in the blogosphere, with Levant and Steyn—and the indefatigable binky of freemarksten—leading the charge.) Seems to me what she’s really kvetching about is the fact that the sock case exposed a corrupt system that had been left to fester in darkness for a very long time, and that now that Canadians have been able to see it for what it is, there’s no going back to the “good old days” when HRCs got to harass and silence Canadians without question, and with complete impunity.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:51 | link | comments (4)

Kish and tell: The Globe and Mail’s Mideast correspondent, Mark “Malarkey” MacKinnon, is (great fanfare of horns and drums, please) “on the road to Jerusalem”--his final jaunt in the region, since he's being reassigned to China. (Vaya con dios, Malarkey, you and your not-any-better half Carolynne Wheeler, who I assume will be going with you.) Along the way he has stopped off at Kish, the Iranian island “oasis” that’s striving to be the Shia Dubai. Like Dubai, it’s struggling to find a balance between allowing tourists their “fun” and the strict requirements of sharia (a law which, let’s face it, ain’t exactly a barrel of yucks):

…Twenty-nine years after the Iranian revolution brought in the tight-laced social restrictions that transformed a Western-backed monarchy into a strict Islamic republic, Kish provides a rare outlet for Iran's booming population of educated young people who are frustrated with the regime.

There is no fun in Islam, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomaini once said. It's hard to guess what he would have thought of Kish. Live music is frowned upon in Iran, anything resembling a discothýque is banned outright. Alcohol is completely illegal, as is the mingling of unmarried members of the opposite sex. But in this one corner of Iran, it's as if the Islamic revolution never completely took hold.

"Kish is the best place in Iran. You can feel the air on your head and breathe more easily here," said Mani, a 21-year-old sales clerk at one of the myriad of duty-free malls that are the island's main attraction beyond the beaches. A Tehran native, her own black head scarf barely clung to the back of her head, revealing a combed-back mane of dark brown hair.

In reality, Kish is hardly sin city. Despite the occasional forbidden tipple, the island's restaurants openly serve only fruit juices, soft drinks, tea and coffee. Those who live and work here say that Kish is less freewheeling now than it was before hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came to power in 2005. Even during the dinner boat musical performance, head scarves remain on and no one goes so far as to stand up and dance.

Nonetheless, Kish remains a place where Iranians, as many as one million of them annually, come to let their hair down — and let it show — a little bit. Ninety-two square kilometres of sandy beach and palm trees, and home to just 16,500 people, Kish is at once the Hawaii of Iran, its Las Vegas and its Hong Kong. It's only a short flight from Bushehr, the city at the centre of Iran's controversial nuclear program, but to Iranians, the island is a rare escape from their country's economic woes, turbulent politics and repressive restrictions.

The once-obscure island shot to notoriety during the 1970s when Iran's last shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, turned the backwater fishing outpost into a playground for the country's elite. A luxury hotel and a grand casino were built, as was an airport big enough to handle the shah's private Concorde jet, which legendarily would fly in planeloads of prostitutes and meals prepared at Paris restaurants.

That all changed with the Islamic revolution in 1979. It's unlikely that a Concorde jet will ever again grace the runway at Kish International Airport.

Nonetheless, Kish has got some of its groove back in recent years as Ayatollah Khomaini's successors have loosened restrictions in an effort to compete with the likes of Dubai, where tens of thousands of Iranians travel every year to indulge in duty-free shopping and a liberal nightlife. A decade ago, Kish was made both a duty-free zone and the only part of Iran that foreigners could enter without a visa approved in Tehran.

The notorious religious police that keep an eye out for improper female attire and other social no-nos in Tehran and other cities seem to be absent here. Though there are separate men's and women's beaches — and the hotel pools have sat empty of water since shortly after the revolution — this is one of the few places in Iran where sunbathing is tolerated at all. Men and women ride jet skis and tandem bicycles together, and under the cover of night some of the more adventurous women even go wading into the water with their partners, albeit while fully clothed.

"Everything is better in Kish. Even the air is different," said Arman, a slick-haired 33-year-old electrician from the eastern city of Mashhad…

My letter:

Mark MacKinnon says “it’s hard to guess” what Ayatollah Khomeini would have made of Kish, an oasis of fun, freedom and frivolity in the Iranian Republic. Yeah, that is a real head-scratcher. What would the cleric who banished fun from the land and replaced it with what is arguably the most repressive and cheerless regime on the planet have thought of a place where Iranians get to act as though they’re living in the “decadent” West?

I could be going out on a limb here, but I’m pretty sure it would not have turned his frown upside down.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:55 | link | comments

Celebs who lean to the right: All 33 of them.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:02 | link | comments

A must-read: The Globe and Mail has a review of Tears of the Desert, a book that, for sheer intensity and horror, rivals Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s great autobiography Infidel:

Stories of Janjaweed attacks on villages in Darfur, of rapes and massacres and children thrown into burning houses, have become painfully familiar in recent years. But seldom have these stories been written by Darfurians, and never, until now, by a woman. Halima Bashir brings to her memoir not just her own horrific tale, but her experience of trying to treat the victims of a war which, for all the endless international condemnation surrounding it, continues apparently unchecked. Tears of the Desert is a brave and haunting book.

Bashir is the eldest daughter of an enlightened and prosperous farmer of the Zaghawa people. She grew up peacefully in a small village in Sudan, surrounded by close relations, the family ruled over by a despotic but devoted grandmother. But she was cleverer than the other children and her father longed to see her properly educated. Though forced to undergo female circumcision - an excruciating and barbaric practice which she describes in some detail - she was sent away to school and then, having produced remarkable results, to university in Khartoum. It was her dream to become a doctor and to bring health care to her village.

Not the least interesting part of this exceptional book is Bashir's determination to give the explosion of violence that engulfed her country a historical context. Long before reaching university in Khartoum, she was acutely aware of the great divide between the for the most part darker Darfurian Africans and the lighter, more powerful, semi-nomadic Arabs. Their sense of superiority, and the contempt with which they treated the African villagers, and their links to the government in Khartoum were things she had observed and experienced for herself since early childhood.

Even as she graduated, her results were unfairly marked down by professors unashamedly hostile to the people of Darfur. There was never a moment when she was not aware of some level of discord.

With her degree, Bashir became something very rare in Darfur: a qualified woman doctor. Sent for a while to the accident-and-emergency department of a local hospital, she learned the rudiments of war surgery, a skill for which there was a frightening and growing need. In the villages and mountains of Darfur, the fire of a serious war had been lit. Rebels, challenging the supremacy and poaching of the Arab nomads in times of drought, were clashing with government forces. Janjaweed fighters, Arabs armed and supported by Khartoum and accompanied by helicopter gunships, were making their first raids on remote villages.

Bashir was working in a primitive health centre in a distant village when the Janjaweed carried out a lightning raid on the village school. In it were 40 girls, between 8 and 13 years of age; all of them had been circumcised. They were repeatedly raped; the horror and the pain, for the entire community, was appalling.

As the only doctor, it fell to Bashir to care for them. She comforted them, stitched them up, disinfected the wounds. She was, as she observes, barely trained, but no training could ever have prepared her for having to treat the eight-year-old victims of gang rape, in a rural clinic with almost no medicines or medical equipment. She was becoming angrier, and more radical, every day.

A few weeks later, the soldiers came for her. She was known to have talked to a UN team investigating atrocities in the area, and her treatment of wounded Zaghawa rebels had not been lost on the government.

Her punishment was to be cut, raped, burned with cigarettes and raped again, many times. "Go and tell whoever you want what rape is," the soldiers told her when they set her free, knowing the pain and dishonour of surviving such violence.

And that is just what she has done, though not before her own village and family were in turn sucked into the fighting, and her own much-loved father killed. And not before negotiating and enduring the loneliness and confusion of flight in search of safety and asylum…

I’m sure everything will be dealt with at that UN conference on racism--once it’s resolved the far more pressing problem of those “apartheid, Janaweed” Zionists, that is. First things first, eh?

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:45 | link | comments

The old switcheroo: Diana West asks us to imagine that Bambi is McCain, and vice versa. From Town Hall:

We interrupt regular column writing to ... imagine John McCain ahead in the polls.

Imagine that McCain had spent the last 20 years in the pews of a white supremacist church that supported an apartheid-like separationism from black people, and also that, until a few months ago, McCain had proudly claimed the church's white racist pastor as his "friend, mentor and pastor" -- even taking the title of his best-selling 2006 memoir from one of this man's sermons. Imagine further that, in the 1990s, McCain had directed foundation funding toward a white-separatist educational program supported by this same pastor.

Now imagine McCain -- this same imaginary McCain whose polls indicate imminent victory -- had only lately left this church, brushing off his relationship with the racist pastor by pleading ignorance of the man's vile views.

All of these McCain hypotheticals, of course, are mirrored in Barack Obama realities related to his relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah "G-- d--- America" Wright. The foundation funding I refer to, detailed in a recent scoop by Stanley Kurtz, is the $200,000 that Obama, as chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge foundation, approved for a local organization that promoted black separationism as taught by such Afrocentric theorists as Jacob Carruthers, who, Kurtz writes at National Review Online, sought to use "African-centered education to recreate a separatist universe within America, a kind of state-within-a-state." Carruthers, and many others from his organization, the Association for the Study of Classical African Civilizations (ASCAC), which, Kurtz writes, "takes as its mission the need to `dismantle the European intellectual campaign to commit historicide against African peoples,' were featured speakers at Wright's church.

Interesting, no? Worth a question or two into Obama's more or less political relationship with Wright, no? Or views on Afrocentrism, no? Or into his media-honed reputation as the candidate of post-racial integration, no?

No.

Let me demonstrate why not by harkening back to our McCainian world of pretend for an unreality-check.

Imagine -- and this may be the hardest thing to swallow -- that the press corps (panting adjunct to this imaginary McCain campaign), assorted pundits, politicians and practically anyone else with a microphone or blog, say none of this matters. Or say it is "racist" to discuss these shocking facts. Weirder still, imagine that Obama, imaginary McCain's trailing opponent, says the very same thing -- more than passing strange given the happenstance that Obama is black and thus a key symbol of the imaginary pastor's vicious animus.

It is mind games like these that we need to play on ourselves to puncture the bubble of complacency and conditioning that has swathed and protected Obama not merely from the consequences (as in voter-rejection) from his Jeremiah Wright relationship, but from his relationships with a veritable pantheon of anti-American extremists. A partial list includes the racist Jeremiah Wright, the radical William Ayers, the former PLO spokesman Rashid Khalidi, the redistributionist and voter-fraud-perpetrating ACORN, and the out-and-out socialist New Party. These are the people and groups, from the farthest reaches of the anti-American left, that have shaped and driven this man who would be president.

Oh pshaw, Diana. Everyone knows that’s just a bunch of right-wing hogwash, and that all will be copacetic once The One is in office and has wrought his mystical, magical “change”. Why can’t you last cranky holdouts make like Kay and  Buckley, and sumbit?

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

Jackson eats his words: Jesse Jackson claims he never said what he reportedly said about “the Zionists” and their undue influence on American policy. He insists that his words were “distorted” by “conservative” writer Amir Taheri. From JTA (which is awfully suspicious of "conservatives," too):

WASHINGTON (JTA) -- Was it an October surprise that surprised the surpriser?

Two prominent political bugbears whose very mention drives the "other side" into foaming denunciations -- the Rev. Jesse Jackson, whose 1984 bid for the Democratic presidential nomination stumbled on an anti-Semitic epithet, and Amir Taheri, a conservative whose writings about the Middle East have a habit of coming undone -- collided this week, and sparks were flying.

Jackson said his views were distorted in an article by Taheri that quoted the Democrat as saying "Zionists" would lose their influence under an Obama administration.

Jackson's denials did not keep Republicans from trying to use the remarks against U.S. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) in a fraught presidential election. Even a mainstream Jewish organization, the American Jewish Committee, blasted

Jackson as "echoing classic anti-Semitic conspiracy theories."

A report in Tuesday's New York Post by Taheri, a writer who has in the past been accused of making exaggerated claims, said Jackson told the first World Policy Forum last week in Evian, France, that "Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades" would lose influence under Obama.

According to Taheri, Jackson told the forum that Obama promised "fundamental changes" in U.S. foreign policy, and said the most important changes would take place in the Middle East, where a President Obama would end "decades of putting Israel's interests first."

Jackson said that if the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not resolved, the Middle East will "remain a source of danger to us all," Taheri wrote.

"Barack is determined to repair our relations with the world of Islam and Muslims," Taheri quoted Jackson as saying in an interview they conducted after Jackson delivered his remarks. "Thanks to his background and ecumenical approach, he knows how Muslims feel while remaining committed to his own faith."

Jackson was quick to label the article a distortion.

"The recent column in the New York Post by Amir Taheri in no way represents my views on Middle East peace and security," Jackson said in a statement released Wednesday by his Rainbow Push coalition.

"The writer is selectively imposing his own point of view, and distorting mine. I have a long-held position of a two-state solution to achieve peace in the Middle East. I stand forthrightly for the security and stability of Israel, its protection from any form of hostility, and a peaceful, non-violent resolution to co-existing with its Palestinian neighbors."

Jackson also accused Taheri of seeking to "incite fear and division."

Sources close to Jackson said some of the quotes in Taheri's article were fabricated -- Jackson never used the term "Zionists," for instance, they said.

It was unclear if Taheri claimed to be in the room when Jackson made his remarks, or if others had reported the remarks to the writer.

Taheri, a favorite of conservatives who back confrontation with Iran, has a controversial past. Some of his writings on his native Iran have been debunked by experts as based on fabrications and distortions. Canada's National Post apologized for his 2006 report that Iranian leaders planned to force Jews to wear a yellow insignia after the claim proved unfounded.

More recently, Taheri reported that Obama had tried secretly to persuade Iraqi leaders to stall the withdrawal of U.S. troops in order to prevent the White House from earning a success. Obama's campaign and the White House both denied the substance of the report, and the Democratic camp accused Taheri of being in the pocket of the campaign of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the GOP candidate.

In an editorial Thursday, the New York Post stood by the Jackson story, noting that in his statement, Jackson did not directly deny the quotes.

"He meant what he said," an editorial said, "until things blew up in his face. Jesse Jackson needs to shut up and realize that his biggest enemy is his mouth."…

Jesse Jackson and the Palestinians—they never learn, do they?

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:47 | link | comments

Moo Moo pushes the eliminationist agenda: They're cheering wildly in Libya as kookoo Moo Moo Khadafi, who's wearing scary dark glasses, and looks like he's on the mend after a visit or two (or ten) to Mickey Rourke's facial surgeon (or maybe one too many all-night Botox parties with the Moo Moo-ettes), offers his insights into the Bambi candidacy (soon to morph into a presidency). As Moo Moo sees it, Bambi is one of them--born to a Muslim papa, instructed in the faith in an Indonesian madrassah--but, being a black man and an American, he's gone a bit astray. That's partly due to his not having a clear grasp of Middle East issues (unlike, say, Moo Moo, who knows for sure that it's all about "Dimona," Israel's nuclear reactor, and Israel's refusal to allow the Palestinian "refugees" to return so they can "solve" the problem with a "one-state solution"--code for the elimination of Jewish Israel--a new entity which, Moo Moo, the Shakespeare/Rodney Dangerfield of the Arab world, has named "Isratine"). Moo Moo attributes the rest of Bambi's "confusion" to his being, er, black (not that Moo Moo's racist or anything), but the potentate assures him that he shouldn't let his skin colour engender feelings of insecurity, since all the Arabs and all the blacks are behind him and want him to succeed. Moo Moo is certain that, once Bambi's on top, he can be shown the error of his thinking by his multitude of Muslim and black (and Black Muslim)  fans.

Oh, yeah--JFK and David Ben Gurion and Iran also show up in Moo Moo's captivating oration, but I'd have to watch the whole thing again to tell you in what context, since my head is still spinning like a circle in a spiral from the windmills of his mind.

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

Ismail’s insight: What’s behind the financial collapse? Sub-prime mortgages? Corporate greed? Don’t be silly. According to would-be genocidaire Ismail Haniyeh, another, much more powerful authority is at work. From the Jerusalem Post:

The current economic turmoil in the US is "divine punishment," Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh said Friday.

During a sermon before Muslim prayers at a Gaza City mosque, Haniyeh said God was chastising America for its support of the Israeli-led blockade imposed on Gaza.

Haniyeh said God's punishment would also extend to America's allies.

Hear that Mr. Harper? You’ve been warned.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:59 | link | comments

Reverend Jackson’s forecast: It’s killing him—killing him—that Bambi’s The One, and he wasn’t, isn’t, and never will be, but Jesse Jackson still has a good feeling about the kind of “changes” an Obama presidency will bring. FrontPage Magazine:

This week Jesse Jackson, speaking in France at the first World Policy Forum, predicted that a Barack Obama presidency would bring "fundamental changes" in U.S. foreign policy -- most notably by ending America's "decades of putting Israel's interests first," and by standing up to "Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades." "Barack is determined to repair our relations with the world of Islam and Muslims," Jackson elaborated. "Thanks to his background and ecumenical approach, he knows how Muslims feel while remaining committed to his own faith."

When asked whether an Obama presidential victory would close the chapter of black grievances linked to the legacy of slavery, Jackson responded: "No, that chapter won't be closed. However, Obama's victory will be a huge step in the direction we have wanted America to take for decades."

Jackson was also asked whether Obama -- who is not a descendant of slaves -- was in fact representative of a typical American black. He replied: "You don't need to be a descendant of slaves to experience the oppression, the suffocating injustice and the ugly racism that exists in our society. Obama experienced the same environment as all American blacks did. It was nonsense to suggest that he was somehow not black enough to feel the pain."

Jackson expressed his belief that Obama would apologize for the "arrogance of the Bush administration," and thereby help America to "heal wounds" it had caused to other nations.

Change you can believe in—if you, too, loathe Capitalism, democracy, America and “Zionists”. In fact, not unlike the kind of “change” those pushing the sharia/eliminationist agenda believe in. Won’t it be swell when America and the eliminationists finally come together under a Bambi banner to “heal” the wounds caused by Israel’s existence?

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:38 | link | comments (1)

And in other news, dog bites man and Jew-haters blame "da Jews" for world's ills: Wash Post and SF Chronicle endorse Obama.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:12 | link | comments

The man who invented Palestinian victimhood: A good argument can be made (and Ibn Warraq, in his book Defending the West, has made it) that Edward Said, a Palestinian Christian, did more to mess up Western minds about Islam than any other single academic. Blogging on the Jerusalem Post site, another academic—Martin Kramer—writes about an upcoming conference that will be honouring the still-influential (though now dead) Said and his deadly—and dead-wrong—ideas:

 Columbia University will be hosting an "Edward Said Conference" on November 7-8, with the title "1948-1978: Orientalism from the Standpoint of its Victims." The participants, who include all of Columbia's Palestinian mandarins, will focus on the contradiction "between European representations and Palestinian realities" as a case study of Orientalism. 1948, the audience will learn, was "a world-event enabled and prepared by the history and structures of Orientalism" - the anti-Oriental, anti-Arab and anti-Islamic racism supposedly endemic to the West since time immemorial, as alleged by Said in his 1978 book, Orientalism. The West therefore owes the Palestinians a reversal of 1948, for sins of misrepresentation going back to Homer.

What the audience on Morningside Heights likely will not hear is the extent to which the Palestinians were victims of their own Orientalist-like prejudices. A prime piece of evidence can be found in the testimony of the late Ibrahim Abu-Lughod, Palestinian academic and native of Jaffa (whose daughter Lila will be a participant in the Columbia conference). Abu-Lughod fled his native Jaffa in 1948, and left an important account of the mood among the city's Arab inhabitants on the eve of the war:

Now, when I think of those days, I am inclined to think that the inhabitants of Jaffa in general believed - like most of their fellow Palestinians throughout the land - that the Palestinian was braver than the Jew and more capable of standing hardship. They thought that, as the country belonged to the Arabs, they were the ones who would defend their homeland with zeal and patriotism, which the Jews - being of many scattered countries and tongues, and moreover being divided into Ashkenazi and Sephardic - would inevitably lack. In short, there was a belief that the Jews were generally cowards.

This set of familiar prejudices, when directed against Jews, is generally known as anti-Semitism. It is why the Palestinians failed to assess the real strength of their Jewish adversaries in 1948. It also explains why they refused to accept the partition plan - the internationally sanctioned solution for Palestine adopted by the United Nations in 1947. Why concede any of the country to a motley mob of cowardly Jews? And so the Palestinians did become victims - of their own anti-Semitism, which imbued them with a baseless conceit. The people of Jaffa, Abu-Lughod goes on to say, believed that "if they made ready a bit... then they were sure to emerge victorious."

Instead the Palestinians went down to an ignominious defeat. In doing so, their conduct in the war conformed almost precisely to the conduct they had expected of the Jews - something that made them contemptible in their own eyes and those of other Arabs. The shame still eats at their souls.

This long legacy of underestimating the Israelis because they are Jews continues to warp the judgment of many Palestinians, including some of the participants at Columbia's conference. Once again, the myth is spreading that the Israelis are weak of resolve, and so could be compelled to give up their crowning achievement, the State of Israel, and subsume themselves in a binational state - the so-called "one-state solution." This is the product of an anti-Semitic delusion: that the rootless Jews, unlike all other peoples, will not defend their sovereignty to the hilt. Reject accommodation with Israel, urge the Palestinian extremists who clamor for "one state," because ultimately the Jews are too cowardly to fight for their state.

This was the Palestinian error of 1948, and it is the Palestinian error of 2008. Nothing changes, because the Palestinians have never probed their own history critically, or accepted any responsibility for the decisions that led to their defeat. Instead, the sum of Palestinian intellectual life is a vast blame game, meant to evade the truth of 1948 and the self-loathing that it engendered. Alas, the shame is so great that the Palestinian intellectual class - still ridden with debilitating anti-Semitism - keeps insisting that all its past errors can be undone. "In resisting Israel," Joseph Massad said to a Columbia conference last spring, "Palestinians have forced the world to witness the Nakba [1948] as present action; one that, contrary to Zionist wisdom, is indeed reversible." From the Mufti to Massad, they never learn…

Posted by: scaramouche at 16:32 | link | comments (1)

Wine and whining: Two notable events, from the Canadian Arab Federation’s most recent newsletter:

4- Oct. 18 Picket to boycott wines of Israeli Apartheid, October 18, 2008 – Vancouver.With the 60th anniversary of the Palestinian Nakba, the Israeli government announced plans to “rebrand” its 60 years of dispossession and ethnic cleansing. Here in B.C., the focus of this “rebranding” is the promotion of wines under an Israeli label in B.C. liquor stores, which are now carrying products from the Galil MountainWinery, the GolanHeightsWinery and the DaltonWinery. The Golan Heights Winery produces wines from grapes grown on occupied Arab land, and many of their wineries are located on occupied Syrian land in the Golan Heights. All of this is in direct contravention of the Fourth Geneva Convention and stated Canadian policy. Nonetheless, successive Canadian governments have given Israel preferential trading status under the Canada Israel Free Trade Agreement, an agreement that financially enables the Israeli government’s oppressive policies and does not even attempt to distinguish products that are from illegal Israeli settlements. And BC liquor stores, when questioned as to their shameful actions, replied they “…offer products from around the world on a commercial demand basis.” We say 60 years of “rebranding” is enough; 60 years of dispossession, exile and the destruction of a whole nation are enough. Send this message to the Israeli government, and to our local and national politicians. As the South African campaigners said many years ago outside BC liquor stores, then as now, DON’T DRINK WITH APARTHEID! The picket takes place at OCTOBER 18, 2008 from 2-4 PM In front of BC Liquor Store, 1120 Alberni St., Vancouver (Thurlow and Alberni). Visit www.cpavancouver.org for more details. 

5- Teachers for Palestine: Meeting, October 19, 2008 –

Mississauga - Join our small but energetic group of elementary and secondary teachers, retired teachers, and teacher candidates as we plan for an exciting year of educational events and activities. We are raising awareness amongst teachers, students, and parents about the occupation of Palestine, and what we can do as teachers to help end Israeli apartheid. The meeting takes place at 1 pm, on Sunday October 19. It will be held at Palestine House, 3195 Erindale Road, Mississauga (link to map below) To RSVP, and to join a carpool to this meeting, contact: chewittw@gmail.com

 

DON’T DRINK WITH PALESTINIANS, PEDAGOGUES AND OTHERS PUSHING THE ELIMINATIONIST AGENDA!—I’ll drink to that.

Posted by: scaramouche at 16:07 | link | comments

CJC inclusiveness: The Jewish advocacy group’s “congrats” to Stephen Harper are somewhat diluted by its’ including every single candidate from every single party—and every single community and agenda in the land—in its good wishes:

Toronto- CJC extends warmest congratulations to Prime Minister Stephen Harper on the Conservative Party of Canada's electoral victory.

CJC Co-Presidents Sylvain Abitbol and Rabbi Reuven Bulka said today, "CJC warmly congratulates Prime Minister Harper on being re-elected and we wish him and his caucus well in carrying out their responsibilities. We also urge a spirit of cooperation among all parties in the new Parliament to best deal with issues of critical significance to Canada and the international community."

"We acknowledge the dedicated efforts of the leaders of all parties during the campaign and thank all of the candidates for running for the House of Commons in the interest of public service. CJC looks forward to working with the new MPs as well as the returning incumbents on the agendas of our community and all Canadians."

Talk about casting a wide net. You know what can happen when one does that, though. You can end up consorting with some mighty dubious fish—pirana, sharks and the like.

Posted by: scaramouche at 15:51 | link | comments

Islamism 101: Young Muslims of Canada, the Canadian branch of the Young Muslims organization (slogan: “in pursuit of Allah’s pleasure”) invites the young’uns to come learn about “Living the message” of Islam’s founder:

Muhammad is one of the most common names in the world today. Countless men and women send prayers and peace on him night and day. The life of the Prophet Muhammad is a blueprint for seekers of Guidance and Truth. Today, Muslims are in need of implementing this blueprint more than ever before. Sh. Abdool Hamid Akbar will provide in depth lessons on how this Prophetic methodology can be understood in the context of our contemporary world.

In her book They Must be Stopped: Why We Must Defeat Radical Islam and How We Can Do It,  Brigitte Gabriel has this to say about YM’s “context”:

The Young Muslims (YM) was created in the mid-1990s by the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA). While it denies the association, published reports indicate that ICNA’s main goal was to model themselves after the Pakistani terrorist group Jamaat-e-Islami. Young Muslims holds youth retreats in summer and winter to teach young Muslims the ideology of political Islam and Sharia law, including Islamic world domination by the sword and martyrdom. In 2002, the theme of a Young Muslims retreat was “Planning for Our Akhira” (afterlife). Such themes appear to be a constant in every Muslim youth retreat sponsored by the Muslim American Society, Muslim Student Association, and the Islamic Circle of North America.

It’s interesting (but not too surprising) that the “lessons” being advertised by YM Canada pertain solely to the Medinan phase of history, that period when Islam’s founder had left behind the lofty John Lennonesque message he was pushing in Mecca (“all I am sayin’ is  give me a chance”), since it was getting him nowhere, in favour of setting up the world’s first Islamic state—through force of arms—in Medina. Here’s how YM describes it:

The Medinan phase in the life of the Prophet Muhammad saw the building of a new society based on Islamic ideals, earning legitimacy on the Arabian Peninsula, battles, treaties, outreach and a powerful farewell. This establishment allowed Islam to flourish to the ends of the earth.

You betcha.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:49 | link | comments (1)

What not to indulge in in sunny Dubai: Sex on the beach.

Alcohol and illicit canoodling--a double no-no under the terms of sharia.

 

Update: Meantime, over in the U.K. (the provenance of the now-jailed Dubai beach canoodlers) al fresco sex is given a hearty, er, thumbs up.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:18 | link | comments

Harpoon’s sour grapes: Despite his best efforts to tar Harper with the Bush brush; despite his canard that a Harper government was the first one to “starve” Gazans as a matter of policy; despite his beating the drum time and again for everything that most big and little “C” conservatives abhor (bigger government; more power in the hands of Islamists and the UN and a less powerful U.S.; “justice” for the Palestinians as the expense of Jewish sovereignty in Israel, etc.)—despite all that, Canadians still went and voted for a man that Harpoon Siddiqui despises. Here’s his bitter post mortem which, what are the odds?, includes a new and even direr warning about the state of our nation:

…The Prime Minister's greater challenge, besides the economy, will lie elsewhere: our growing democratic deficit.

The Tories won 19 seats more than they did in the last election with just 1.3 percentage points more of the popular vote. Such is the quirk of parliamentary arithmetic, especially with five parties running.

Canadians residing on the left of centre will begin to echo what used to be the standard complaint of those on the right, namely that a party with less than 40 per cent of the vote gets to implement policies rejected by 60 per cent or more of the voters.

The parliamentary answer is that like-minded parties can come together or work together.

But uniting four parties is harder than it was to unite two – Reform and the Progressive Conservatives. But the Liberals, New Democrats and the Bloc have the option of using their Commons votes strategically. If they misuse it, they will pay a price.

It is the nearly 7 per cent of those who voted Green who will feel the most cheated. This "wasted vote" will trigger greater demands for a proportional representation system.

Add the steadily decreasing turnout – less than 60 per cent Tuesday, the lowest ever – and you are staring at an alienated electorate.

The problem of the disenfranchised and the disenchanted is not confined to Canada and not attributable to a sitting Prime Minister alone. But it does become his brief.

It is, therefore, essential that Harper deliver on his promise of providing "inclusive and responsive" government. That standard refrain of the winner takes on greater meaning on the more defining issues of the day.

Harper will have to stop ordering the opposition around. He will have to curb his partisan, deeply divisive and often vindictive instincts and those of some of his colleagues, such as attack dogs Jim Flaherty, John Baird, Peter Van Loan and Jason Kenney.

Harper will have to reduce the dissonance between his view of the world and that of a majority of Canadians, as measured by polls and partially proven by the election. He has to think hard about how best to work with a new U.S. president three months from now. He has to rethink our Afghan mission…

Yeah, the heart bleeds for those “nearly 7 per cent” who voted Green and now feel “cheated” because they “wasted” their vote. Also for all those Harpoonians who won’t get to go to Durban II, who won’t get to vote in lockstep with the UN Jew-haters' annual raft of anti-Israel resolutions, who won’t get to foist a shifty environmental tax scam on the Canadian taxpayer, who won’t get to see a Bambi equivalent at the helm on Parliament Hill when Bambi takes over in Washington.

It must suck to be them.

Update: To clear things up--this is Harpo; this is Harpoon. Only one of these clowns writes for the Toronto Star.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:35 | link | comments (1)

Terrorism in B.C.?: David Harris, an expert in the subject, thinks so. The RCMP is reserving judgement. From the Province:

Former CSIS lawyer David Harris says two explosions in less than a week that targeted a natural gas pipeline in northeastern B.C. are likely the work of terrorists.

"Terrorism means the threat or use of violence to influence policy and that's what is happening here," said Harris, director of international and terrorist intelligence for Ottawa-based Insignis Research.

Pipeline workers yesterday morning discovered a large blast hole under the EnCana natural gas pipeline in a remote area just off Highway 2, half a kilometre from the Alberta border.

The pipeline was damaged but did not rupture. A small leak was quickly contained by technicians.

It was the second deliberate blast after a large explosion occurred overnight last Saturday next to the same EnCana Corp. pipeline, at a different site near the town of Dawson Creek, about 50 kilometres from the B.C.-Alberta border.

Before the blasts, northern media received suspicious handwritten letters that branded energy companies as terrorists.

Tomslake store manager Sharon Hahn, just 10 km from the second blast, said crews with gas-emission readers have told residents they are safe for now. Police have told local residents to "be on the lookout" for suspicious people.

"It's hunting season here and it would be easy for anyone to pass as a hunter in camo," said Hahn.

"We may not all be happy with having oil and gas in our backyard, but why would anyone local endanger all our lives with an explosion at a natural gas pipeline?"

Harris pointed out: "We've had sabotage before in projects that impact aboriginal land . . . and there are tensions related to landowners and the extent to which they feel abused by pipelines crossing their property."

The Kelly Lake Metis Society and the Blueberry and Doig First Nations, who have suffered sour-gas flares and leaks in the past, have erected angry blockades in opposition. Some natives, however, have cashed in on the oil boom.

RCMP Sgt. Tim Shields said although he is not using the "terrorism" word, "there is no group or individual that we won't look at."…

Update: More David Harris on terrorism.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:05 | link | comments

Conservative victory makes an impression: Canadians often have the feeling that nothing that happens up here ever shows up on America’s GPS. It is thus gratifying to read the following story from the Wall Street Journal, since one would be hard pressed to find something similar in, say, the Globe and Mail or the Toronto Star:

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Conservative Party coasted to an easy victory in national elections on Tuesday, winning 38% of the vote and 143 seats in parliament. Mr. Harper's closest competitor, Liberal Party leader Stéphane Dion, managed only 26% of the popular vote for 76 seats.

Though he did not win the 155 seats he needed to secure a majority, Mr. Harper did pick up 16 new members of parliament, while the Liberals lost 19 seats. In other words, in a time of great economic uncertainty, Canadians by a large margin went with the tax cutter over the tax raiser.

Leading another minority government is not what Mr. Harper had in mind when he called this election in September. But it's nonetheless striking that the global financial panic and his response to it -- which critics called too casual -- didn't take a bigger toll on his party. One reason may be the fact that Mr. Harper has restored Canada's important role in NATO and revived Canadian pride in playing a role on the world stage. Since first taking the Conservatives to a national victory in 2006, he has reversed a pattern of parliamentary neglect of Canada's armed forces and made proper funding for the troops a priority. Rather than flee Afghanistan as Mr. Dion wanted to do, Mr. Harper's Canada is playing a crucial role in the international effort to defeat al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Mr. Harper's first government also cut the national sales tax, personal taxes and corporate taxes. His domestic platform in this race promised to cut corporate taxes further to attract capital and grow the economy. Mr. Dion promised to levy a new carbon tax on business. Mr. Harper was able to explain to voters that a carbon tax is a tax on them. John McCain, take note.

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:15 | link | comments (1)

 "Joe the plumber": Ah yes, I remember her well.

Update: The fabulously wry Claudia Rosett plumbs the plumber:

Obama’s colloquy with Joe the Plumber sure got my attention, and not just because it was the star feature of the final presidential debate. I’m worried that in the communal paradise promised by Obama, there’s going to be a horrendous shortage of plumbers.

After all, once Obama’s wealth-spreaders arrive to start carting away more of Joe’s hard-earned money, why should Joe bother with all that hard work? He won’t be doing it for himself, or his family, or his private dreams and ambitions. He’ll be toiling away on other people’s drains so that officials of an extremely large government can take away even more of his income than they do right now.

Of course, these public servants will have to be paid for their own hard work in deciding where and how to spread Joe’s money around — or whatever is left of Joe’s money, once all the government deciders and spreaders are done with it. If history and human nature are any guide, they will use their powers to foster all sorts of new entitlements and interest groups, on top of the old ones, which will mean even more people figuring out ways to spread around yet more of Joe’s money.

So, just try phoning Joe the plumber when your sink backs up, or a pipe springs a leak. He’ll have better uses for his time, like not working to make more money so the Obamocracy can take it away.  

Joe just might feel that his wealth has been spread around quite enough already. If Joe has been a prudent spender, current on his mortgage and faithfully paying his taxes, he’s already on the hook for the wealth-spreading done in the name of happy home-ownership by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. If Joe has been putting away money for a private pension (because with good reason he doesn’t trust the government’s Social Security plan to someday pay out to him the way he’s paying out for others right now), he’s just seen his pension account trashed by the market implosions triggered by Freddie and Fannie. You get the idea.

Obama’s breezy remarks to Joe are the voice of the Harvard Man talking down to the Plumber, and somewhere in there, it starts to sound like Orwell’s Big Brother talking to Winston: “It’s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance for success too,” said Obama. “I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

Oh really? Who’s the “you” who’s going to do the spreading? It’s not Joe. If Joe was using his income himself to buy things he wants and can afford, he was already spreading the wealth around — and in the process helping to create real jobs, and real value, probably with a lot more knowledge and efficiency than the government ever could.

But in Obamaworld, the government can do a much better job than Joe himself of spreading Joe’s wealth. So who cares what Joe wants? Once the IRS gets done with him, other government officials must be empowered to decide who, exactly, qualifies as being “behind” Joe. Should that include people who had the same opportunities to make money as Joe the Plumber, but decided they’d rather do something they like more, but which pays less? Should Joe be required to subsidize third-string artists, middle-aged sociology students, unemployed bankers and beach bums? And someone has to decide exactly what it is that other people are supposed to need, and when, and how often, and what government hoops (held by paid government hoop-holders) they have to jump through to get it…

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:57 | link | comments

Don't miss: Hugh Fitzgerald on Israel's tragically inept, ignorant and misguided leadership.

With leaders like these, who needs Ahmadinejads?

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:55 | link | comments

 Turkey time: Turkey is the featured nation at this year’s Frankfurt Book Fair, and you know what that means—the works of Nobel Prize-winning novelist Orhan Pamuk are being displayed cheek to jowl with the usual kooky Judenhass beloved by Nazis and Islamists alike. From the Jerusalem Post:

Anti-Semitic tracts can be found throughout the Muslim-world book stands at the Frankfurt Book Fair, including at the displays of this year's "honored guest," Turkey, according to the Simon Wiesenthal Center.

In a report submitted to the book fair's director Jurgen Boos, the center's director for international relations, Shimon Samuels, said he was saddened by "the number of anti-Semitic conspiracy theory volumes on the exhibit shelves of Turkish publishers and even on sale at the official Turkish sales stand in the fairground's Forum."

These works included three books published by an Istanbul publisher "speculating on the Jewish origins of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, President Abdullah Gül, and the founder of their AKP party, Bulent Arinç;" books claiming Jewish control over US President George W. Bush, Kurdistan and Turkey; a book comparing Bush to Hitler and more…

No biggie. I can find more or less the same assortment of bilge and camel poopy at my local Indigo.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:24 | link | comments

Stephane channels Shania: He says he ain't no quitter.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:47 | link | comments

Victim quest: Did you know that we here in Ontario are blessed with a government body called “the Ontario Victim Services Secretariat”? No? Neither did I, but I would venture that the mere fact that we have such a creature—it’s a subsection of our Ministry of the Attorney General—helps explain why the only people who seem to have been given leave to speak freely in this province are radical clerics proselytizing for Islam, or anyone who has a serious grudge against the Jewish state. Take, for instance, the Canadian Arab Federation, an organization that has demanded Hezbollah be removed for Canada's list of terrorist organizations, and that spews blatant Big Lies about “Zionists” on its Website, even as it invites readers to take this survey about being on the receiving end of so-called “hate crimes.” The survey is made possible by a grant from, you guessed it, the Ontario Victim Secretariat. Here are some of its questions:

…Hate Crime: […] Any criminal offence committed against a person or

property that is motivated, in whole or in part, by bias or prejudice

based on real or perceived race, ancestry, national or ethnic origin,

language, colour, religion, gender, age, mental or physical disability,

sexual orientation or any other similar factor, whether that of a victim or

that of associates with whom a victim is closely affiliated. (Hate Crimes

Community Working Group, 2006)

 

7) Based on the definition above, have you been a victim of a hate

crime?

a) No

b) Yes (please describe experience/ incident)

 

Discrimination: the negative treatment of a person or group based on

racial, cultural or religious difference as opposed to individual merit.

 

8) Based on the definition above, have you experienced

discrimination from Canadian officials? (i.e. RCMP, Police, CSIS,

airport personnel, justice system, elected officials, provincial/federal

boards and tribunals)

c) No

5

d) Yes (please describe experience/ incident)

 

9) Are you aware of anyone who has been discriminated against

by Canadian officials? (i.e. RCMP, Police, CSIS, airport personnel,

justice system, elected officials, provincial/federal boards and tribunals)

a) No

b) Yes, I reported the incident

c) Yes, but I did not report the incident (please indicate why)

 

10) Have you experienced discrimination in your daily interaction

with people? (i.e. workplace, school, transportation, and other public

places)

a) No

b) Yes

If yes (please explain)

 

11) Do you believe that local and national mainstream media

outlets such as the daily news, contributes to a specific or general

feeling of discrimination towards the Arab and Muslim

communities?

a) No

b) Yes

If yes, how so?

 

12) Do you feel that the level of discrimination against you is

affected by government legislation and/or policies?

a) Yes

b) No

 

13) Do you feel that the level of discrimination against you is

affected by public pronouncements of government officials?

a) Yes

b) No

 

14) If you have felt discriminated against, why do you believe you

were discriminated against? (please circle all that apply)

a) The colour of my skin

b) Ethnicity/nationality

c) Religious dress

d) My name

e) Political views

f) Accent/language difference/language barrier

g) Don’t know

h) I have never felt discriminated against

i) Other (please specify)

 

Yes, please do specify. The Ontario Victim Secretariat is dying to know all about it; in fact it needs to know about it if it hopes to justify its existence and the ceaseless flow of tax dollars that fund such make work projects for government bureaucrats who would otherwise be idle.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:34 | link | comments

Balance, shmalance: In Canada, we strive to strike a “balance” between free speech and “hate speech” (which is impossible, since to do so deprives people of their most essential freedom, and thus tips the scales in favour of the censors). Meanwhile, over in sunny Dubai, they’re striving to find a balance of another sort—between the Draconian requirements of sharia law and kafirs who think they can comport themselves like, well, like kafirs, in a land where God-law is in command. From the timesonline (my bolds):

A British couple has been sentenced to three months in jail for having sex on a Dubai beach this summer.

Judge Hamdi Mustafa Abu el-Khair sentenced Michelle Palmer and Vince Acors to the prison term, as well as a fine of $US350 and deportation from Dubai after having served their sentence.

Neither defendant was in court to hear this morning's verdict, which defence lawyers have vowed to appeal.

Ms Palmer, 36, has been suffering from severe anxiety and depression. She had been excused from appearing in court by doctor's orders.

The couple was arrested in July and charged with sex outside marriage, public indecency and drunkenness.

However, their sentence is seen as relatively light, given that they could have faced several years in jail for their crimes.

Their case has become a symbol of a clash of cultures that has pitted Dubai's Western expat majority against the conservative laws enforced by Emirati rulers.

Analysts here say their punishment is meant to strike a balance - by showing that expats must respect local laws, while maintaining the Emirate's image of being welcoming to Westerners.

Similarly, Canada’s anti-hate apparatchiks mean to strike a balance—by showing politically incorrect citizens (like Mark Steyn) that they must respect local Section 13 laws, even as the censors maintain the pretence that Canada welcomes diversity of expression. (If, however, you want to have sex on a beach and film it for artistic purposes, the government of Canada may be willing to give you the shekels you need to produce your mise-en-sand—so who says Canadians aren’t “free”?)

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:48 | link | comments

A radical change: That old Cassandra, Melanie Philips, warns of what’s in store once Bambi gains the White House:

…This may come as a shock to most people, but Obama is at the centre of a network of radical associations which he has tried to conceal.

Take for example his relationship with William Ayers, founder of the terrorist Weather Underground which bombed federal buildings in the 1960s and who has consistently maintained his radical views ever since.

Obama’s own political career was actually launched in Ayers’s Chicago house at a fundraising-event in 1995 which fired the starting gun for his run at the Illinois Senate.

Not only that, Obama and Ayers both sat on the boards of two organisations, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge and the Woods Fund. These organisations put into practice Ayers’s revolutionary ideology by channelling money supposed to fund regular educational projects into extreme radical groups instead.

Obama now says he didn’t know of Ayers’s terrorist past and never endorsed his views, simply working with him on an educational project. But it defies belief he didn’t know about Ayers, who was notorious in Chicago. In 2001, indeed, Ayers told a magazine: ‘I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.’

The crucial point was that this educational project was itself a vehicle for subversion; in the view of Ayers, its driving force, education was ‘the motor-force of revolution’. Moreover, Obama wrote a rave review about Ayers’ book on criminal justice, which compared America to South Africa under apartheid.

Through the Woods Fund, Obama also funnelled millions of dollars to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). Described by an academic sympathiser as ‘a uniquely militant organisation’, ACORN played a significant role in the sub-prime scandal - which detonated America’s financial crisis — by physically intimidating banks into lowering credit standards for poor and minority customers.

The Obama campaign has paid an ACORN subsidiary $800,000 to register new voters. But now, numerous states are launching investigations into massive voter fraud being carried out by ACORN activists who are being caught falsifying voter registration cards, registering fictitious individuals and hounding voters to register multiple times.

But Obama’s connections with ACORN go even deeper. Even though his campaign has denied this, for several years running he trained its activists and in 1992 even ran one of its voter registration projects.

Such radical links fit with other highly dubious associations Obama has made. We all know that, under pressure, he distanced himself from his longstanding mentor Pastor Wright, who infamously coined the phrase ‘God damn America!’

But Obama never distanced himself from the anti-white teachings of his church, which was heavily influenced by the philosophy of the black racist James Cone who claimed that ‘whiteness is the symbol of the antichrist’.

And after the controversy over Wright, Obama has become close to another preacher, Jim Wallis, who spews out the same anti-American message — once calling the U.S. ‘the great power, the great seducer, the great captor and destroyer of human life’.

That’s not all. ACORN is heavily involved with a Marxist group called the Chicago New Party, whose strategy is to force the Democratic Party to the far Left by infiltrating it and ‘ burrowing from within’. In 1996, the New Party exulted that one of its members who had just been successful in the political primary season was — Barack Obama.

Whenever any of this surfaces, the Left tries to suppress it by screaming ‘guilt by association’. Not so. This is guilt by participation.

The left cries ’smear’ and ‘racism’. On the contrary — if Obama wasn’t a black Democrat, with this history his candidacy would have been toast before it got started.

Just consider if the boot had been on the other foot and McCain’s political career had been launched by an abortion clinic bomber, his mentor for 20 years had been a Ku Klux Klansman, and he had paid nearly a million dollars to far-right militias who strong-armed voters into fraudulent registrations.

Of course, there is no suggestion that Obama supports terrorism or intimidation. But the question is whether through expediency or ideological sympathy or a combination of the two, he has allowed himself to be associated with thinking that threatens the basic values of America and Western society.

This may sound too incredible for words. But what’s really incredible is that, with dozens of reporters feverishly combing Alaska for any evidence to tarnish Sarah Palin, the mainstream media has largely refused to investigate any of this.

What’s really incredible is that a man with such a background in anti-Western thinking can now stand on the verge of becoming the leader of the free world.

Please don’t get me wrong. I am not a particular fan of John McCain. I think he is indeed erratic, and has run a lousy campaign. And the exhausted Republicans deserve to lose. But the prospect of Obama in the White House as America’s first far-Left radical president is deeply worrying.

It would be a crowning triumph for the anti-Western ideology which has wrought such havoc on both sides of the Atlantic…

As that famous Sixties rock group, the Weather Underground (or was it Fidel Castro?) used to sing, “you say you want a revolution, we’ll you know, we all want to change the world…”

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:08 | link | comments

The purpose of some ‘interfaith-dialogue’: As this piece on the FrontPage site makes clear, some interfaith efforts (like the one involving the Muslim Public Affairs Council, a Muslim Brotherhood front, and some clueless and therefore extremely useful Hollywood idiots) are aimed at stifling all criticism of Islamic law:

…MPAC’s efforts to suppress [“Obsession”] this prize-winning documentary is of a piece with the larger agenda of Islamists the world-over.  In the name of countering a concocted thought-crime they call “Islamophobia,” Brotherhood fronts, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Shariah authorities and Islamist agitation operations here and abroad are insisting that freedom of expression must not extend to expressions that “offend” Muslims.  As those making such demands are easily offended, they are striving to shut down public discourse and education about Shariah, its steady, if incremental, insinuation into Western societies and the implications of this phenomenon for all we hold dear.

The profound potential impact of “Obsession” has made it a special target of Islamist ire since its initial release two years ago.  In particular, MPAC has engaged in a veritable jihad on the film.  Since the Islamists are unable on the merits to attack the factual reality the documentary portrays, LA’s preeminent Brotherhood front and its non-Muslim dupes resort to decrying “Obsession” for being “deeply divisive and anger-provoking,” “invoking fear and hatred”  and “dehumanizing Muslims.”  Never mind that it is the inhumane behavior of Shariah-adherent Muslims toward those they brand as “infidels” or “apostates” – and even towards their own children – that evokes entirely justified, and often angry, responses from Western audiences. 

Among the non-Muslims who are appeared at today’s press conference to aid and abet the Muslim Public Affairs Council’s efforts in this regard were actor Mike Farrell, a well-known member of the Hollywood Left, and assorted apologists for Islamism drawn from an “Interfaith Alliance” convened by MPAC.

None of this would be worth another thought were it not for the appearance as well at the press conference of Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, providing a high-level law enforcement endorsement to MPAC’s efforts to suppress this film.

This disturbing development is yet another demonstration of the American Islamists’ ability to hoodwink government officials and the public alike with pious talk of interfaith dialog and understanding, while promoting a radical agenda that aims at nothing short of the destruction of our secular and democratic values and the imposition of barbaric Shariah law in place of the Constitution. What makes this myopia, bordering on dereliction of duty, by public officials even more puzzling is the fact that the Islamists’ views and objectives are hardly hidden.  Even a perfunctory perusal of relevant open sources readily exposes the subversive nature of MPAC and the Islamist network of which it is a key leader...

It has long, ahem, amused me that people who make no bones about their desire to see Islamic law fulfill its destiny (as promised to Islam’s founder and outlined in the Koran) make use of useful idiots who insist that such folks can’t possibly mean what they say since all that stuff about the Jews wanting to control the world is a crock. So the Islamists, who truly do want to dominate via their God-law, get the benefit of the doubt because of the obvious falsehood of the canard about the Jews—a canard that many Islamists themselves purvey.

What a funny, cockeyed world we live in.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:51 | link | comments

Cold comfort: A NOW  Magazine scribe is mega-bummed out that the ee-vil Tories managed to pull out a victory again. (For those who don’t live  in these environs, NOW is a self-important freebie rag that helps defray the cost of restaurant reviews and  anti-U.S., anti-Israel screeds by running tons of raunchy sex adverts in the back of book—so if you’re ever in town and itching for a little jiggery-pokery, or whatever yanks your chain, you’ll know where to look.) The scribe draws comfort, however, from the fact that Gilles Duceppe (the political leader whose raison d’etre, as they say in la belle province, is engineering the demise of Confederation via Quebec independence) and urban sophisticates  (like herself) united to “save our Canada” (i.e. deprive the Harper Conservatives of a majority):

It’s hard to be upbeat right now since the overwhelming first-past-the-post message of the election is a strengthened Harper minority. But given the array of forces aligned on his side, the Conservatives actually did relatively poorly. Harper had all the ingredients for a perfect Tory storm.

We had the lowest voter turnout in history (which always favours the incumbents), an unprecedented destabilizing economic crisis (which favours the safe haven of the known), no real opponents in the race (Jack Layton’s spin notwithstanding) and a giant corporate media conglomerate onside (CTVglobemedia) that showed its hand publicly when it actually went so far as to intervene in the election on Harper’s behalf (the outrageously unethical tape release). 

But Canadians have failed to stand up and deliver. 

My Canada includes Quebec – something for which I am thankful every day, but at no time more than today, when Quebeckers have literally saved the country as a whole. While the hype played on about the Bloc being a party that has lost its raison d’être with the demise of a separatist agenda, Gilles  Duceppe has shown that the Bloc holds a new place that defends the cultural identity and best interests of this beloved province at the same time that it resonates with those who are like-minded in the rest of Canada.

This idea of a new connection between the Bloc and other progressive parties in the rest of Canada is one of the most hopeful possibilities to emerge out of this election.

Quebeckers and urbanites unite. Cities from St. John’s to Victoria also tended to stand up to the Tory tide, most notably in our own fair province, with Hamilton, Guelph, Kitchener, Windsor, London, Ottawa, Kingston, Sudbury, Sault St. Marie, Timmins and Thunder Bay all resisting the blue tide to some degree. Of course, our Toronto deserves a special nod for really holding back the blue line. Yay us!

On the subject of cities, my Canada does not include Alberta or Saskatchewan. (Just kidding.)…

No she isn’t.

Echoing these sentiments, another sage, albeit crushed, NOW pundit explains that “Harper appeals to our baser instincts.”

Oh, you mean like the “instincts” that can be assuaged—for a price—by all the hard working guys and gals who advertise in the back of your rag? Funny, but not once during the campaign did I see Harper or Stockwell Day or Jason Kenney show up in bondage gear (and let's all give a little prayer of thanks, shall we?, for that. Mind you, now that green goddess Lizzie May has been soundly rejected, she might want to consider a career as a dominatrix. She'd look rather fetching, I think, done up in rubber, which, as we know, is a natural and biodegradable material).

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:52 | link | comments

The perambulations of a non-violent Salafist: They say the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. One man who understands the wisdom of that proverb is the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada’s Imam Syed Soharwardy. Soharwardy, who in a previous incarnation was most famous for being the guy who scrawled out some barely literate chicken scratch so that Ezra Levant could be harassed for 900 days by the Alberta “human rights” inquisition (Ezra had published some blasphemous Mo ‘toons, the silly kafir), has been walking across Canada for months now. And every leg of his journey has been documented by impressed and mightily impressed community newspapers. Here, for example, is the latest report, from the Penticton (B.C.) Herald:

A nation-long walk to bring attention to the grievous violent acts in today’s society passed through the South Okanagan Monday.

Syed Soharwardy and Haris Saleh of Calgary have completed more than 6,000 kilometres of their cross-Canada journey which began on the docks of Halifax on April 20 of this year.

Soharwardy, 53, who is the founder of Muslims against Terrorism, said the idea to embark on the Multi-Faith Walk against Violence to shine the light on various types of domestic violence, child and spousal abuse was sparked by an inter-faith discussion group.

Speaking from a rest stop on Highway 97 south of Penticton, Soharwardy noted response from the people has been "very positive" as it has been during their time on the road.

He recalled an elderly fellow with a B.C. flag on his van that stopped the two of them earlier in the day.

"He stopped and said Iwanted to greet you guys because you’re going through my area,’" said Soharwardy adding they’ve received numerous horn honks and salutations from those supporting their cause.

Soharwardy said he felt that walking across the country was one of the most effective and peaceful ways of raising awareness about the dangers and consequences of using violence as a means of conflict resolution.

However because he was unable to secure any form of sponsorship or financial donations to get the walk moving he took a leave of absence from his job and secured a mortgage on his house, funding it out of his own pocket.

"I’m quite passionate about it," he said. "And when you are passionate, you take action," he said.

Saleh wanted to be a part of the walk because he felt overwhelmed about the way violence is depicted in the media, on TV and in video games.

"It’s a disturbing trend across the world," said Saleh. "There are many other ways and means of resolving issues."

The 32-year-old said aside from the challenge of the walk itself, he’s also found it to be rewarding, energizing and fulfilling.

The pair joked that the greatest obstacle they’ve encountered up to this point was in Northern Ontario when they nearly came face-to-face with a bear.

Following close behind on the roadways during their trek is Montreal resident Zaheer Sheikh who sits behind the wheel of the motorhome where the men rest and re-energize. The men have averaged anywhere from 30 to 45 kilometres per day and they’ve managed to wear out nine pairs of shoes.

On Monday they enjoyed a Thanksgiving dinner in Olalla before hitting the trail again today…

When the walk wraps up about the end of October, Soharwardy said he plans to establish a group specifically to address issues around using violence as a form of conflict resolution. He would also like to set aside one day to hold an annual walk in other Canadian cities…

 

Another group dedicated to non-violent “conflict resolution.” What’s he going to call this one—Muslims and Naifs Against Terrorism?

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:12 | link | comments

Raging whore moans: Another daffy/angry/off-her-meds showbiz chick has announced her desire to do grievous bodily injury to Sarah Palin. From MTV:

NEW YORK — On Election Day, it's officially going to be Obama for the Material Momma.

Madonna pledged her allegiance to the Democratic Party at the premiere of her directorial debut, "Filth and Wisdom," in New York on Monday night.

The pop icon, in the midst of her Sticky & Sweet Tour, continues to keep politics center stage, launching an impromptu campaign against the Republican vice-presidential nominee, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, during shows in New York and New Jersey last week.

Madonna first banned the governor from the tour. In between sets, she screamed, "Sarah Palin can't come to my party! Sarah Palin can't come to my show!" As the week progressed, Madonna even threatened to "kick her ass."

But Madonna played down the trash talk on the red carpet of her movie premiere.

"It's a metaphor," she said. "She's in the Republican Party, I'm in the Democratic Party."

When asked if it's safe to assume she's voting for the Obama/Biden ticket, Madge told MTV News, "Hell, yeah!"

Politics get a regular slot in Madonna's current concert routine through dramatic video montages. During the song "Get Stupid," John McCain's face pops up on a screen right next to murderous dictators including Nazi leader Adolf Hitler and Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe.

Meanwhile, the next act features happy pictures of Obama, alongside John Lennon, Mahatma Gandhi and Al Gore…

Get Stupid, indeed.

Posted by: scaramouche at 15:51 | link | comments

J Streeters for censorship: These clueless, sanctimonious, anti-Zionist moonbats don’t want anyone telling the truth saying anything nasty about their One and Only. From JTA:

WASHINGTON (JTA) -- A campaign by a new dovish pro-Israel group to get Jewish newspapers not to run Republican Jewish Coalition attack ads has raised questions about what's kosher and what isn't in this fraught political season.

The new group, J Street, helped flood many Jewish newspapers with letters in recent days urging them not to run the RJC ads attacking the Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.). Letters were even sent to newspapers in which the ads did not appear.

"I was saddened to see that the Republican Jewish Coalition's vile, fear-mongering advertisements have been printed in your publication," read one typical letter. "Since when do Jews go along with smear campaigns? By all means tolerate genuine dissent but please, draw the lines at hateful, dishonest caricatures."

In addition to initiating the letter-writing campaign, J Street organized a petition calling on papers not to publish the ads. The petition garnered 23,000 signatures, according to the group's executive director, Jeremy Ben-Ami.

"There is a deep well of anger in the broader Jewish community over the questionable tactics used by the RJC and the lies and distortions they and others have circulated during this campaign," Ben-Ami said. "We do hope that our campaign will spark a discussion among Jewish media executives about the extent to which they wish to provide a platform for further dissemination of baseless allegations and unfounded personal attacks."…

Baseless allegations and unfounded personal attacks—oh, you mean like ones about Ayers and ACORN and Zbig, and  Khalidi and all the others that the mainstreamers have been bound and determined to play down and/or ignore? Yeah, wouldn’t it be tragic if Americans allowed any of “character assassination” that to factor into their voting?

Posted by: scaramouche at 15:39 | link | comments

Phew!: That's me breathing a huge sigh of relief that Stephane "Rhymes With Yawn" Dion (ditto) will not be taking command in Ottawa. I have to admit, though, that I wasn't at all sure it would turn out that way. That's probably a function of my innate pessimism coupled with the palpably anti-Harper stance of the vast majority of the mainstread media: The likes of the Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail kept assuring us that Canadians wanted a leader who was touchier-feelier; someone who felt their pain in these difficult economic times; someone who evinced the faux-empathy of Bill Clinton, and who maybe gave them lots of freebies, like Oprah Winfrey (the queen, the empress, the czarina of empathy) when she gives pajamas and Plymouths to her studio audience. Then there was Ceeb radio (I can't speak of TV, since I didn't watch it), which, throughout the campaign, gave up all pretence of impartiality and sounded like it was doing pro bono PR for Smilin' Jack; were one to crunch the numbers, I have no doubt that Jack (a guy whose world view is sympatico with the Ceebers) was given more way air time than any other leader. (It did seem to pay off, though, since the Socialists picked up six seats. Not enough to become the official opposition, but you can count on Jack remaining on the scene long after Stepahne has been given the hook. Even as we speak, the lean and hungry Liberals--Iggy, Bob Rae, maybe even Gerard Kennedy--are circling the carrion that is Mr. Green Shift's political career.)

So--hurray! Because of Harper's win, there will be no cockamamie green shift (the "social credit" of our time). We will not be going to the UN's Wannsee II Conference in Geneva come April. However--and it's a big however--there are still a couple of sticky issues that this government must tackle. First and foremost, it must do something to curb the power of a parallel justice system that is the antithesis--and makes a mockery--of Western law. (It's an excellent fit with sharia, though). At the very least, the Harper government must get rid of Section-13 and its provincial/terrirorial equivalents, so that, at a time when voices are being silenced around the world, Canadians know they have the freedom to speak, to be politically incorrect, to criticize their government, to balk at the encroachments of sharia, and, yes, to be as sarcastic, disrespectful, derisive, iconoclastic, disrespectful and "mean" as they want to be, even if upsets the likes of Mo Elmasry and Harpoon Siddiqui, and even if the nervous men of the Jewstablishment fear that such unfettered freedom could lead to a Kristallnacht on Bathurst Street.

Also--I think it's time for the Canadian government to stop paying for Gaza's infrastructure planning, at least until such time as Hamas, a terrorist, jihadi organization which, for religious reasons, wants to slaughter the world's Jews, is no longer in power.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:29 | link | comments (5)

When Dief was the chief: On the day when Canadians go to the polls, Kathy Shaidle invites bloggers who value free speech--real free speech, not the watered-down Trudeaupian version we have now--to quote these words by one-time Conservative Prime Minister John George Diefenbaker. Happy to oblige, Kathy:

"I am a Canadian,
free to speak without fear,
free to worship in my own way,
free to stand for what I think right
free to oppose what I believe wrong,
or free to choose those
who shall govern my country.
This heritage of freedom
I pledge to uphold
for myself and all mankind."

From the Canadian Bill of Rights,
July 1, 1960.

I might mention that I have something of a personal connection to "The Chief." He was a good friend of my late uncle's, who was, yes, a Jewish Conservative in the days when such a creature was even more of a rara avis than it is today. When Dief was the chief, there was no moral relativism, or multiculturalism, or humungous anti-hate/victim industry, and there were maybe four or five non-Muslims, tops, who knew what "dhimmi" meant; a time when one could say the above words unashemedly, without fear of being derided as a "colonialist"/"imperialist"/"hegemon," or other such like blather. I have a feeling Dief would be shocked at what's become of his Bill of Rights, how his successors, in their misguided zeal, have removed its guts and replaced it with garbage: freedom from speech; free speech in "balance" with "hate speech". What a travesty of his noble ideals! (By the same token, I don't think he'd be too impressed by what's become of the United Nations, a now morally bankrupt organization that that taken on the Nazi/Arab eliminationist agenda, dressing up Hitler's Final Solution in the sheep's clothing of diplomacy and "human rights".)

Posted by: scaramouche at 15:50 | link | comments (1)

Shilling for Socialists: Imagine the surprise of Soo voters last week when the doorbell rang and who should appear before them but that hard-lefty Odd Couple, dapper neat freak Smilin’ Jack and his shlubby friend, Fat Mike. The Toronto Star reports on the controversy touched off by the Felix-Oscar electioneering:

OTTAWA– American filmmaker Michael Moore is turning the tables on Tory claims that he and the NDP may have broken election rules.

Last week, the Conservatives issued a statement questioning whether Moore and NDP incumbent Tony Martin violated the Canada Elections Act by hitting the hustings together in Sault Ste. Marie, Ont.

"This canvassing appears to be a violation of the Canada Elections Act, which clearly states that only Canadians can actively participate in a Canadian election," a Tory statement read.

But in a letter Monday to an online newspaper in the Sault, Moore said it was the Conservatives who initially invited his film crew to go campaigning with Tory candidate Cameron Ross.

The director told SooToday.com that when the Tory candidate failed to meet up with the crew, Martin proposed they tag along with the NDP instead.

Moore, who made the popular documentaries Bowling for Columbine and Fahrenheit 9/11, said he visited two homes alongside Martin and interviewed the residents on their feelings toward the candidate.

Brad Lavigne, an NDP spokesman, said crews documenting candidates or the election campaign is not new – or wrong, for that matter.

"Mr. Moore was not handing out literature or persuading people to vote one way or another, and therefore, the claim is fairly bogus," he said.

"Having your canvass documented by either a domestic or international documentary filmmaker, in our judgment, in general, does not constitute a violation of the Act."

The Elections Act states that: "No person who does not reside in Canada shall, during an election period, in any way induce electors to vote or refrain from voting or vote or refrain from voting for a particular candidate..."

Canadian citizens or permanent residents are an exception to the rule.

Moore has reportedly asked Elections Canada to investigate the Conservative candidate.

The agency said it was against its policy to confirm or deny whether a complaint had been filed...

Do us a favour and go home, Mike. Canada has already exceeded its quota of pathologically angry jerk-offs, and having you here is what the French would call de trop.

Come to think of it, why not go to France? They seem to love American filmmakers there.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:00 | link | comments (2)

Say it ain't on, Jon: In anticipation of The One's inevitable victory, the National Post's Jonathan Kay gives in to the swoon.

They're dropping like flies.

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:26 | link | comments

Brilliance on display: Here, in Roger Kimball’s pajamas media post about his friend Christopher Buckley going over to the O-side; and here, in a comment left following Kimball’s essay by someone named cfbleachers:

In point of fact, Roger, I assume you do not disagree at all with what Christopher Buckley finds appealing in Sen. Obama, neither do I.

He displays a soft temperament, is at times inspiring with his delivery of ideas, soothing and calming in demeanor. Anyone who disputes this is unable to continue in the quest for principled disagreement.

We tend in this country, to overcompensate away the deficiencies of the last guy in office. Nixon was sort of brooding and had dark corners, Ford was affable and light. But Ford was portrayed as a clumsy oaf, so Carter was the nuclear engineer. But Carter was limp and cowardly, and Reagan was brave and heroic. But Reagan was sleepy, cowboyish and dim, Bush Sr. was erudite and gentler. But Bush, Sr. was a wimp married to his grandma, and Clinton was dashing and bold. But Clinton often ruled by polls and plebiscites and spent time chasing his tail literally and figuratively, (some of which he put on the payroll), so we closed the last chapter with the current President Bush, married to a sweet librarian and not leading by watching polls but rather, destroyed by them. Going it alone was a mantra, a badge of honor. Perhaps, most importantly, this President Bush, in a war of words…most often fought on a battlefield between his brain and his tongue.

So, the most eloquent speaker, who appeals to the “world court of opinion” and prodded on by a media in his pocket and not on his watch…will “cure” the ills that have befallen us.

What Christopher chooses to ignore, are all the signs of what we will have to cure in the next election. He glosses over them as if they are invisible. That is what surprises most, that is what deadens the heart and chips away at the soul.

Christopher is clearly brilliant enough to see and chooses instead to avert his gaze. The thuggery and mean-spririted henchmen who do the dirty work, keep clean the hands and the image of “first class” comportment. The abject slander heaped upon opponents, comes not from the mouth of the candidate…but from the bellowing rage of his campaign.

The crushing of dissent by teams of lawyers, calls to action and “in your face” aggression come not from written directive, but from the planning committee seeking to choke off relevant inquiry. Clearly, Christopher cannot be so mesmerized as to wash this grime away with a simple wave of the hand. He has fallen for the image and he has been distracted by the persona.

I love liberals, Roger…as I suspect you do. Many of them surround my daily life. But I despise leftists. A liberal is ruled by compassion, a leftist by deceit.

A liberal wants to try a different approach, a leftist wants to replace the system.

A liberal believes in fair play and honest disagreement, a leftist believes in hiding the truth and crushing dissent.

A liberal believes you may have a point, a leftist believes there are no points other than his.

A liberal says this country is great, but can be greater through dialogue. A leftist believes some other country is great and this country makes him puke.

A liberal wants equality for all persons regardless of gender, color or creed, a leftist wants class and racial warfare.

A liberal wants to take the poor and give them a chance to be rich, a leftist wants to take the rich and make them poor.

The liberals are gone, Roger. The leftists have consumed them. I love the liberals, I despise the leftists. What Christopher cannot see…is the lefitst (sic) magicians on stage, not with their trinkets hidden up their sleeves…but dangling from them in plain view…and daring us to shout out what we see….because, if we do…they will scream that we are racist and paranoid and not nuanced enough to appreciate the trick they are about to pull.

And if a brilliant and informed man like Christopher Buckley can be taken in by the sleight of hand, what possible chance does that leave for those who stand to vote the difference in this election? I’m afraid this magician’s show will make many of our fondest liberties disappear. For that, we will all pay the price of admission.

I don’t know who this cfbleachers person is, but I’d sure like to read more by him/her.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:14 | link | comments (5)

Effin’ crazy: Don’t miss the FrontPage piece about how Fanny and Freddie funded foolish and feckless far-lefties (who now blame the sitting government and Wall Street fat cats for the financial fiasco and the “failure” of capitalism).

…To gain a fuller appreciation for just how closely the mortgage companies were allied with the Democratic Party and its surrogates, one might look at the grant-making arms of Fannie and Freddie — specifically, the Fannie Mae Foundation and the Freddie Mac Foundation. The former was established in 1968, the latter in 1991. Together, they hold combined assets exceeding $285 million, and each year they give tens of millions of dollars (nearly $89 million in 2006 alone) in grants to predominantly leftwing organizations that promote a host of pro-Democrat agendas. Among the groups supported by Fannie and Freddie are the American Civil Liberties Union; the NAACP and the National Urban League; left-wing financier the Tides Foundation; pro-illegal immigration groups like the Mexican American Legal Defense & Education Fund, the National Immigration Forum, and the National Council of La Raza; pro-Democratic community activist groups like the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the Center for Community Change, and the Alliance for Justice; feminist organizations like National Organization for Women and the National Women’s Law Center; and former president Jimmy Carter’s Carter Center. A comprehensive list of liberal, leftist, and pro-Democratic Fannie and Freddie grantees would fill an entire book…

A book called “Gone With The Wind” no doubt, since that’s where everyone’s pension money seems to have gone.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:21 | link | comments

A little bit is better than nada: I happened to catch my favourtie golf movie--Tin Cup--on the tube last night (I'm a sucker for any sports flick featuring Kevin Costner seducing a pretty gal). It strikes me that the message of its bouncy theme song applies to love and chocolate, but not to free speech.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:58 | link | comments

Churchill they ain't: Toronto Star "culture" pundit Martin Knelman calls the starving artists' effort to reinstate government arts funding (eee-vil Stephen Harper, in an admittedly foolish and ill-timed measure, had cut some of it) the "Arts warriors' finest hour."

Oh, please. Their finest hour would have been if, instead of kvetching about how the government was "censoring" them by refusing to fund every crappy soft-core film production that cantered up to the public trough, they had finally awoken to the fact that, while they were enjoying the largesse of the taxpayer, someone up and swiped everyone's free speech. Where's the spleen, the outrage, the furor over that--the totalitarian "human rights" apparatus that really can and actually does censor us? There isn't any, and there likely won't be any, because these so-called "warriors" are far too absorbed in their own little pictures to notice or care about the bigger one, and far too busy trying to firm up government funding for the next Young People F**king.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:18 | link | comments

The skeptic (Mark Steyn) and the Bambi-soxers: When the two met up, the inevitable hilarity ensued. From NRO:

...The day after the debate I bumped into two Obama supporters in St Johnsbury, Vermont who said isn’t it great that he's on course to win. Well, they were cute chicks, and I know an obvious pick-up line when I hear one, so I stopped to chat. God Almighty, it was like reverse Viagra: After ten minutes of Babes For Barack, I never want to meet a female woman of the opposite sex for the rest of my life. Their basic pitch was:

 

How do you solve a problem? Like, Obama!

How do you hold a moonbeam in your hand?

That’s John McCain's problem. Traditionally, when an unknown politician emerges on the national scene, it’s a race to define him. Governor Palin is a good example: within days, the coastal sophisticates were mocking her as a chillbilly ditz with a womb that spits out inbred kids faster than the First National Bank of Welfare Swamp issues subprime mortgages. That’s politics as usual: Define your opponent. But Obama is defined by his indefinability. When I pointed out to my Vermont gals that he lives in a swank pad that was part of some shady real estate deal with a convicted fraudster (Tony Rezko), that he entrusted his daughters’ entire religious education to a neo-segregationist anti-American nut who preaches that the government created the AIDS virus to kill black people (Jeremiah Wright), that he attended fundraisers with a political patron who’s an unrepentant terrorist proud of plotting to blow up young ladies just like them at a dance at the Fort Dix military base (William Ayers), when I pointed all this out, they looked at me as if I’d brought a baseball bat to a croquet match. Mere earthbound politicians are defined by their real estate deals and sleazy buddies, but Obama is defined only by his vibe. As his many admirers in France would say, he has a certain je ne sais quoi. And, if you try to pin down quoi precisely, then they don’t want to sais.

Besides, said one of the cuties, it’s racist to try to link him to unsavory white men (Ayers). And black men (Wright). And Arabs (Rezko). And, just to be on the safe side, any dodgy Uzbeks or Papuans who might have been lurking around the greater Chicago area for the last quarter century. The ladies weren’t exactly covering their eyes and going, “Neee-neeee-na-na, can’t hear you,” but the other cutie did begin waving at me her Obama sticker — the one with the giant blue-frosted O embedded in a manicured candy-striped upland — like the villain in the movie trying to hypnotize you with his pocketwatch. I began frantically looking around in hopes that a passing Hare Krishna or Scientologist type could get me out of there. But, no: Gaze into the giant zero of the Obama logo, the hole in the star-spangled donut, the vast fathomless nullity that is the gaping keyhole to the door of utopia. To a sad shriveled Republican cynic, there’s nothing there but the wide open spaces of Obama’s blank resume. But a believer will see therein the healing of the planet and the receding of the oceans. The black hole of Obama will suck you in through the awesome power of its totally cool suckiness…

Or, to quote a rotund but solidly-built Jewess re her birthplace, Oakland, CA: There’s no there there. (A propos the Jewess but not the Big O--a candidate who has the depth and heft of a hologram--I highly recommend Janet Malcolm’s Two Lives: Gertrude and Alice. It’s a slim, deliciously-written volume about a couple of Jewish lesbians who somehow managed to live in France during WWII without being hassled by the Nazis. It’s also a look at some of the scholars who are obsessed with the larger Jewess’s impenetrable writings and assuring her unreadable “masterpiece,” a novel that makes Finnegan’s Wake seem as pellucid as Stephen King, its place in the literary canon.)

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

Head games: An Iranian actress who appeared in a Hollywood movie turned up in public afterward sans a head shmatta—and all hell has broken loose back home. The Toronto Star has more:

TEHRAN–When Iranian movie star Golshifteh Farahani moved from Tehran to Hollywood, she didn't bring along her Islamic headscarf, which is obligatory in her own country.

The 25-year-old actress appeared at the New York red-carpet premiere of Ridley Scott's new action movie, Body of Lies, last week sporting a broad smile, a sleeveless designer dress and bare curly hair. In the movie, which also stars Leonardo DiCaprio and Russell Crowe, Farahani plays a pious Muslim woman who works as a nurse.

In the past week, heated debates on dozens of Iranian websites have pitted those who support Farahani's decision to remove her scarf against those who accuse her of selling out her Muslim heritage.

This is not the first time a prominent Iranian woman has been photographed in the West bareheaded. When human rights activist and lawyer Shirin Ebadi received the Nobel Peace Prize in Sweden in 2003, she didn't wear a scarf at the ceremony. Following harsh criticism at home, Ebadi said nowhere in Iranian law was it written Iranian women are obliged to cover their heads when they are abroad.

Farahani has starred in numerous domestic box-office hits and won several national acting movie awards. The Iranian public, however, has never seen her without a hijab covering her hair.

Farahani told the New York Daily News at the premiere that she had experienced "a lot of problems because of this movie."

Iran's Kayhan newspaper, which supports the government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said Farahani's scarf-free appearance in New York was the result of a conspiracy.

"The cinemamafia takes female actress to America," one headline read. "They have forced her to appear in front of cameras without hijab and in inappropriate clothing. They immediately published the pictures on websites," the paper said, adding, "Western groups try to break the taboo of being without a head scarf."…

And “Eastern groups” have invested a huge amount of symbolism in a small piece of cloth—a bit of fabric that represents a chick’s complete submission to those who want to control every aspect of her life via their repressive, misogynistic law. A “conspiracy” of another sort, I’d say.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:07 | link | comments (1)

Opportunity knocks: “The Jews,” who have tons of liquidity and have used some of it to buy up high profile American companies and landmarks (including the Empire State Building), have been suffering from the economic meltdown, too. Some of the “Zionist Elders” will be gathering in the Middle East to lick their wounds, try to staunch the bleeding, and figure out how to capitalize on others’ misfortune (because one man’s economic implosion is another, richer man’s economic opportunity). From Reuters:

DUBAI (Reuters) - Private equity executives from the United States and across the Middle East descend on Dubai this week to seek out investment partners and deals during one of the most tumultuous periods in the industry's history.

The three-day annual Super Return Middle East conference coincides with extreme volatility in the financial markets and a credit freeze that has only exacerbated the inability of the firms to access financing for leveraged buyouts.

Attendees will be watching addresses from Wall Street moguls such as KKR's Henry Kravis, Carlyle's David Rubenstein and Blackstone Group's LP (BX.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) Steve Schwarzman for signs of how U.S. private equity will ride out the storm and the investment opportunities they see emerging.

From the Middle East, the focus will be on private equity and sovereign wealth funds, with speakers including some from Dubai government investment agency Istithmar World Capital, which owns fashion retailer Barneys New York; and Saudi-based private equity firm Swicorp, which recently bought a stake in leasing company Jordan Aviation.

Behind closed doors, a flurry of meetings are expected as U.S. private equity executives test for any appetite for further ventures, fund raising and deals from a region that has been burned by investing in the United States.

Some sovereign wealth fund investors have taken stakes in companies whose shares have dived dramatically, as well as faced a hostile reception from critics questioning their political motives. That has caused concern among U.S. buyout bosses about continued investment in the country.

TOUGH INVESTMENTS

"Imagine a private meeting in a room far from the US; a decision is quietly made and billions of dollars that were invested here find a new and more hospitable home," wrote Schwarzman in a recent column in the Financial Times. "Or billions of dollars that could have been invested here are reallocated to other more benign markets."

High profile investments have included U.S. bank Citigroup Inc (C.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz), which in January raised $12.5 billion from a private sale of convertible preferred securities to investors, including Kuwait and Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal. Citigroup's shares have lost about half their value this year.

Other investments include Abu Dhabi buying a $1.35 billion stake in Carlyle Group in September 2007 and Dubai taking a $1.26 billion stake in U.S. hedge fund Och Ziff Capital Management Group (OZM.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) in October 2007 before it went public, priced at $32 a share. Och Ziff shares have lost about 80 percent of their value since then.

Middle East investors bought $42 billion worth of U.S. assets last year and have spent $14 billion so far this year, data from Thomson Reuters shows. That vastly outweighs funds flowing the other way, with $1.4 billion invested last year by U.S. firms buying Middle East targets.

Private equity investments in the Middle East by U.S. firms totals $652 million so far this year.

In addition to buying direct stakes in companies, sovereign wealth funds have invested in private equity funds. A report earlier this year from London-based Private Equity Intelligence estimated they have up to $150 billion committed to private equity, equivalent of up to 10 percent of the global total capital available to the industry…

And don’t forget—"the Jews" conrol the media, too.

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:47 | link | comments

Sock thoughts:

Here’s Khurrum Awan’s interview last January with Excalibur, the student newspaper of Gaza York U. It makes for interesting reading in view of what was to follow:

Khurrum Awan is an Osgoode Hall alumnus who has gone on to be a positive face for Muslim Canadians across the nation

At age 27, Khurrum Awan has already accomplished things most people have not been able to accomplish in a lifetime (cliché aside). In 2007, he graduated from York University’s Osgoode Hall Law School and has since gone on to represent Muslim Canadians and numerous other humanitarian concerns. 
Awan is a man of many words that turn into actions. This man is set to make a difference in the future for not only Muslim Canadians but all Canadians. Like most of us, he has a vision. Unlike many of us, however, he also has a plan. Awan’s plan will be put into high gear when he finishes his articling this year at the Supreme Court of Justice in Toronto and becomes an official human rights lawyer.

Excalibur: What age did you decide to become a lawyer? Why did you choose this path?

Khurrum Awan: I decided in my second year of undergrad at the University of Waterloo. I was always interested in law and politics and really saw a place for me in public life. I was also quite interested in human rights and civil liberties.
Especially after the 9/11 crises, I sensed the negative environment and racism against Muslims, Arabs, Pakistanis etcetera. This encouraged me even more to be in this sort of area because many laws were being passed, such as the Anti-terrorism Act, which limited laws for these groups of people and that was completely unfair.

E: How do you think becoming a lawyer in the near future will help your aspirations come true?

KA: I have been able to accomplish a lot of goals as a law student and by articling.
For instance, I appeared in front of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration and that was for the purpose of representing the interests of Muslim communities because the committee was studying possible changes to bring in Canada’s citizenship laws, which would most likely make it harder for Muslims to come to Canada.
I appeared in front of the Senate Committee to discuss the anti-terrorism law. The Senate was doing a review of the Anti-terrorism law, and so I was making suggestions as to what kinds of changes needed to be made to ensure that the law complied with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for everybody, including Muslims.
Most importantly, I got together with other students at Osgoode Law School and formed a group to work on the misrepresentation of Muslim communities by the mass media. We are currently working on fighting a case against Maclean’s magazine. Maclean’s magazine published an Islamophobic article called ‘The Future Belongs to Islam,’ which basically represented the idea that Muslims are multiplying too quickly in Western societies and that they wish to impose oppressive Islamic law on Western societies. […] So we filed a human rights complaint.

E: How were you able to become such a vital part in so many big projects?

KA: I have done a lot of this work through the Canadian Islamic Congress, which is a volunteer group I have been working with since I got into law school.

E: Being a Muslim student in law school, what kinds of stereotypes and problems have you already run into and expect to come across again?

KA: I have come across a number of issues. There are negative assumptions of Muslims by the media. I often hear negative views and misrepresentations of Muslims in the legal business. People also assume that just because you’re a Muslim lawyer, you will only be interested in Muslim issues. However, I am interested in helping all Canadian citizens receive social justice.

E: How do you hope to overcome those stereotypes and problems?

KA: The way to overcome these stereotypes and problems is to let your work speak for itself.
I also want to do good work for all Canadians and simply be a good and ethical lawyer who rises to the top with honesty and professionalism. If you work hard enough, you can overcome any obstacle. I also think it’s important to actively engage in broader issues that concern the Canadian society as a whole…

 

So far, so good. I’d say it’s just a matter of time before Khurrum gets snapped up by Smilin’ Jack and the NDP. What better way to engage in “broader issues” than by becoming an M.P.?

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:49 | link | comments

This just in: Harper says he's not the devil.

This 'toonist, whose work is featured on the Ceeb site, begs to differ.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:34 | link | comments

Don’t know much about history: Who “don’t”? Why those clueless ‘roos, of course. Here’s another morsel from their lope to judgement (it can’t be called a “rush,” since they bloody well took their time): 

[125] Dr. Ayoub acknowledged that there are those of the Islamic faith, both historically and today, who believe that they understand the “true Islam” or claim exclusive knowledge of the faith. Today’s violence, perpetrated in the name of Islam, is not based in Islamic tradition or in scripture. Dr. Ayoub’s concern about the Article is that the actions of a fringe group like al-Qaeda are described as being the norm. That is, the reader is asked to conclude that all Muslims believe or act in this way. He testified that Islamic extremists, who represent only a small group of Muslims, generally pose a problem world wide and specifically pose a problem for Muslims. This is particularly true for Indonesia, a Muslim country, and among the world’s most peaceful.

[126] Drs. Rippin and Ayoub criticized the Article’s inaccurate and misleading reporting of events in different European countries. The Article uses these erroneous reports to show Islam as an unchanging and homogenous religion about which generalizations can be made or to create fear of the impact Muslims have on European culture…

And here’s a noted Islam expert—Raymond Ibrahim—who, go figure, wasn’t called by the sock side—on a famous historical event that prevented Muslims from broadening their impact on European culture: 

Precisely 100 years of Islamic conquests after Muhammad's death (632), the Muslims, starting from Arabia, found themselves in Gaul, modern day France, confronting a hitherto little known people—the Christian Franks. There, on October 11th, 732, one of the most decisive battles between Christendom and Islam took place, demarcating the extent of the latter’s conquests, and ensuring the survival of the former.

Prior to this, the Islamic conquerors, drunk with power and plunder, had, for one century been subjugating all peoples and territories standing in their western march—from Arabia to Morocco (al-Maghreb, the “furthest west”). In 711, the Muslims made their fateful crossing of the straits of Gibraltar, landing for the first time on European ground. Upon touching terra firma, the leader of the Muslims, Tariq bin Zayid, ordered all the boats used for the crossing burned, asserting “We have not come here to return. Either we conquer and establish ourselves here, or we perish.” Islam was there to stay.

This famous Tariq anecdote—often reminisced by modern day jihadists—highlights the jihadist nature of the Umayyad caliphate (661-750), the superpower of its day. As most historians have acknowledged, the Umayyad caliphate was the “Jihadi-State” par excellence. Its very existence was closely tied to its conquests; its legitimacy as “viceroy” of Allah based on its jihadi expansion.

Once on European ground, the depredations continued unabated. Writes one Arab chronicler regarding the Muslim northern advance past the Pyrenees: “Full of wrath and pride” the Muslims “went through all places like a desolating storm. Prosperity made those warriors insatiable…everything gave way to their scimitars, the robbers of lives.” Even far off English anchorite, the contemporary Bede, wrote, “A plague of Saracens wrought wretched devastation and slaughter upon Gaul.”

Strange anecdotes also find their way in the chroniclers’ accounts during this time. The Muslim chronicler Abd al-Hakim reports that, after landing on an island off Iberia, one of Tariq’s squadrons discovered that the only inhabitants were vinedressers. “They made them prisoners. After that, they took one of the vinedressers, slaughtered him, cut him into pieces, and boiled him, while the rest of the companions looked on.” The Muslims proceeded to eat halal meat—cannibalism of course being forbidden in Islam—while letting the vinedressers believe they were eating their companion, resulting in a rumor that Muslims feast on human flesh.

At any rate, this must have been the picture the men to the north had of the invaders from the south—wild and insatiable madmen, possibly cannibals, mounted on swift steeds, not unlike, in this manner, the Huns of old, who, under the “anti-Christ” figure of Attila, came ravaging through Europe, only to be defeated, in part by the Franks, in the year 451 at the Battle of Chalons, also in modern day France, 150 miles east of Tours.

“Alas,” exclaimed the Franks, “what a misfortune! What an indignity! We have long heard of the name and conquests of the Arabs; we were apprehensive of their attack from the East [Siege of Constantinople, 717-718]: they have now conquered Spain, and invade our country on the side of the West.”

Oh, Raymond, stop with the "stereotyping".

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:14 | link | comments

From the BC ‘roo judgement: Read the sucker again. Found this, the crux of why the complainants “lost” (my bolds):  

We think that Dr. Rippin put it best when he said that the Article is a rallying cry to the “West”. The Article may attempt to rally public opinion by exaggeration and causing the reader to fear Muslims, but fear is not synonymous with hatred and contempt.

[158] We accept that it may be possible to link feelings of fear with hatred and contempt but in the absence of any expert evidence which makes that link in the context of the Article, we cannot find that it was done so in this case.

[159] The Article, with all its inaccuracies and hyperbole, has resulted in political debate which, in our view, s. 7(1)(b) was never intended to suppress. In fact, as the evidence in this case amply demonstrates, the debate has not been suppressed and the concerns about the impact of hate speech silencing a minority have not been borne out.

 

In other words: The system works! A great victory for free speech (since this case ended up stimulating “debate,” not terminating it)! Now go back to sleep and let us get on with the job of silencing those who don’t have the clout of Mark Steyn and Maclean’s, and the financial wherewithal of their benefactor, Ted “Mr. Moneybags” Rogers!

Posted by: scaramouche at 15:43 | link | comments

Damned if they do or they don’t: On The American Thinker site, Edward Bernard Glick, professor emeritus of political science at Temple University, poses some timely questions:

…Does Israel's present prime minister have the guts to emulate Menachem Begin, and to emulate him right now? Does the Israel Defense Force have the skill to do to Iran today what it did to Iraq a quarter of a century ago? Is Israel willing to use tactical nuclear weapons if it concludes that conventional weapons won't do the job? And does Israel realize that if Democratic Sen. Barak Obama wins the American presidency next month, it may never have the chance to take out its mortal foe?

There are uncertainties. But one thing is certain, however: Neither Israel's friends, nor my former Saudi students, nor Israel's other foes will ever publicly thank it for taking out the Mad Mullahs of Teheran.

If you’re going to be damned either way, you may as well try to do what it takes to survive—assuming you want to survive, that is.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:54 | link | comments

Artistes vs. Philistines: In light of Stephen Harper's cutting, then reinstituting, funding for Canada's starving creative types, the Toronto Star, of all places, suggests we take a gander at this--a Yes, Minister spoof of "arts funding".

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:30 | link | comments

It was twenty years ago today: The Toronto Sun’s Salim Mansur observes a momentous anniversary—the 20^th year since the release of Allan Bloom’s best-selling ruminations on moral relativism/political correctness, and how it was destroying Americans’ ability to think rationally.

Twenty years ago a dense meditation on the state of higher American education by a political philosopher at the University of Chicago rose to the top 10 of the New York Times non-fiction bestseller list.

Allan Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind discussed how liberal education, by pushing cultural relativism in American universities over the previous 25 years, undermined critical thinking. Bloom taught Plato, and he recalled for his readers Plato's famous allegory of the cave and man's escape from its darkness via philosophy.

Bloom wrote, "A culture is a cave. (Plato) did not suggest going around to other cultures as a solution to the limitations of the cave." Instead, according to Bloom, Plato held "philosophy, not history or anthropology, is the most important human science" for assisting individuals to emerge eventually from the closedness of caves to the openness of republican democracy.

Cultural relativism is anthropology's revenge on philosophy, and subversion of critical thinking or reasoning. The function of rational thought is to assist individuals learn how to discriminate between good and evil, right and wrong, truth and falsehood, beauty and ugliness. But for such discrimination there needs to be standards -- measurements and criteria -- by which what is good, or true, or beautiful can be discerned, appreciated and separated from what is evil or false or ugly.

WHITE MALES

But cultural relativism insists standards are arbitrary construction of norms and values by those holding power or, in other words, predominantly white males.

Moreover, cultural relativists by conflating discrimination with bigotry put a chill on critical thinking and corrupted liberal education by subjecting it to political correctness.

For Bloom, the closing of the American mind meant dismantling of rational inquiry in higher learning. He observed, "As Hegel was said to have died in Germany in 1933, enlightenment in America came close to breathing its last during the '60s."…

Bloom helped prepare us for new Dark Ages—an age replete with troofers instead of critical thinkers; incoherence instead of reason; mush instead of intellectual rigour; “niceness” instead of enlightenment. One thing not even he could have foreseen twenty years ago, though: that our age of moral relativism would give rise to a movement devoted to a religious law in which there is no relativism; in which everything is clear-cut, all-encompassing and precise.

No, back then not even a scholar with Bloom’s brain-power could have anticipated the rise of the sharia agenda—and how nicely it would  dovetail with the closing of Western minds.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:07 | link | comments

“Pride” in Toronto: Arab “pride,” that is—a cultural attribute that will be celebrated next weekend at Harbourfront. The event, advertised here, is being “co-presented” by the Canadian Arab Federation (the Canadian taxpayer, presumably, being the other co-presenter), and is described thus:

Heritage Day - Arab Pride | October 17-18, 2008

Discover the magic of Arabia! Arab Pride−Heritage Day showcases the cultures and traditions of more than 20 Arab nations that stretch from Morocco and Algeria in the west to Yemen and Oman in the east. Featuring an Arab souk, Arabic sittings, folklore dances, workshops in belly music, food, poetry, and all facets of Arab Canadian culture.

When I fasted for Yom Kippur I heard plenty of “belly music”—and I didn’t even need to take a workshop.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:58 | link | comments (1)

Bluesy 'roos: That B.C 'roos Maclean's judgement was such an eye-glazer. Don't you wish they could have done it in song, maybe a la Ray Charles? Oh wait, I think I hear them now...:

Hit the road, Mac,

And don’t you talk back

No more, no more, no more, no more.

Hit the road, Mac,

And don’t you talk back no more.

(What we say)

Hit the road, Mac,

And don’t you talk back no more.

 

Woah, Markie, oh Markie, sarcastic and “mean”.

The meanest opiner we ever have seen.

Don’t like the stuff that you say.

So pack it up and go away. (That’s right)

 

Hit the road, Mac,

And don’t you talk back

No more, no more, no more, no more.

Hit the road, Mac,

And don’t you talk back no more.

(What we say)

Hit the road, Mac,

And don’t you talk back no more.

 

Now Teddy, oh Teddy, know you got the dough.

That’s why we’re all givin’ this one the heave-ho.

Don’t care if you know that it’s understood

You got too many shekels, and that’s just no good.

We’re wantin’ to keep this one short

So it don’t go to a real court. (That’s right)

 

Hit the road, Mac…

 

Yes, I know, I know: the 'roos ruled "in favour" of Maclean's and Steyn. A great victory for free speech. The system works, and all that crap. Big whoop. I for one am still feeling might chilled, knowing that my words and thoughts are subject to the approval of the likes of the B.C. 'roos. Time was when I thought they were merely clueless apparatchiks with Marxist mush for brains. Now, however, I think they know exactly what they're doing. Nazi cellar fellers being decidedly scarce these days, the're looking to hold onto their cushy jobs by branching out into the anti-blasphemy game--one of the few genuine growth industries in these economically uncertain times. And given that at least some Canadians (a "radical fringe"?) are unlikely to want to go gentle into that sharia night, chasing down "blasphemers" should keep the censors busy (and in the money) for many years to come.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:26 | link | comments

The Sock speaks: The guy member of Elmo’s hosiery triad reflects on the Maclean’s ‘Rooling (pun completely intentional). From the Province (my bolds):

…Khurrum Awan, an articling lawyer and CIC member who prepared the complaint, said he was happy the tribunal agreed with CIC's assertion that there was a "fear-mongering tone" to the article.

"We do hope news media in Canada will examine critically the way that they have been covering Muslims and Islam in their news and editorial coverage, and find an appropriate balance to be able to talk about important social issues while not publishing material of the nature in this case," said Awan.

The high-profile case has come to symbolize the clash between two competing rights: freedom of expression --  guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms -- and the freedom to be free from discrimination -- guaranteed under federal and provincial anti-discrimination laws.

The B.C. tribunal itself came under fire for hearing the complaint in the first place, with journalists and some academics saying it would put a chill on future debate on sensitive topics.

Ah, yes—that ever-elusive “balance”. When you manage to track it down, Khurrum, could you please let these folks know? They’ve been searching high and low for it, too.

Posted by: scaramouche at 22:47 | link | comments

Shades of Hitler and the Grand Mufti: German neo-Nazis see Islamists as their natural allies.

Well, duh.

Posted by: scaramouche at 22:21 | link | comments

“It a real good thing what the BC ‘roos did”: I have perused the BCHRT ruling which dismissed the case against Maclean’s and Steyn, even as it chided the two for their “factual errors” (another instance of the quasi-judicial systems’ ability to have its cake and eat it too—see the Babsy Hallmonitor “verdict” in the “hate” case she wasn’t allowed to hear). My conclusion: there’s still a distinct Wahhabi-like chill in the air, and nothing whatsoever had changed. The “Nice” Forces still too have way too much power, and we, the not-always-so-nice, continue to live in a freaky Twilight Zone episode, where we’re at the mercy of an adorable, freckle-faced moppet, who, if we’re not careful is apt to think us into the cornfield. (And that corn is as high as an elephant’s eye, isn't it Rev. Boisson?)

As a bracing gust of clarity—an antidote to the mushy-brained useful idiocies of the clueless ruling—I am delighted to offer this example of Steynian “hate speech” from back in April. Enjoy it while you can, because if the “Nice” enforcers/Islamophobiaphobes have their way, such anti-social expression will soon be consigned to the past, when, once upon a time, we were free:

…I quote from "Concepts Of Race And Racism And Implications For OHRC Policy" as published on the OHRC website:

"The denial of racism used by so many whites in positions of authority ranging from the supervisor in a work place to the chief of Police and ministers of government must be understood for what it is: an example of White hegemonic power over those considered 'other.' "

Got that? Your denial of racism merely confirms your racism — because simply by being a "White hegemon" (like Barbara Hall or Jennifer Lynch) you wield racist power. The author, Frances Henry, cites the thinking of "modern neo-Marxist theorists" as if these are serious views that persons of influence in Canada's "human rights" establishment ought to be taking into account, rather than just the latest variant of an ideology that's led to the deaths of millions in Russia, China and everywhere else it's been put into practice. Yet, underneath the blather about "omissions" and "denial" of racism is the bleak acknowledgement that, alas, Canadians just aren't hateful enough to justify the cozy sinecure of taxpayer-funded hate police. "I would say that for a province as large and as diverse as Ontario, to have 2,500 formal complaints a year, that that's a very low level," Commissar Hall said. C'mon, you Ontario deadbeats, can't you hate a little more? Or complain a little more? To modify Brecht, we need to elect a new people, if only to file more "human rights" complaints.

Oh, and again, isn't that kind of a Nazi thing to do? Exaggerate the threat in order to justify government powers to deal with it?

Well, look, the defenders of the present "human rights" regime started this whole free-speech-leads-to-the-Holocaust line. I'm not saying that Canada's thought-crime enforcers are planning to murder millions of people, only that (as Jennifer Lynch might put it) history has shown us that extraordinary government powers in the name of "reasonable limits" often lead to hurtful actions that undermine freedom and have led to unspeakable crimes. Whether or not I'm the new Führer and Maclean's is Mein Kampf, Commissars Lynch and Hall are either intentionally inverting the historical record or, to be charitable, simply ignorant. But, if it's the latter, why should they have extraordinary powers to regulate public discourse?

I don't have as low an opinion of Canadians as Barbara Hall and Jennifer Lynch do. I don't believe your liberty is the conditional discretionary gift of hack bureaucrats advised by Marxist theorists. You defeat bad ideas — whether Nazism, Marxism, jihadism, Steynism or Trudeaupian pseudo-"human rights" mumbo-jumbo — in the bracing air and light of day, in vigorous open debate, not in the fetid corridors of power policed by ahistorical nitwits.

It's not a left/right thing. It's not a gay/straight thing. It's not a Jew/Muslim thing. It's not a hateful Steyn/nice fluffy caring compassionate Canadian thing.

It's a free/unfree thing. And the commissars are on the wrong side.

Indeed, but at the moment, it looks like the wrong side may be winning.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:08 | link | comments

Ken’s “clarification”: NOW Magazine, the hard lefty freebie rag with the full-colour sex adverts in the back (and delusions of being a voice of influence throughout), prints the following missive from "misunderstood" Liberal MP Ken Dryden:

I am writing with regard to your recent article Dryden Blurs Liberal Stance On Mideast (NOW, October 2-8). I am concerned the article, reporting as it does on an important exchange that occurred at an all-candidates debate in York Centre, mischaracterized my position on aid to Gaza. I said – and I stand by my statement – that we should restrict government-to-government aid to Gaza, due to the Hamas-led government’s continuing refusal to disavow violence and recognize Israel’s right to exist. My statement was clearly in reference to government-to-government aid. That was the context of the discussion, and in subsequent discussions with your newspaper, that point was underscored.

However, your article leaves the false impression that I implied or otherwise meant that I support halting humanitarian aid and food distributed through various United Nations and other humanitarian agencies. That is not my position, nor did I say that during the all-candidates debate.  Tragically, the residents of Gaza face a daily struggle for survival. I believe, and the Liberal party believes, that Canada must continue to provide humanitarian aid through non-governmental agencies. 

I regret any confusion on this matter, and I thank you for the opportunity to clarify what was printed in your newspaper.

Ken Dryden, P.C., M.P.

York Centre

I don’t know about you, but now I’m thoroughly confused. If, as Ken insists (in what will undoubtedly turn out to be a futile gesture meant to prove his “street cred” to NOW’s angry, anti-Zionist readers) Gazans are facing “a daily struggle for survival,” does that mean that “humanitarian aid” isn’t getting through? And if that's the case, then why don’t more people in Gaza patronize this local supermarket, which seems to be extremely well-stocked for a supposed disaster zone?

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:09 | link | comments (3)

 The “mean” meme: I’m sure you’re aware of it, since it’s become epidemic.  In Canada it sounds like this:

·         Those neocons who severed brake lines and wrote insulting graffiti on Stephen Harper’s orders ARE SO MEAN.

 

·         That Stephen Harper, with his hidden neocon agenda IS SO MEAN.

 

·         Isn’t it MEAN that Stephen Harper, that MEAN neocon, is so completely lacking in empathy for the average Joe/Josephine who’s about to lose his/her home because of the financial meltdown.

 

·         That MEAN Stephen Harper—he doesn’t care at all about the environment.

 

·         Why won’t the Tories “repatriate” poor Omar Khadr? They’re so MEAN.

 

·        It’s so MEAN of those Conservatives to harp on Stephane Dion’s difficulties speaking the English language. It isn’t his first language, you know, and he’s doing the best he can.

 

·         MEAN Stephen Harper, taking money out of the mouths of starving artists.

In the U.S. it sounds like this:

·         There go those MEAN neocons again, trying to make our Bambi look bad just because of his close association with Rev. Wright/Bill Ayers/ACORN/Rashid Khalidi/that Black Muslim supremacist etc., etc., etc. Boy, are those MEAN neocons ever MEAN (know what I mean?).

The flipside of all this, of course, is that those on the Left are “nice”. Really nice. So “nice” that they would gladly allow in a “little bit” of sharia, if it makes people happy. So “nice” that they are willing to jettison free speech, if it means sparing people from “hurt” feelings.  The price of “nice” is  abject submission (a.k.a dhimmitude)—a price that, go figure, only the blue meanies here and abroad refuse to pay. Therefore, it is a given that Western civ. depends on the “mean”: The “nice” can lead us only to perdition.

Posted by: scaramouche at 16:54 | link | comments (1)

Move over, Rev. Wright: Bambi claims to be stalwart in his support for the Jewish state’s right to be, but the coterie of Jew-haters/Allah-fans that surrounds him makes such a claim risible, to say the least. FrontPage Magazine has an article about one these dubious characters, a Black Muslim supremacist who was another of Boy Bambi’s many father figures:

Black Muslim lawyer Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour recently made news when it was revealed that he was a patron of Barack Obama and recommended him for admission to Harvard Law School in 1988. Back in the 1960s, al-Mansour, whose “slave name” was then Don Warden, was deeply involved in Bay Area racial politics as founder of a group called the African American Association. A close personal adviser to Huey Newton and Bobby Seale, al-Mansour helped the pair establish the Black Panther Party but later broke with them when they entered coalitions with white radical groups. After becoming a Muslim, al-Mansour found not only an ideological justification for his racism but also a political purpose. That was, in the words of a memorandum produced by the Muslim Brotherhood and seized by the FBI as part of its probe of the Holy Land Foundation, to “eliminate and destroy the Western civilization from within.” Many black racists like al-Mansour are key figures in this “stealth” jihad, whose prime recruiting grounds are the U.S. prisons and mosques where inmates and worshippers alike are taught to embrace a radical Islam engaged in an apocalyptic battle against America.

Al-Mansour met Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal in the mid-1970s and formed a relationship that led to al-Mansour’s hiring as attorney to King Saud. He has since been an adviser to Saudi billionaires who fund the stealth jihad and spread Wahhabi extremism in America.

Other black racist Islamists play less glamorous but equally significant roles as Imams at major mosques in the U.S.; as chaplains in prisons and jails; and as radical figures who haunt American higher education by advising and speaking for organizations such as the Muslim Students Association (MSA) on campuses across the nation. Whatever audience they target, they speak a lingua franca of anti-white, anti-Semitic, anti-American hatred—all in the name of Allah.

And why is it that black racists such as al-Mansour constitute a significant proportion of these hate mongers? In large part, it is because blacks have been specifically and aggressively targeted for recruitment by leaders of the worldwide jihad, just as they were targeted for recruitment by the Communist Party USA in the 1920s. Black grievance, combined with the evangelism of the Nation of Islam over the last seventy years, has established an audience for the ideology of hate…

No, no, no. Blacks, having at one time been enslaved by the White Man, can never be “racist”. And anyone who says differently is ipso facto racist himself (that’s me, channelling the mainstream thinking of the Lefty establishment and the anti-hate/victim grievance industry).

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:28 | link | comments

Satire is what closes on Saturday night: As we know, Tina Fey is dead-ringer (and sounder) for a woman she clearly loathes, Sarah Palin. But you can bet that no one on SNL is brave (foolish?) enough to impersonate the epitome of human perfection, the beloved of God, the one, the only...Barack Obama.

Just jesting, of course. SNL “does” Bambi all the time, but would never dream of impersonating the gentlemen whom many refer to as “the seal of the prophets.” Some intrepid Germans joshers, however, are said to be ready to go where American satirists fear to tread. From Der Spiegel:

German Satire Magazine Shocks with 'Unbelievable Competition'

A Muhammad look-a-like competition is slated to take place during the Frankfurt Book Fair, and it has already offended and outraged people far beyond Germany. But Titanic, the monthly satirical magazine behind the inflamatory event, insists: "It will be a blast."

Titanic, the German satire magazine, is never far from polemics, but its latest action takes its reputation for controversy to new heights: It is staging a Muhammad look-a-like competition -- and has invited the Turkish President Abdullah Gül to take part.

Turkish newspapers were quick to react to the "unbelievable competition," which is to be held parallel to the Frankfurt Book Fair, where Turkey will be the guest country this year. The popular Turkish daily Sabah drew parallels with the infamous Muhammad cartoons published in Denmark's Jyllands-Posten newspaper in 2005, which sparked death threats and protests across the Muslim world, with some escalating into violence.

 

According to its Web site, however, Titanic is going ahead with its look-alike contest: "Come along to the most dangerous event of the Frankfurt Book Fair ... It will be a blast," it wrote. The competition, to be held on Oct. 18, is set to take place on a specially built stage at the state-funded Caricatura Museum in Frankfurt. Achim Frenz, head of the museum, said it was designed to test of the boundaries of "jokes and fun." The museum's Web site comments: "Of course it is a sin to represent the prophet. For this reason, we are trying to do something exceptional."

During the competition there will be readings from the Koran and participants will be encouraged to mimic the Muslim prophet. "Of course you can never create a picture of the prophet," the magazine claims in a flyer advertising the event, "but you can try to emulate him."

Titanic, the German equivalent of Britain's Private Eye, has a track record of inflamatory stunts, including hoax bribery faxes sent in 2000 to delegates of the FIFA soccer world championship committee, urging them to support the German bid for the 2006 World Cup. In return for their votes, Titanic offered gifts of a cuckoo clock and Black Forest ham. Titanic also founded its own political party, Die Partei (the party), which lists the rebuilding of the Berlin Wall as one of its goals.

The museum head’s name is Achim Frenz? Too perfect!

Get set for the frenz-y, Achim.

Update: Sarah Palin is set to appear on SNL. Can't wait to see "Tina" Palin and Sarah Palin appearing on the same stage--and Sarah impersonating Tina.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:01 | link | comments (1)

The wearing o' the Green: And I ain't referring to the Irish or environmentalist variety. In this photo of a still-standing New York City landmark, the upper floors are bathed in an aura representing the colour of its new owners' religious affiliation:

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:32 | link | comments

Judgement Day: Well, it's finally here. After months of sifting though mountains of evidence offered by Slayer experts and other savants; months of concerted cogitation and deliberation (with the odd day off here and there for some well-deserved R&R), the B.C. marsupials are finally ready to reveal their verdict in the Steyn-Maclean's show trial. Will they, as many believe, decide that they've hooked much too big a fish this time to continue operating with impunity (and thus let the fish off the hook)? Or will they, sensing the total collapse of Harper's forturnes and knowing how firmly entrenched the "Nice" industry is in Canada's body politic, and how unwilling any political party is to take it on, go with the Islamist flow and convict the "Islamophobes" of a "hate crime"?

All will be revealed at noon 'roo time today.

Update:"Victory" for the "hate-mongers." Yup, that fishy was TOO big for these 'roos. This represents a Phyrric victory, of course, since Maclean's doesn't get to appeal the judgement to a real court. Meanwhile, there's still a definite chill in the air, and while the "Nice" Cops and 'Roos may not be prepared to take on loudmouths like Levant and Steyn, the folks with smaller voices who have moths flying out of their wallets--the Rev. Stephen Boissons, and Guy Earles--are going to remain in their line of fire.

That said, I'd have loved to see the expression on Elmo and the Sockettes' faces when the verdict was announced. I expect it looked something like this.

Update: Andrew Coyne, the Maclean's scribe who live-blogged the sucker, calls it "Phyrric," too:

More comment to follow once I’ve read the thing, but be clear on this: it is no victory to be told by a shadowy government agency that you will be permitted to publish. This ruling only preserves the tribunal from utterly discrediting itself, and as such keeps alive the possibility that some other complainant can drag Maclean’s or any other media organization through yet another travesty half-a-continent away, at great expense of time and money. It also prevents Maclean’s from appealing the tribunal’s decision to an actual court, wherein it might have had the relevant section of the B.C. human rights laws thrown out on constitutional grounds. (Or does it? Can you appeal when you win?)

So the real fight, that of returning our human rights laws to their original purpose, and permanently clipping the wings of the human rights commissioners, will have to be won in the political arena. Until that day…

Until that day we must continue to invoke the Levant mantra without let up: FIRE. THEM. ALL.

Update: If anyone's keeping score, in the matter of Elmo's socks vs. Maclean's, it's two out of three for the latter. Lest we forget, OHRC Commissar Babsy Hallmonitor declared the defendants "guilty" of "xenophobia" and "Islamophobia," even though her Commissariat had no authority to try the case.

Update: Inquiring Steynians want to know: what does the verdict mean for Steyn's writing career in Canada? Has the chill given Maclean's frostbite, or is he going to return?

Update: Header in the National Post--Maclean's wins 'hate speech' human rights challenge in B.C.

My question: shouldn't the "win" and the "human rights" be in quotes, too?

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:04 | link | comments (7)

Should we hae them; shouldn't we hae them?: The good people of Scotland are reportedly split on whether to follow England's lead and allow Sharia Courts into the land.

That piteous yet defiant moan you now hear is the sound of William Wallace rolling over in his grave.

Update: A report about a couple of "Scots" who want to see Sharia rule.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:29 | link | comments (2)

Cherry-picking Harpoon: Some selected recent “wisdom” from the Toronto Star’s much-honoured, highly-revered pundit:

On Stephane Dion:

·         Dion is a sincere and honest politician, untainted by scandal. He is a polite and decent man. He is not mean or vindictive. He does not treat his political opponents as enemies. He does not question the patriotism of the critics of his Afghan policy, let alone call them agents of the Taliban. He is not proposing to send 14-year-olds to jail for life.

 

·         But Dion's plan is more than what Harper is offering: himself as the Great Helmsman.

On Stephen Harper out-Bushing Bush:

·         At times, Harper has been more pro-Israel than Bush. He made Canada the first country to start starving the Palestinians for electing Hamas in January 2006.

On Harper’s "duplicity" re Afghanistan:

·         Similarly on Afghanistan, Harper is trying to mislead Canadians. "I don't believe, and I have said many times, that we can pacify every corner of Afghanistan." And that he does support Hamid Karzai negotiating with the Taliban.

 

In fact, what he has conveyed to Canadians is that he would never cut and run; that he would never, ever negotiate with terrorists; and that he would squish them.

On fellow America-loather, John Ralston Saul, whose latest polemic (which blames Capitalism and Canada’s “ruling elites’” submission to the U.S. and the great God mammon for all that ails us) is simpatico with Harpoon’s world view:

·         They [Canada’s ruling elites] see Canada as an American appendage, as their predecessors saw it as Britain's. They are loyal to American military adventures, as their predecessors were to Britain's. It makes them "feel important to be at war in the shadow of a great power. ...

 

"It is this character weakness [saith Ralston Saul]  that got us into trouble over Maher Arar; caused our refugee rules to be changed to suit Washington; causes our serious newspapers to give more coverage to the Academy Awards than do serious U.S. newspapers; discouraged our elites from leading an interesting public debate on Iraq and anti-terrorism; makes Toronto business people to think that bringing a National Football League team to Toronto from a declining U.S. city is a sign that Toronto is becoming an important place. The possible effect on the Canadian Football League is of no concern to them."

 

It is this attitude that's returning Canada to its "assigned role as that of a source of raw materials for the U.S. That's what peripheral colonial societies are for."

 

The attitude also partly explains our democratic deficit, with the elite rarely delivering what Canadians demand: fix medicare; end child poverty; reduce economic disparity; and maintain an independent foreign policy by keeping a distance, say, from the U.S. way of waging war in Afghanistan.

 

"This entire pattern I am describing does seem improbable. The insecurity, the self-loathing, the incapacity to act, the fear of owning, the resurgent colonialism. What's all this doing in the oldest, continuous democratic federation in the world – a G8 country, rich, peaceful, comfortable? How could its elite slip so effortlessly back into old colonial habits?"continuous democratic federation in the world – a G8 country, rich, peaceful, comfortable? How could its elite slip so effortlessly back into old colonial habits?"

What’s “the insecurity, the self-loathing, the incapacity to act” doing here in Canada?  It has nothing to do with the fat cats’ “colonialism” (a favourite buzz-word of Islamists and loony Lefty intellectuals alike) and everything to do with the self-contempt that is part and parcel of the Raltson Saul anti-U.S., anti-Western, anti-Capitalism perspective. Harpoon shares that perspective, but not out of self-loathing. His desire to see Capitalism collapse and America slink off in to the night has to do with a desire to see Islam accorded its proper place in the world.

With the recent global financial collapse, and its concomitant panic, the Ralston Saul/Harpoon hopes and dreams have been given an incalculable boost.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:02 | link | comments (2)

One more before I go: Debbie Schlussel explains that, Lebanese assertions to the contrary, Israel did not "steal" falafal, hummus and other delectables from the Arabs. In fact, hummus is an Israeli invention, and the rest of the food items have long been a staple of Sephardic cuisine in Arabs lands, where Jews had lived for centuries until they were unceremonioiusly kicked out (without food or compensation) following the '48 War of Independence.

In deference to the day of fasting that begins at sundown, I will not post a photo of any of these purportedly purloined edibles.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:33 | link | comments

Me too: JPost.com will resume after Yom Kippur.

To whom it may concern: easy fasting, y'all.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:47 | link | comments

Oprah's rabbi to bring Yom Kippur to the Web: I think I speak for many when I say, "Oprah has a rabbi?"

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:45 | link | comments

Come one, come all: The Canadian Constitutional Foundation is hosting its second annual law conference, Oct. 17-19. This year's theme--Individal Freedom and the Common Good: Defining Human Rights in a Free Society--should be of interest to all free-speechers, as well as to those who believe that free speech must end when "vilification" begins.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:22 | link | comments (1)

What would happen if the whole world got to vote in the U.S. election?: Bambi wins, hands down.

That should (but likely won't) set off alarm bells, considering that the whole world hates American power, sat rapt as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad slayed 'em at the UN, and is planning to take part in the upcoming "Kill da Jews"/Islam Rocks event, Durban II.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:12 | link | comments

Artists victorious: Stephen Harper has decided that it’s in his interest to subsidize crappy, unwatchable Canadian soft-porn after all. From the Ceeb:

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper's promise to reverse plans to scrap tax credits for productions deemed offensive to Canadian viewers came as a pleasant surprise Tuesday to those in the film and television business and a major blow to the religious right.

"The arts community, I think, can almost relax and unpack their bags," actor Gordon Pinsent said in a telephone interview with the Canadian Press.

Pinsent said he never would have expected such a change of heart from the Conservatives, and he wondered whether it means Harper may be open to other new ideas.

"This flexibility shows he can be flexible again."

Harper revealed the change of heart as part of his party's much-anticipated election platform.

While Pinsent suspects the decision, which came just a week before the election and with the Conservatives flagging in the polls, was largely political, he said he'll take what he can get.

Harper may be hoping the reversal will help his party at the ballot box on Oct. 14, particularly in Quebec, where opposition to Tory cuts to cultural programs has been the fiercest in Canada.

The controversial changes to film and television tax credit eligibility were folded into a massive, 569-page, highly technical tax reform bill that passed in the Commons earlier this year despite widespread protest.

Plan would've killed growing industry: producer

The government argued the provision was needed to keep tax dollars from funding objectionable productions, and Heritage Minister Josee Verner was to spend the next year consulting with industry to find a formula for assessing taxpayer-subsidized productions.

A film about the sex lives of young singles entitled Young People F---ing — which coincidentally comes out on DVD the day of the election — became a lightning rod in the debate over the bill.

Producer Steve Hoban called Tuesday's decision "good news all around" and a sound economic move, given the worldwide market meltdown.

He said the plan would have ultimately killed the domestic film industry at a time when it's growing and generating billions in economic spinoffs.

"It would have been a really dumb move to do that to an industry that's actually contributing to our economy," he said.

"What this would have meant is that banks would not have known for certain whether productions would get that tax credit or not and if a production was not certain to get it, the bank couldn't guarantee it.

"If a bank couldn't guarantee it, it meant we wouldn't have that chunk of financing to make the films with in the first place.

"There would be 140,000 people thrown out of work immediately, and there would be billions of dollars of economic benefit to Canada disappear overnight."…

I say put them to work in the most “creative,” well-funded and fastest-growing sector in the country—the “human rights” industry.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:04 | link | comments (3)

Chilling thoughts: A letter in the National Post applauds the CJC/Weimar approach to “free speech”:

Re: Lesley Hughes' Hateful Fantasy, Bernie M. Farber, Oct. 6.

Conspiracy theorists are entitled to their opinions, but the right to free expression ceases at the moment that it causes harm by vilifying an identifiable group.

Bernie Farber understands correctly that evil deeds follow evil words and that 9/11 "truth seekers" need to wake up and realize that their accusations against Jews and Israel have serious consequences in the real world.

Rubin Burstyn, Thornhill, Ont.

Actually, Rubin, in Germany’s case the evil deeds followed years of censorship—the same kind we have in operation here in Canada. But no doubt it’s a great comfort to you and other Jews to think that robbing everyone of their free expression is a small price to pay if its ends the vilification (even though, clearly, it has done nothing of the kind, as evidenced by the ever-popular Israeli Apartheid Week, Malarkey MacKinnon in the Globe and Mail and the vilifying words expressed, freely and fulsomely, by leaders of the CAF, the CIC and other anti-Zionist groups).

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:53 | link | comments (4)

You’ve been warned: Anne Bayefsky lays out the whole gloomy doomsday scenario that could be in store should American voters put abortion ahead of Armageddon on their list of priorities. From NRO (my bolds):

Since the time of Hitler, civilization has never been so close to the brink of total catastrophe.  This American election will decide whether civilization as we know it will survive.  As much as economic questions are currently front and center, with blame to go all round, this is not an election primarily about corporate greed, or individuals living beyond their means, or government neglect of economic oversight. Nor is it about whether we should have gone into Iraq where, like it or not, American boots on the ground have begun to create an emerging democracy. This election is about whether there will be a nuclear holocaust.

Alarmist? I sure hope so. Isn’t it about time that we got to the point about the stakes in this election? How many more pundits do we have to watch talking about the minutae — a candidate’s look, an accent, a stumble, a slogan? We have four weeks to talk about the thing that matters most: a nuclear-armed Iran, and which candidate will prevent it.

The question that must be put point-blank to both presidential and vice-presidential candidates is: “Will you authorize the use of force in time to stop Iran from acquiring the capacity to make nuclear weapons — yes or no?”

Wouldn’t your beliefs for and against abortion fade if you thought nobody would be born into a world fit for living things? Wouldn’t your worries about health care pale if you thought the mutilation, cancer, and death of millions upon millions, sure to follow nuclear war, would occur in your lifetime? Wouldn’t your concerns about affording a college education fade if you thought your children will have the grim task of fighting a war of horrifying devastation instead of going to school?

Wake up. There is a genocidal maniac on the verge of reaching the point of no return in his ability to make a nuclear weapon. A fanatic with the stated ambition to murder five million Jews living in Israel — to start. A villain who has already funded and armed a terrorist war against the Jewish state that in 2006 forced one-third of Israel’s population to live underground for almost a month. In other words, an individual who is ready, willing, and able to give the nuclear trigger to a terrorist group — to terrorists who cannot be bargained with because they prefer their death to your freedom. As for the suggestion that the Mullahs are more powerful and nicer guys, the millions brutalized and subjugated in Iran tell a different story.  

I don’t know why it is possible after the Holocaust, to have such widespread denial of man’s capacity for evil. Nor do I understand why Ahmadinejad’s virulent anti-semitism and call for the destruction of Israel are dismissed as irrelevant factoids when calculating the Iranian threat. Time has a story about “experts” who believe that Iran seeks an atomic bomb not because they have any interest in using it or passing it to others who will, but to deter, to ensure its security. According to Thomas Fringar, chairman of the U.S. National Intelligence Council: “Iran’s biggest strategic concern is obtaining security assurances and accords,” and it is the United States “which the Iranians consider a mortal threat.” These “experts” have it exactly backwards. If Iran were really driven by such security concerns, these concerns could be alleviated without spending a nickel — by stopping its nuclear-weapons campaign and its funding of terrorists.

No amount of ignorance, stupidity, or wishful thinking will change the reality that there are people who are prepared to kill you and your family for no good reason at all. Not because of poverty, or envy, or discrimination or because of anything you’ve done. But because they hate you — whether you live in Jerusalem, Washington, London, or Paris. They hate everything you stand for — liberty, tolerance, equality. And their minds are made up. Closed — period — to the entreaties of naïve foreign diplomats or would-be presidents and vice presidents…

 

Closed—period—and not even Godalmighty Obama is ever going to crack them open.

Posted by: scaramouche at 22:51 | link | comments (1)

Holocaust denial vs. free speech:  If she has to choose between free speech and allowing people the freedom to freely deny the Holocaust, Melanie Phillips says, difficult thought it may be, she must opt for the former. A cri de coeur from a die-hard free-speecher, these words should (but won’t) be a wake-up call to Canada's Official Jews, who, to a man (and you'll notice, they're all men), have opted for the phony protection afforded by censorship:

…As a Jew, I am acutely alive to the vicious potential of denying the Nazis’ attempted extermination of the world’s Jews. Such lies are used to whip up hatred against the Jewish people by effectively accusing them of fabricating claims of genocide.

There is no question that this not only denies the historical evidence of Hitler’s ‘Final Solution’, but also subjects Jews round the world to further hatred and persecution. Holocaust-denial is, indeed, a modern form of Jew-hatred.

But, through gritted teeth, I have to say that I am totally against the extradition of this man and appalled at the political and legal developments that have brought these moves about.

There are two fundamental issues at stake here. First is the threat to the principle of freedom of speech. Second is the erosion of Britain’s power to uphold its own historic commitment to that principle.

Freedom of speech is a bedrock of our society. Sure, it’s not absolute; but we limit it only in the most rare of circumstances where it poses a direct threat to individuals, such as inciting or encouraging people to violence.

For similar reasons, we also outlaw incitement to racial hatred. But we draw a distinction, for example, between inciting hatred of people for what they inescapably are, which we rightly treat as a crime, and inciting hatred of their views, which we see as part of the cut and thrust of a liberal democratic society. That’s why there was such uproar over the new crime of incitement to religious hatred.

It’s because of this respect for debate that this country has never criminalised Holocaust-denial. Odious as it is, it is an interpretation of history — and one which in any event defies easy categorisation.

True, it’s an interpretation that used to stir up hatred against Jewish people. But once you argue that it should therefore be made a crime, there’s no end to it.

After all, you could make exactly the same point that the current vilification of Israel and the denial that it is the victim of aggression in the Middle East has led to an upsurge in violence and prejudice against Jews worldwide…

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:20 | link | comments (2)

Derangements across the border: Recently, I posted about an American Jew I know who averred that, even if Adolf Hitler was the Democratic candidate for president, said Jew would still vote for the Democrats. (I suggested that, in that case, this gentleman would likely have no problem voting in an entire Nazi slate, including Joe Goebbels for Veep and Adolf Eichmann for Secretary of State.) I think I just heard the Canadian equivalent of this gobsmacking statement. A friend told me about a Canadian Jew she knows--a highly-paid, purportedly intelligent individual--who describes Prime Minister Stephen Harper (you know, the guy who consistently stands up for Israel and has balked at taking part in the international Judenhassfest, Durban II) as--wait for it--"the devil incarnate."

It looks like at least one--and perhaps even both--of these Jews may end up getting the leader they (though not I) deserve.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:13 | link | comments

Arrivaderci, Roma: That’s me bidding a fond farewell to Italia (and the possiblity of another visit there) after reading this--Caroline Glick’s assessment of Italian complicity in furthering the Arab/Muslim eliminationist agenda . From JWR:

In a letter to Italy's Corriere della Serra in August, former Italian president and Senator-for-life Francesco Cossiga acknowledged that during the early 1970s, then Italian prime minister Aldo Moro signed an agreement with Yassir Arafat's PLO and affiliated organizations that enabled the Palestinians to field terrorists, operate bases and store weapons in Italy in exchange for immunity from attack for Italy and Italian interests worldwide. Cossiga also acknowledged that even when the Palestinians murdered Italians, the government still protected them. Indeed, he admitted for the first time that the largest terror attack ever to take place on Italian soil - the bombing of the Bologna train station in July 1980 which killed 85 people - was the work of PLO-affiliated terrorists from George Habash's Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine...

At the time of the bombing, Cossiga was Italy's prime minister. Right after it occurred, he blamed the atrocity on neo-fascists. In his words at the time, "Unlike leftist terrorism, which strikes at the heart of the state through its representatives, black terrorism prefers the massacre because it promotes panic and impulsive reactions."

In August, he claimed that it was the work of the PFLP and asserted that the bomb exploded inadvertently. That is, the Palestinians hadn't meant to kill non-Jews - so Italian authorities protected them…

COSSIGA ALLEGES that his country's agreement with the Palestinians has recently been expanded to include Hizbullah. After the Second Lebanon War, Italy agreed to command the UNIFIL force charged with preventing Hizbullah from reasserting control over southern Lebanon and blocking its re-armament efforts. Yet Cossiga asserts, "I can state with absolute certainty that Italy has a deal with Hizbullah according to which UNIFIL forces turn a blind eye to Hizbullah's rearmament so long as no attacks are carried out against soldiers in the force."

Ganz notes ruefully that although Cossiga's statements provoked the Italian Jewish community to demand that Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi investigate the government's collusion with Palestinian terrorists, no such investigation is likely to be forthcoming. Ganz explains that Berlusconi himself is not immune to the anti-Semitism that caused his predecessors to abstain from protecting Italy's Jewish citizens. When he addresses Italian Jews, Berlusconi often calls the Israeli government "your government," and so exposes his adherence to the view that Jews are not true citizens of any country other than Israel.

The anti-Semitic belief that all Jews are Zionists and therefore all Jews are fair game in the war against Israel - itself simply another round of the age-old war against the Jews - allows anti-Semites to obfuscate the fact that their anti-Israel rhetoric is simply warmed over Jew-hatred. People like Iranian leaders Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Ali Khamenei, and Palestinian terrorists from the PLO and their progeny in Hamas and Hizbullah nearly always limit their threats to "Zionists," and so pretend that they aren't actually anti-Semites.

Their razor-thin deception is eagerly embraced by their fellow travelers in the West - from university professors like Juan Cole, Steven Walt and John Mearshimer, to policymakers like Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski, to Western decision-makers and European heads of state, and an alarming number of American politicians.

This deception is par for the course of anti-Semitism. Throughout history anti-Semites have used Jew-hatred as a way to rally their troops. By attacking Jews as the collective enemy, tyrants have given their people a convenient, weak culprit to attack to deflect criticism away from their own failures or to hide real enemies from pacifistic publics uninterested in fighting. Anti-Semitism appeals to people's basest instinct. But people don't like to acknowledge how much they hate Jews, and Jews have always preferred to deny that they are hated.

So anti-Semitic leaders have disguised their appeal to base instinct by pretending that they are actually appealing to sublime aspirations. In the case of the Nazis for instance, Adolf Hitler and Josef Goebbels appealed to Germanic pride and love for the Fatherland. Today, the Left appeals to people's aspirations for peace and justice. It is only by permitting and indeed enabling Jews to die and the Jewish state to be destroyed that "peace" can be secured and the Palestinians can receive "justice."…

Sad to say I will be eliminating Italy from my travel itinerary for the time being, even though the sights there are beauteous and the food is molto delish.

Posted by: scaramouche at 15:17 | link | comments

Oops!: Even a well-meaning albeit completely loopy Wahhabi vice cop can occasionally mess up. From Arab News:

JEDDAH: A 22-year-old Saudi woman told Arab News yesterday that she and her husband of four years were stopped on a road by the religious police of Al-Jurf, west of the holy city of Madinah, accused of being an unrelated man and woman in an illegal state of seclusion (khulwa) at about 1 a.m. on Sunday.

“As we were driving home, my husband and I realized we were being followed by three men in a car,” said the woman, who did not want her name published. “They were coming from both sides of the car and (at one point in the chase) were also in front of our car. I was afraid of having an accident. The whole scene looked just like something in a movie.”

She also said that because no police officer was accompanying the three members of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, her husband was afraid to stop. Eventually, the commission vehicle got in front of the car they were pursuing and forced the couple to stop, according to the woman.

Abdullah Al-Zahrani, the head of the Madinah branch of the commission, confirmed to Arab News yesterday that the commission was tailing the couple, but he maintains that the three commission members did not abuse the suspects. He also claims that the two are not married.

“The woman is neither his wife nor his cousin,” said Al-Zahrani.

When asked if the police, in response to the woman’s complaint, had questioned the commission members over what happened early Sunday morning, he said the police did not seek any clarification. “The police did not question the commission members, as they (the commission) are a monitoring body, which hands suspects over to the police for further investigation,” he said.

The couple has filed a complaint and the Commission for Investigation and Prosecution is looking into the case…

Say, wasn’t that an old Vaudeville line: “That was no lady; that was my first cousin”?

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:47 | link | comments

You knew it was coming: Hamas blames "the Jews" for the global financial meltdown.

Yeah, it was that Fanny Mae Goldberg and that Freddy Mac Shapiro.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:36 | link | comments

Peggy's priorities: Doyenne of CanLit, revered author Margaret Atwood (Peggy to her intimates) has been speaking her mind lately--and how--about the perils of cutting funding to the arts, condemning the philistine leader who would dare foist such an outrageous policy on us. About the peril to the arts and expression in general posed by the Supreme Court-sanctioned absence of free speech in the land, and the maintenance of "correct thinking" via a powerful and egregiously well-funded "anti-hate"/pro-censorship nomenklatura, alas, the novelist/poet/essayist/literay critical has remained strangely, indeed, steadfastly silent.

Anyone care to venture an opinion as to why that might be?

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:00 | link | comments (3)

A poem describing the MSM's reaction to their Bambino's close friendship with a former Weatherguy:

Nobody cayers

About Ayers.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:34 | link | comments

The dubious company he keeps: Wright and Ayers and Khalidi, oh my.

And don't forget Soros and Zbig.

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

Eye-jinks in the Magic Kingdom: By now you may have heard about the Saudi cleric who thinks that the eye slit in burqas is far too revealing (since it often reveals that a Muslima is--gasp--wearing eye make up) and who wants chicks to wear a one-eyed shroud. I bet you haven't heard this, though--the song the cleric has written for his one-eyed burqa campaign. It reminds me of a novelty tune written some years ago by a kafir named Mr. Shep Wooley:

Well, I saw something comin’ out of the store

It had a chaperone--couldn’t see much more.

It commenced to walkin’ and I said “ooh-eee”

It looks like a perfect burqa cover to me.

 

It was a one-eyed, black sack, perfect burqa woman cover,

(One-eyed, black sack, perfect burqa woman cover)

Revlon begone makeup-hiding woman cover

Sure looks good to me (too bad she can't see)...

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:46 | link | comments (1)

Head hunting: The UN nuclear watchkitten, the IAEA  is on the prowl for a brand new feline to lead it--and I have the perfect candidate for the job. He’s young (well, youngish), passionate, energetic, and really has a way with people. I’m speaking, of course, of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a man who, at this stage of Iran’s ongoing cat-and-mouse game with the watchkittens, could be considered a world expert in nuclear stealth.

I realize that taking on such a job means that he may have to give up some of his other activities—Holocaust denial, trying to sweep the map clean of Jews, doing Hitlerian stand up at the Turtle Bay Yuk Yuk’s—but I’m pretty sure he could work something out.

Set a nuclear miscreant to catch a nuclear miscreant: Hey, it could work, right?

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:05 | link | comments

Unhinged in the Star: No official word yet about who’s responsible for the election vandalism in Toronto (Liberal signs defaced with graffiti; brake lines cut) but several letters in the Toronto Star claim to be all-but certain of who’s behind it. Here’s one of them (my bolds):

Kudos to the Star for exposing yet another obvious Stephen Harper- ordered dirty trick. The cutting of brake lines on Liberal supporters' cars in the Toronto St. Paul's riding is typical neocon behaviour. Stay on this story, or better yet, get Bob Rae and his investigative team on it. Between the two groups, I'm positive you will find a link between this callous threat to Liberals' lives and the Harper Conservatives, even if you have to make it up. Everybody knows how mean the Tories are.

Kirk Cederberg, Streetsville

Well, Kirk, seems to me you can always find a link to a group you despise if you’re prepared to “make it up.” Heck, you've practically described the entire history of antisemitism. As for the inventive Mr. C.’s assertion that “neocons” typically deface houses and cut brake lines, I’d like to assure him that I know plenty of neocons who have never, ever, not even once, not even on a bet, not even to win an election, indulged in such dangerous, not to mention criminal, behaviour. To purposely make your own party look bad, especially when it’s faring pretty well in the polls—would be patently, obviously stupid.  Also self-destructive. Also extraordinarily, stratospherically stupid. And one thing you should know about us “neocons”: we may be “mean,” but we’re not stupid.

Two other letter-writers are upset because the can see a disturbing historical commonality:

It starts with slander, slanderous jokes and slanderous ridicule, which lead to hatred in unstable people. Politically, that is how Hitler started his campaign against the Jews. It was 1944 and Poland's 3.5 million Jews had nearly all been murdered. As I walked holding my terrified mother's hand in Charnkow, a small Polish town, German women were encouraging their children to run after us spitting and shouting "Polen." Since slanderous ads can trigger deranged people to act, they should be banned from all political advertising.

Eugene Gmitrowicz, Toronto

The initial non-response by the party leaders to the attempted murder of 26 Liberal supporters in the Toronto ridings of St. Paul's and Parkdale High Park was telling. Our election process has been dragged to the level of a Third World dictatorship. Great leaders would have insisted that every house in those ridings sport Liberal party signs, in solidarity. Less courageous ones would have suggested that all signs be removed from all lawns, again in solidarity. The lack of solidarity against tyranny was particularly abhorrent on this day: Holocaust Memorial Day in Toronto.

Laurence Bernstein, Toronto

So there you have it. Without the least bit of evidence, some people have jumped to the conclusion that “neocon” Harper and his “mean,” murderous Tories are preparing to pull a Hitler and unleash a genocide of…the Liberals.

Get a grip, folks. You’ve lost it.

Update: Mean neocons have now upped the ante and are making threatening phone calls to terrified (and terrorized) Liberals. The Ceeb (which kind of has a vested interest in ensuring that the mean neocons are sidelined) offers this photo, an example of the mean neocons' handiwork:

 All my mean neocon pals refer to the Liberals this way, so it must be legit.

Posted by: scaramouche at 09:52 | link | comments (6)

Consorting with terrorists no biggie to Bambi-fans: He’s shocked—shocked!—to learn that Rev. Wright was a racist William Ayers was a terrorist.

Not that it matters to the Bambi-soxers. They love The One no matter what.

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:05 | link | comments

Deep fried theft: Oh, those greedy, grasping Jews. First they “stole” their homes. Next they “stole” their land. And now,  in a theft that cannot, will not, be ignored, the ultimate indignity: they’ve stolen their balls.From YNet News:

Lebanon is planning on filing an international law suit against Israel for violating a food copyright, Fadi Abboud, president of the Lebanese Industrialists Association, told the al-Arabiya network.  

 

The Lebanese claim is that Israel markets original Lebanese food like tabouleh, kubbeh, hummus, falafel and fattoush which the Lebanese considered their trademarks prior to the establishment of the Jewish state.

 

Abboud explained that the fact that Israel has been marketing Lebanese delicacies under the same names and ingredients around the world has caused great losses to Lebanon, and that while, “the full extent is unknown, it is estimated at tens of millions of dollars annually.”

 

Abboud, who prepared a memo on the subject, based his case on the, ”feta cheese precedent” that occurred six years ago.

 

At that time, France, Denmark and Germany asserted that Greece cannot have a monopoly over the production of this type of cheese. Greece managed to prove in international institutions that it is the cheese’s “originator” and won the case.

 

Until that point, the three prosecuting countries produced 12,000 tons of cheese a year.

 

The court ruled that from then on, other countries could not use the name “feta”, as this cheese is “largely associated with Greece’s history and has been produced under this name for 6,000 years.”…

 

Ah, yes—the infamous “feta cheese precedent.” Too bad it doesn’t apply since, last time I checked, LEBANON WASN’T A MEMBER OF THE EU. Which means that falafel and all the rest of these yummy comestibles fall into what global purveyors of fried chick pea balls and we, their grateful customers like to call “the public domain”.

 

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:37 | link | comments

Fatah kidvid:  As this Palestinian Media Watch video posted on You Tube shows, Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah TV for moppets is every bit as pernicious as Hamas TV for moppets (and equally determined to rip off Walt's iconic rodent.)

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:49 | link | comments

Thanks for coming and try the genocide: Jonathan Tobin derides the lackadaisical response to the hairy Shia troll whose last gig, which was extremely well-received, involved doing a fabulous impression of Der Fuhrer at the Turtle Bay Yuk Yuk’s (a return engagement, no less). From JWR:

On the threat from Iran, we got some good news, bad news and even worse news.

The good news: Both presidential candidates think the prospect of Iran going nuclear is a bad thing.

Republican candidate John McCain went straight to the bottom line in the first presidential debate when he flatly stated, "We cannot allow a second Holocaust." Should Iran gain nuclear capability, he declared, it would be an "existential" threat to the existence of the State of Israel, as well as a danger to the rest of the world.

Moments later, his Democratic rival Barack Obama echoed some of those sentiments when he, too, asserted, "We cannot tolerate a nuclear Iran. It would be a game changer. Not only would it threaten Israel, a country that is our stalwart ally, but it would also create an environment in which you could set up an arms race in the Middle East."

A bipartisan consensus that Iran is a genuine threat to world peace is essential, and the fact that both candidates affirmed this stance, while disagreeing about just everything else, was an important step toward building support for action on the issue.

DIPLOMATIC DEAD END
The bad news is that there is no such consensus as to what can be done about Iran.

McCain spoke of tough sanctions to be enforced by his pet notion, a "league of democracies," led by the United States and its principal Western allies, which would bypass the United Nations and inflict so much economic pain on Tehran that it would give up its nuclear ambitions.

Obama dismissed McCain's "league" idea, saying that for sanctions to work, we would need non-democratic nations, such as Russia and China, to help us. He believes direct diplomacy with both those nations, as well as Iran, can do the trick.

But neither option ought to inspire much hope.

McCain's "league" is a grand idea, but the notion that Britain, France and Germany, not to mention the rest of Western Europe, will abandon the U.N., as the instrument of policy on this question, is unrealistic.

If push comes to shove on Iran - and it almost certainly will - what the world will need is an America that is not willing to be fettered by our feckless allies. Anyone waiting for Europe, even democratic Europe, to take action before that "existential" problem is resolved hasn't been paying attention to the continent recently.

As for Obama's blind faith in his ability to win over China and Russia, let alone Iran, the kindest thing one can say is that he's a trifle optimistic. The Iranians have used every meeting with the West (including one that was the result of a recent humiliating retreat on the part of the Bush administration) as evidence that they can't be stopped. Both Beijing and Moscow have also been crystal clear that they will not allow the U.N. or the United States a free hand on the issue and haven't the slightest intention of backing the sort of crippling sanctions that could actually bring the Iranians to their knees.

What could be even worse than that? The fact that, while the presidential candidates were talking tough on Iran, the object of their rhetoric spent a triumphal week in New York City addressing the U.N., CNN and even a Quaker dinner - to applause.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad used his speech before the U.N. General Assembly, as well as a typically fawning interview with CNN's Larry King, to spout Holocaust denial and other anti-Semitic lies about Zionism, Israel and the Palestinians.

Even after all this, there is still some debate about how seriously to take the Iranian. Obama rightly pointed out in the debate that he is not actually the most important person in Iran and that his diatribes are mere "nonsense" that ought not to prevent us from sensible diplomatic outreach.

But while he may appear to be a clown to Americans, Ahmadinejad is serving his role of front man for the Islamist ayatollahs quite well. More to the point, his provocations are showing the Islamic world that America can do nothing about him…

Did somebody say “clown”?  In his day, this “joker” was considered pretty clownish, too. Turned out the joke was on us, though, wouldn't you say?

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:56 | link | comments

Tough call: According to Ron Csillag on the JTA site (anyone know if he’s still writing for the Canadian Jewish News?), Canadian Jews are having a tough time deciding who to vote for:

…There's no hard data on Canadian Jews'  voting trends. But one informal study showed that during the 1970s, the years of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, they voted Liberal at a rate 20 percent higher than the national average.

"There's lots of talk in both Montreal and Toronto about Jews considering supporting the Conservatives," said McGill University sociologist Morton Weinfeld, one of Canada's foremost watchers of Jewish voting trends.

Weinfeld predicted a drop in Jewish votes for the Liberals, but "it may be a modest drop. I think the Jewish liberal tendency will persist but at a reduced margin."

Echoing the phenomenon of increasing numbers of  Jews leaning toward the Republicans in America, he said that some socially minded Jews are torn between Harper's support for Israel and his domestic conservatism.

Some Jews may fear that handed a majority government, the Conservatives could unleash drastic cost-cutting measures in social programs for children, immigrants, the eldery and other vulnerable populations.

B'nai Brith Canada has issued a 19-page guide to "issues of concern and recommendations for action" in this election. The guide does not endorse any party since non-profit organizations are prohibited from doing so.

The group's top domestic priority is hate-related activity in Canada. The guide notes that in 2007, there were 1,042 anti-Semitic incidents in the country -- the highest figure ever recorded by the group's annual audit, and an increase of 11.4 percent from 2006.

On the international front, the group has called for reform at the United Nations and for Ottawa to insist that "the emerging Palestinian state" end incitement to hatred, reject terrorism and move to disarm and outlaw terrorist groups.

The Canadian Jewish Congress has also laid out its issues in an election guide. They include the need to get tougher with Iran, shore up laws governing hate speech on the Internet, and developing a "national poverty strategy."

The Conservatives have also scored points in the Jewish community with a $3-million program to help beef up security at places of worship and ethno-cultural buildings. To date, they have allocated more than $600,000 to 19 synagogues, Jewish schools and communal buildings.

Dion, the Liberal Party candidate, has pledged $75 million to help ethno-cultural centers and houses of worship improve security...

Yeah, it’s a real head-scratcher. Should I vote for the guy who told Durban II organizers to “bite me” (although he may not have used those exact words); or for the guy who was elected leader at convention where Mohamed Elmasry was in attendance, and during which the Canadian Arab Federation endeavoured to scupper Bob Rae's candidacy by passing out flyers full of innuendo about his “Jewish” wife and her supposed associations with the "Zionists".

Let me sit and ponder that for a mo’.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:36 | link | comments (1)

Bambi's philosophy: To Ayers is human; to forgive, a Divine right.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:11 | link | comments

Holy rollah delighted about Great Satan’s money woes: He had it comin’, says one of Iran’s  mully-bullies (whose mutterings have been translated by MEMRI):

In his October 3, 2008 Friday sermon at the Tehran University campus, Iranian Guardian Council secretary and interim Friday prayer leader Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati said that Iran's enemies had targeted its economy, and that the U.S.'s economic crisis was "divine punishment" that had made Iranians very happy. Calling the U.S. presence on the Afghanistan and Pakistan borders a problem that "cannot be ignored." he said that Americans could expect to be "slapped in the face by Islam, Muslims, and the Islamic Revolution," and concluded his sermon by saying that since the U.S. invaded Afghanistan, "drugs are being produced and distributed under U.S. supervision."…

Posted by: scaramouche at 16:49 | link | comments

Can you say "eliminationist agenda"? The madness of Durban II.

Posted by: scaramouche at 16:41 | link | comments

The choice is yours: By all means go ahead and vote for Stephane (rhymes with “yawn”) or Smilin’ Jack or Lizzie May if you:

·         Want to “repatriate” Omar Khadr.

 

·         Think “tin foil” is a fetching shade for a chapeau and can sense the shadowy/sinister presence of the Mossad and/or Cheney McHalibushitler behind the 9/11 attacks.

 

·         Believe the “Green Shift” is a common sense approach to reducing Canada’s carbon footprint (and like to say "carbon footprint" a lot).

 

·         Plan to participate in one of more of the many festive and exciting events at this year’s Israeli Apartheid Week.

 

·         Want Canada to go to Durban II, because it’s a good place for the world community to tackle pressing issues like “human rights” and “Islamophobia”.

 

·         Think free speech is an American concept and enjoy the bracing chill that Section-13 censorship laws add to the Canadian scene.

 

·         Wish Barack Obama were running for Prime Minister or, since that’s not possible, how about that Justin Trudeau?

 

·         Admire the EU’s cradle-to-tomb support system for citizens.

 

·         Don’t see why sharia tribunals and sharia banking are such a big deal; isn’t it discrimination when you don’t allow people to have their own laws?

 

·         Remain convinced that Stephen Harper has a “hidden agenda” and the reason he has yet to reveal it is because he wants to keep it, um, hidden.

 

Did I forget anything?

Update: My friend, fellow free speecher and sistah-in-arms, WriterMom, advises me that I've missed one: You should vote for Stephane or one of the others if you "want to keep the CBC stong and healthy." To which I'd add, vote for them if you "think it's kind of nice that Avi Lewis and other former Ceeb employees have moved over to Al Jazeera (did you know it's just like CNN--only with more Arabs?), and rather liked what Heather Mallick had to say about that scary, trailer-trash hick, Sarah Palin, who I thought sounded exactly like Frances McDormand in the Coen Bros. movie Fargo until I saw Tiny Fey do Palin on SNL."

Posted by: scaramouche at 16:19 | link | comments

Watery words: Here, in really iffy English translation (at least, one assumes it’s the translation that’s at fault, since a highly educated individual couldn’t possibly be this opaque and inarticulate in his first language, French) is Stephane Dion’s response to CJPAC’s query re his position on censorship and Canada’s HRCs:

Thank you, thank you very much for the question. Well listen, us, one believes much - as you know, one is to it the party of the Canadian Charter of the rights. One believes much in the Canadian law on the human rights and in the Commission of the rights of the person of Canada and one believes that it is something that it is always necessary to reinforce and that was crucial to fight racism, the sexism, the anti-semitism and all the forms of intolerance. Thus you have in us a strong guard of these - of these tools. Now it as should be seen as there were complaints recently saying that them - that the cases which are carried before the Commission