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

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

You can’t get anything you want

At Taliban Restaurant.

You can’t get anything you want

At Taliban Restaurant.

Bow and scrape

‘Else they’ll decapitate.

Sharia is the law that they appreciate.

You can’t get anything you want

At Taliban Restaurant.

Posted by: scaramouche at 22:00 | link | comments (2)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:33 | link | comments

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:21 | link | comments (2)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:58 | link | comments

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:36 | link | comments (1)

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

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

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

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

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

 

Makes sense to me.

 

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

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:25 | link | comments

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

All I can say is: God help us all.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:59 | link | comments (1)

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

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

 

And once again it looks like the Jews are expendable.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:37 | link | comments

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

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:09 | link | comments (2)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:05 | link | comments

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

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:35 | link | comments (1)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:29 | link | comments (1)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:15 | link | comments (1)

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:51 | link | comments

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

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

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

SPIEGEL: Why?

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

SPIEGEL: What will your organization do?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:23 | link | comments (1)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Chuckles? Unaware? Now there's a shocker.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:57 | link | comments

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

3 French expats killed in Muslim-only area

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:13 | link | comments (1)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted by: scaramouche at 22:13 | link | comments

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

They say Pakistan is aiding and abetting the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Maybe it is. But U.S. President George W. Bush and Afghan President Hamid Karzai have offered little or no proof.

 

The American media are running a parallel campaign, hurling a more serious allegation, that the Pakistan army is extending logistical help to the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Most such stories are based on unnamed sources.

 

The New York Times, which in the pre-Iraq war days carried phony WMD stories, is back practising the same sort of discredited journalism.

 

In a Washington-datelined story last week on ostensible Al Qaeda camps in North Waziristan, I counted 20 attributions to unnamed "American officials," "intelligence officials and terrorism experts," "American analysts," "counterterrorism officials," etc.

 

The assertions of Pakistani involvement have been repeated so often they have become part of the received wisdom of many Canadian politicians, editorial writers and pundits as well. I do not know and have not been able to ascertain whether Pakistan is guilty or not. But, given the track record of those making the allegations, we should be skeptical.

 

In the circumstances, it is useful to know what the Pakistanis, from President Pervez Musharraf down, have been saying.

 

  Pakistan cannot possibly fully control the 2,400-kilometre border, most of it uninhabited terrain.

 

"If the U.S. cannot stop infiltration from Mexico, how do you expect us to control our border with Afghanistan that's mostly desolate and mountainous?" pleaded Tariq Azim, minister of information, in an interview in Islamabad, the capital. 

 

  Pakistan has done more in battling terrorism in the neighbourhood than any other nation. It has deployed 80,000 troops along the Afghan border, double the entire American and NATO contingent in Afghanistan, and has lost more than 700 soldiers, more than double the casualty count of all the allies.  

 

  It has helped arrest dozens of Al Qaeda and Taliban operatives, in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Musharraf: "Tell me how many Taliban leaders have been caught in Afghanistan. Name me one."

 

  The Taliban do have sympathizers among their 15-million fellow-Pushtuns in Pakistan and among the 2.6 million Afghan Pushtun refugees living in Pakistan. But the main problem lies in Afghanistan, because of widespread corruption, opium production and the incompetence of the American and NATO forces, which have failed to bring security and economic development to the population. 

 

"We don't deny that Taliban come and go but that's not the entire truth," Maj. Gen. Shaukat Sultan, spokesperson for Musharraf, told me. "If 25 per cent of the problem lies on our side, 75 per cent lies on that side."

 

  Pakistan admits that a few dozen, or perhaps hundreds of Al Qaeda members are hiding in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP).

 

Pakistan waged war on them and the Taliban over the last five years, but ended up alienating the local population. That's why it signed deals with the local tribes in North and South Waziristan, under which the army was withdrawn in return for the elders keeping the foreigners at bay.

 

"We did the same thing in Waziristan that the Brits did in Afghanistan," said Azim, referring to the arrangement the British made in Musa Qala in Helmand province. Both deals were opposed by the Americans, who insist on a military approach.

 

The deals did work, until recently, in that attacks on troops stopped.

 

But in both cases, some elements of the Taliban/Al Qaeda are now overriding the local elders and regrouping.

Lt. Gen. Ali Jan Mohammed Orakzai, governor of NWFP, architect of the deal, says: "It was imperative to switch tactics to a political approach after 700 soldiers had died, traditional tribal structures had collapsed and anti-government sentiments had soared, helping Islamic extremists."

 

In other words, Pakistan decided to cut its losses…

 

Yeah, that must be it.

 

If I didn’t know any better, I’d say it sounds like Harpoon is on Musharraf’s payroll. I would never, ever make such a suggestion, of course, since I know that Harpoon is perfectly willing to do his shilling pro bono.

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:15 | link | comments (1)

Agita in Iran: The Beeb is reporting that Moo’s intransigence is causing him all sorts of problems with the rabble: 

 As world powers seek new ways to put pressure on Iran, Sadegh Zibakalam, professor of politics at Tehran University, looks at how much popular support President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has at home.

No-one had expected Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to face such a strong barrage of criticism at home so soon after his impressive election victory more than 18 months ago.

In the past few weeks, criticism has been coming from all political quarters, the left, the reformists, former president Hashemi Rafsanjani, influential conservative figures and even some of his hardline allies.

Ever since his election victory in July 2005, Mr Ahmadinejad has been on the offensive.

Iranian officials responsible for handling the country's nuclear negotiations with the International Atomic Agency and European countries were lambasted for "acting weakly and being too docile to the wishes of the decadent Western powers".

At this stage, it's a race to the finish to see which will blow up first—the populace or Moo’s nukes.

 

My money is still on the nukes.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:51 | link | comments

 You mean there’s hope for Jimmy Carter?: The L.A. Times reports that retarted rodents have become smarter after taking an experimental drug.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:42 | link | comments (1)

Condi makes ‘em an offer they can’t help but refuse: Condi holds out what she thinks is a tempting carrot: If the mully-bullies are prepared to halt their enriching, the U.S. is prepared to hold “direct talks” with Iran. From AP via the Houston Chronicle:

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the U.S. would hold direct talks with Iran if Tehran suspended its nuclear program. Iran's president, however, pledged to move ahead with enrichment activity that Washington contends masks weapons development.

"I am prepared to meet my counterpart or an Iranian representative at any time if Iran will suspend its enrichment and reprocessing activities. That should be a clear signal," Rice said in Washington.

Earlier Sunday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad comparing his nation's nuclear drive to a train without a reverse gear or brakes. "We dismantled the rear gear and brakes of the train and threw them away sometime ago," he was quoted on the radio as telling Islamic clerics.

Iran says its energy program is peaceful…

Wow. Quel enticement. I’m sure Moo and the boys will be tempted to drop all thoughts of global domination and the return of their Messiah, the occluded 12^th imam who leapt down a well in the Middle Ages and hasn’t been seen since, for the chance to sit down and hash things out with Great Satan’s Foggy Bottom harlot.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:19 | link | comments

It’s ba-ack: Blood libel, that is. And this time the big, bloody lie is being spread by two university professors, both Jews. Rachel Neuwirth on the American Thinker site has all the gory details:

With the revival of anti-Semitism as a global phenomenon, everything old is new again. A new Holocaust is threatened in Iran, a former top military leader and presidential candidate speaks in code of the dark power of New York money circles, and now, shockingly, the ancient blood libel against the Jews is revived in seemingly respectable quarters.  After all the terrible things that have been done because of this lie, who could be so reckless as to give it new life?

Two Jewish professors, one an Israeli of Italian origin who teaches at a prestigious religious Jewish university in Israel, Bar-Illan, and is the son of a former chief rabbi of Rome, the other an Italian Jewish historian, have just revived the notorious "blood libel" that has caused the cruel murder of thousands of their co-religionists since medieval times. Professor Ariel Toaff has just this past week published a book in Italy called Pasque di Sangue, or "Bloody Passovers," reasserting that the long-discredited medieval Christian legend that Jews ritually murder Christian children, drain their bodies of blood, mingle the blood in their matzah during the Passover festival and ritually consume it, has some truth in it.

 

In an interview with the Italian newspaper La Stampa, Toaff asserted,

"My research has shown that in the Middle Ages, a group of fundamentalist Jews did not respect the biblical prohibition [against the consumption of blood]. . . It is just one group of Jews, who belonged to the communities that suffered the severest persecutions during the crusades. From this trauma came a passion for revenge that in some cases led to responses, among them ritual murder of Christian children." 

According to Israel's Haaretz newspaper, Toaff's book alleges,

"... some blood libels - accusations that Jews killed Christians in ritual murders to add their blood to matzah and wine on Passover - may be based on real ceremonies in which the blood of Christians was actually used."

Italy's most influential newspaper, left-leanig Corriere della Serra, has published extracts from Toaff's book, together with an article praising it by Italian Jewish historian Sergio Luzzato. Luzzato describes Toaff's book as a

"magnificent work of history. . .Toaff holds that from 1100 to about 1500. . .several crucifixions of Christian children really happened, bringing about retaliations against entire Jewish communities-punitive massacres of Jewish men, women and children. Neither in Trent in 1475 nor in other areas of Europe in the late Middle Ages were the Jews always innocent. A minority of fundamentalist Ashkenazis . . .carried out human sacrifices."

According to Luzzato's summary of Toaff's purported research, the fifteenth-century accusation made against the Jews of the Italian city of Trent, where 16 Jews were tortured and hanged on charges of murdering a two-year-old Christian boy and using his blood to make matzot, "might have been true." According to Luzzato, Toaff also alleges,

"a black market flourished on both sides of the Alps, with Jewish merchants selling human blood, complete with rabbinic certification of the product--kosher blood." 

To substantiate the charges of ritual murder against the Jews, Toaff relies not on any new evidence, but on the original confessions extracted through torture from the accused Jews in Trent and elsewhere...

 

Good going, guys. Your scholarship will doubtless prove as invaluable to the Jew-haters as anything delivered by one of the august academics at the hairy Islamic Hitler’ Denialpalooza. More valuable, in fact, because it was written by Jews.

 

As an aside, a relative of mine received a strange call the other day from two friends, a couple, who are not Jewish. They said they wanted to make matzoh balls, but when they googled for recipes on the Internet, the link they clicked on listed an ingredient they weren’t expecting: the blood of a juicy young Christian lad. They wanted to know what THAT was all about.

 

My relative, who wasn’t at all familiar with the medieval canard, expressed alarm and assured them that, no, Jews most definitely do not put blood into their matzoh balls. (And when you think about it, how could they, when it would turn the ecru dumplings a telltale shade of pink?)

 

When I first heard the story I was shocked at the thought that any unsuspecting person looking online for an ordinary m.b. recipe would dredge up this example of judenhass. Then I went online myself. First I googled “matzoh ball recipes.” Then just plain old “matzoh ball.” Then, I googled “matzoh ball blood recipes.” In all cases, I came up empty. To be sure I found receipes that called for a number of what I would call weird ingredients—butter? Cajun seasoning?—but nothing instructing cooks to “kill a young Christian/Muslim boy. Drain his blood. Blend well with eggs, oil, and matzah meal.” So unless these friends speak Arabic and are accessing some hate site in Saudi Arabia, I don’t know how they came up with the recipe they did.

 

Suggestions?

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:04 | link | comments

The old ball and chain (named Bill): In her bid to become president, Senator Hillary Clinton has an Achilles heel. Actually, she’s married to him. And she’s put her co-contenders on notice that she will not tolerate anyone alluding to that little indiscretion way back when that resulting in the heel’s embarrassing impeachment. From the Washington Post:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has a new commandment for the 2008 presidential field: Thou shalt not mention anything related to the impeachment of her husband.

With a swift response to attacks from a former supporter last week, advisers to the New York Democrat offered a glimpse of their strategy for handling one of the most awkward chapters of her biography. They declared her husband's impeachment in 1998 -- or, more accurately, the embarrassing personal behavior that led to it -- taboo, putting her rivals on notice and all but daring other Democrats to mention the ordeal again.

"In the end, voters will decide what's off-limits, but I can't imagine that the public will reward the politics of personal destruction," senior Clinton adviser Howard Wolfson said Friday, when asked whether the impeachment is fair game for Clinton's opponents. Earlier in the week, Wolfson dismissed references to President Bill Clinton's conduct as "under the belt."

But the reality, of course, is that the impeachment was conducted very much in public…

Yeah, I think I remember it. Wasn’t it back in those carefree days when we though the really important news was about a soiled navy blue GAP dress worn by a zaftig intern who spent a lot of her time on her knees in the Oval Office, and who came up with an inventive use for a stogie? (As one wag said at the time—okay, it was me—“An intern is only an intern, but a good cigar is a smoke—unless Monica gets to it first.”)

So much different than today, of course, when the top-of-mind issue is when they’re finally going to plant the decomposing corpse of a bleach blonde ex-stripper who was as promiscuous as she was pneumatic.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:43 | link | comments

Runaway train: As the diplomats continue their fruitless politesse, the hairy Islamic Hitler compares Iran’s nuclear program to a train moving ahead at full throttle with no brakes and no way to go back.

High time to derail the bugger, no?

 

From Reuters via YNet News:

 

Ahmadinejad compares his country's nuclear drive to a train which has no brakes. Iranian deputy foreign minister says Tehran is ready for any possible scenario 'even for war'

Reuters

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Sunday Iran had "no reverse gear" on its way to mastering the technology to make nuclear fuel, voicing fresh defiance before major powers meet to discuss the dispute.

An Iranian deputy foreign minister echoed the tough talk, saying the Islamic republic, which is accused by the West of trying to build nuclear weapons, was ready for any possible scenario "even for war."

The United States insists it wants a diplomatic solution to the row but has not ruled out military action if that fails. Vice President Dick Cheney said on Saturday Washington and its allies must curb Iran's atomic ambitions.

"Iran has obtained the technology to produce nuclear fuel and Iran's move is like a train ... which has no brake and no reverse gear," Ahmadinejad was quoted by Iran's student news agency ISNA as saying.

Officials from the Security Council plus Germany are due to meet in London in the coming days to examine the chances of drafting a resolution that could impose more restrictions on Tehran. UN sanctions were slapped on Iran in December.

"We have prepared ourselves for any situation, even for war," Manouchehr Mohammadi, one of the deputies to the foreign minister, was quoted by ISNA as saying at a conference in the central city of Isfahan.

"If they issue a second resolution, Iran will not respond and will continue its nuclear activities," he said.

And for anyone who still thinks it’s all bluster and that Iran doesn’t have the guts or the will to carry it off, I’d direct you to that childhood classic, The Little Engine That Could.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:17 | link | comments

A whiff of Vichy: France, a nation that has some experience in such matters, has decided to have dealings with genocidal totalitarians who want to murder millions of Jews. From the Jerusalem Post:

France has pledged to cooperate with a coalition Palestinian government that would include Hamas, in a key boost for Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. But Abbas's European tour failed to make headway on resuming aid for his struggling people.

French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy's promise Saturday to work with a government including Hamas and Fatah was the bright spot in Abbas's four-country swing through Europe this week. Other European leaders were more cautious, preferring to wait until the government is formed before making any commitments.

"I encouraged Mr. Abbas to persevere in his efforts to quickly form a national unity government," Douste-Blazy told reporters Saturday evening as Abbas wrapped up his trip.

If the government is formed according to the power-sharing deal worked out in Mecca last month, Douste-Blazy said, "France will be ready to cooperate with it. And our country will plead on its behalf within the European Union and with other partners in the international community."

Abbas welcomed the pledge - yet it may mean little. It was unclear how far France could go in supporting the Palestinians without the backing of the rest of the EU or other members of the Quartet working for Mideast peace: the United States, the United Nations and Russia…

“It may mean little”? Don’t count on it. The last time France signed on with the Arabs, it resulted in the transformation of Europe into Eurabia.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:44 | link | comments

Who got the bagman’s bags?: The fallout from the UN’s Oil-For-Food scam continues as a South Korean businessman, Tongsun Park, has just been convicted for his part in the fraud. Park was paid some $2.5 million dollars by Saddam Hussein to throw around in bribes at Turtle Bay as he saw fit. The strange thing, as Claudia Rosett, the Oil-For-Food bloodhound/pitbull notes, is that we know Park received the moolah (often in the forms of envelopes or shopping bags stuffed with loot); we know that Saddam, who wasn’t exactly flush with cash at the time the bribery started,  expected to get value for money. What we don’t know is who at the UN was on the receiving end of the lucre—nor are we ever likely to find out:

…Digging deeper into this matter is difficult, because Volcker despite his initial promises to release the underlying documents of his investigation has instead turned them over to the UN’s own legal department, which refuses to release them to the public, or the press.

 

So what to make of this curious scene? — in which Saddam’s government paid Tongsun Park more than $2.5 million to bribe an official (or perhaps several) at the UN; but at the UN itself, no one has been accused of taking any money from Park. By many accounts, while Saddam’s regime was massively corrupt, it did not throw money around without expecting some performance in return. And the period most of interest, 1996-1997, was a time at which Saddam was scrimping for cash — Iraq was under sanctions, but the torrent of Oil-for-Food kickbacks, payoffs and smuggling had not yet seriously begun.

 

Tongsun Park did not receive one lump sum for efforts. He got a series of payments from Baghdad, spread out over at least two years. That raises the question of why, if Park was somehow failing to actually deliver bribes to the UN, Saddam’s regime would have continued forking over the cash. Witnesses at Park’s trial testified that in 1996, while the UN under Boutros Boutros-Ghali was setting up Oil-for-Food, Park received stacks of Iraqi cash delivered to him in the U.S. But in 1997, which was after Oil-for-Food had begun, but while it was being further shaped during Kofi Annan’s first year as UN Secretary-General, Park on two separate occasions, in July and September of 1997, received two more big payouts from Baghdad.

 

The first, for about $1 million, was deposited by an Iraqi in July, 1997 into the Jordanian bank account from which Park the following week delivered a check for $988,885 to Maurice Strong (Strong told investigators he did not know the source of the funds, and that Park was handing over funds to invest in a Strong family company). Then there was a second big Baghdad payout, in which Park himself, according to a witness at his trial, walked into the same Jordanian bank in September, 1997 with a bag containing $700,000 in cash and deposited the bundle. Later that same day, Park drew down almost the entire account to issue a number of checks, including several for businesses in which he had an interest, and one for $30,000 to M. Strong. What became of that check has not been explained.

 

And so we arrive at this curious moment in the Oil-for-Food saga. Tongsun Park, to whom Baghdad paid more than $2.5 million for his role in a conspiracy to convey bribes to the UN, is now doing five years in prison for his crime. We can be grateful to the U.S. system of justice that this much has been done. But one might have supposed that given all Park’s efforts, worth millions to Baghdad in bagman fees alone, there would have been someone at the UN on the receiving end of this particular connection; perhaps someone dining out well tonight on bribe money skimmed from the people of Iraq via a job of high public trust. But no one, not one person, has been named. It’s a funny world.

 

And some people at the UN are laughing all the way to the off-shore account in the Grand Caymans, or wherever it is they've hidden their ill-gotten gains.

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

Empty blather: Caroline Glick, cutting through the blarney as always, on the pointlessness—and perils—of “talking” to Iran and Hamas. From JWR:

…From Washington to Brussels to Moscow to Turtle Bay, everyone applauds the fact that both the so-called international community and its Iranian antagonist desire negotiations. This, they say, is proof that there is no reason to abandon diplomacy.

But this is nonsense. The American, European and UN defense of negotiations with Teheran is nothing more than a willful act of collective delusion. For while it is true that everyone wants to talk, it is equally true that there is absolutely nothing to talk about.

In theory, nations engage in negotiations in order to advance their national interests, whether separately or collectively. In the case of Iran, the US and its allies seek to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. They maintain that the best means of achieving that aim is diplomacy.

For its part, Iran wishes to acquire nuclear weapons unmolested. It chooses to negotiate with the West in order to achieve that aim.

The problem here is that the sides' intentions are mutually exclusive so one side's gains come at the other's expense. Since Iran refuses to suspend its uranium enrichment, diplomatically engaging its emissaries serves only to legitimize the regime and enable its leaders to acquire nuclear weapons under the cover of international diplomacy.

This same disturbing pattern repeats itself with the so-called international community's engagement of the Palestinians. This is particularly the case in the aftermath of the Mecca agreement which relegated the Fatah terror organization to the position of junior partner in the Hamas' terror organization's government. As with Iran, so too with the Palestinians, while everyone agrees that negotiations are the answer, they ignore the fact that there is nothing to negotiate about.

The so-called international community argues that it wishes to engage the Palestinians in order to peacefully resolve the Palestinian conflict with Israel. For their part, the Palestinians in Hamas and Fatah claim that the purpose of negotiations is to advance their strategic aim of destroying Israel.

In their dealings with both Iran and the Palestinians, the leaders of so-called international community assert that were they to abandon diplomacy they would strengthen the most radical elements on the other side. As Baradei put it with regard to Iran, "We know that if you jolt a country's pride, all the factions, right, left and center will get together and try to accelerate a program to develop a nuclear weapon to defend themselves."

Unfortunately, experience shows that just the opposite is the case. The so-called international community's engagement of the Iranians and the Palestinians has in no way weakened the most radical elements in those societies. Rather, it has weakened the West's willingness to confront those radical elements and so brought about an effective radicalization of the West…

We have put the fate of the world is in the hands of idiots like Mo ElBaradei and weasels like Tony Blair. To paraphrase T.S. Elliot: This is the way the world ends/Not with a bang but with the whimper of feckless diplomacy.

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

Fuggedaboutit, Abdullah: The Peace in Our Time process is as defunct as a corpse on CSI, CSI Miami or CSI New York. It was dealt a coup de grace when Stinky hitched his wagon to Hamas. But is that stopping the Hashemite potentate from trying to get it going again? 

Heck no!

 

From Monsters & Critics:

Amman - Jordan's King Abdullah II is to address a joint session of the United States Congress next week, in a last ditch effort to jump start the Mideast peace plan before the end of US President George W Bush's tenure in 2008, officials said Saturday.

In his 'historic' speech - the first by a foreign leader before the bicameral legislature since mid-term elections last fall - Abdullah II will concentrate on the Palestinian cause as the core crisis in the region, said one of the sources.

'It will be a collective Arab message to spur influential power circles across the US into listening the voice of the other party,' the source said.

In July 1994, his late father King Hussein delivered a similar speech alongside the late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin - nine months after the two leaders initialled the 'Washington Declaration' which paved the way for the 1994 Jordan-Israeli peace treaty.

Before the US tour, the King will hold 'coordination' talks in Egypt and Saudi Arabia - two pillars of the so-called 'moderate Arab quartet' in addition to Jordan and the United Arab Emirates.

En route to the US, the Jordanian leader will stop in London for talks with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Bush's staunchest ally abroad - who is deeply involved in efforts to settle the Palestinian crisis.

Abdullah ii - a frequent visitor of Washington on yearly basis since he ascended the throne in 1999 - is also scheduled to launch a diplomatic and media offensive on the need to wrest a six-month window of opportunity in the Middle East crisis.

In an interview Friday with the Israeli Television Channel 2, Abdullah warned that the region stood at 'crucial crossroads, related to our life and future as Arabs and Israelis.'

He went on to caution: 'I am afraid that this is the last chance to achieve peace for all of us and to live in harmony in the future.'

If Abdullah was seriously interested in peace, he’d offer to make the West Bank a province of Jordan and let the Palestinians run roughshod over his kingdom.

 

On second though, that won’t work either.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:42 | link | comments

The A-Bomb Serpent: Who dat? 

The hairy Islamic Hitler, dat Who:

Ever since he was a young boy,

He wanted shiny bombs

From Qom down to Tehran

For when the Mahdi comes.

‘Cuz they ain’t seen nothing like him—

The occluded 12^th imam.

That deft, daft and dire boy

Sure has some mean A-bombs.

 

He swaggers like a braggart,

He boasts of primacy.

He calls us all to Allah.

He wants us to agree

That Mo’s the one and only,

The Prophet of Islam.

That deft, daft and dire boy

Sure has some mean A-bombs.

 

He’s an A-bomb serpent,

Just listen’ to him hiss.

An A-bomb serpent

Wants an Apocalyse.

 

How do you think he does it?

(I don’t know)

What makes him so bad?

 

He ain’t got no distractions

He’s focused on his goal.

Since no one’s takin’ action

He thinks he’s on a roll.

And now it’s close to blast-off

He hasn’t any qualms.

That deft, daft and dire boy

Sure has some mean A-bombs.

 

I thought he told

Some huge, outrageous lies

But now the world

Just wants to hide its eyes.

 

He laughs at Blair and Dubya,

At UN watchdogs, too.

Ain’t no one gonna scotch him.

He knows just what to do.

So better start to practice

Your grovels and salaams.

That deft, daft and dire boy

Sure has some mean A-bombs.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:49 | link | comments

Method to their madness: Want to know why various UN busybodies are busyily zeroing in on Israel at this particular moment? According to Arutz 7, it’s part of a concerted international “blitz” designed to discredit Israel while boosting the fortunes of the genocidal coalition which, along with the UN and the leftoids, want Israel to take a permanent hike:

(IsraelNN.com) The United Nations, Russia, Arab states and the media have escalated an international broadside against Israel while touting the Hamas-Fatah coalition.

A report by the U.N. Human Rights Council has provided the background for the Arab position, backed by Russia, that the Western-led economic boycott of Hamas must be lifted in order to fight poverty in the Gaza area.

The council report was commissioned to John Dugard, who formerly campaigned against South Africa apartheid and who concluded that the racist policy is similar to that of Israel. He defined Jews as a "race" and charged that the Israeli army is guilty of terror worse than that of Arab terrorists. Dugard's draft is to be published next month in a full report by the U.N.

Dugard wrote that "Israel's laws and practices in the [Palestinian Authority (PA)] certainly resemble aspects of apartheid. Can it seriously be denied that the purpose of such action is to establish and maintain domination by one racial group, Jews, over another racial group, Palestinians, and systematically oppress them?"

The report accuses Israel of terror by flying jets that set off sonic booms, forcing "residents to live in fear of settler terror." Dugard also alleges that Israel still is "occupying" the Gaza region despite the expulsion of Jewish residents from their communities and the handover of the land to the PA. "Gaza became a sealed off, imprisoned and occupied territory," he wrote.

He cited Arabs for committing war crimes by attacking Israel with Kassam rockets, but added that the IDF has "committed such crimes on a much greater scale."

U.N. Report Ignores Economic Aid to PA
Media throughout the world have headlined the report's assertion that Israeli "restrictions on trade and movement" have created conditions where "the poorest families are now living a meager existence totally reliant on assistance, with no electricity or heating and eating food prepared with water from bad sources."

The report's timing "is especially sensitive, coming to light after both Israel and the U.S. indicated that they will maintain the boycott after the planned Fatah-Hamas coalition cabinet takes office unless it clearly commits itself to recognition of Israel, renunciation of violence and adherence to previous agreements with Israel," noted the London Independent.

The report ignores aid that has been redirected through the offices of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas in order to bypass Hamas, leaving the PA as one of the world's largest recipients of foreign economic aid. The International Monetary Fund (International Monetary Fund (IMF) has reported that the PA received $709 million in aid in 2006, double the amount received in 2005.

The aid figures do not include hundreds of millions of dollars invested by various U.N. agencies in Gaza.

In addition, Hamas leaders have smuggled more than $60 million into Gaza.

Another report by a U.N. agency and published by Reuters News Agency blames Israel's attack on Gaza's "only power station" for leaving the "Occupied Palestinian Territories" without electricity. However, Dugard does not mention that Israel's Ashkelon power plant also provides electricity to many PA residents.

Britain To Deal with 'Moderate' Hamas Elements
The increasing blame on Israel for problems in the PA, along with the mounting pressure from Russia have contributed to a change in the policy of British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who has indicated he is prepared to deal with Hamas.

"It is far easier to deal with the situation in Palestine if there is a national unity government," he said. "I hope we can make progress, including even with the more sensible elements of Hamas."…

Insanity, pure and simple.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:11 | link | comments

Israel slammed again: Israel is in the UN Human Rights Councils’ bad books yet again for systematically denying Palestinian terrorists their “right” to blow up Israeli civilians. From AP via the Ceeb:

GENEVA (AP) - An independent report commissioned by the United Nations compares Israel's actions on the West Bank of the Jordan River and in the Gaza Strip to apartheid in South Africa - charges that have drawn angry rebuke from Israel.

The report by John Dugard, independent investigator on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for the UN Human Rights Council, is to be presented next month. It has already been posted on the body's website.

In the report, Dugard, a South African lawyer who campaigned against his country's system of state-sanctioned racial segregation in the 1980s, said: "Israel's laws and practices in the (Palestinian territories) certainly resemble aspects of apartheid."

The report catalogues a number of accusations against the Jewish state, ranging from restrictions on Palestinian movement to house demolitions and preferential treatment given to Jewish settlers on the West Bank.

"Can it seriously be denied that the purpose of such action is to establish and maintain domination by one racial group - Jews - over another racial group - Palestinians - and systematically oppress them?" he wrote in the report.

Israel maintains its actions are aimed at preventing Palestinian suicide bombings and other attacks that have killed more than 1,000 Israelis in the last six years. Officials say the violence broke out in 2000 after Israel's proposal to pull out of the vast majority of the West Bank and Gaza in exchange for peace was rejected.

Israel's ambassador in Geneva criticized Dugard for directing attacks only at the Jewish state.

"Any conclusions he may draw are therefore fundamentally flawed and purposely biased," said Yitzhak Levanon...

Would that be the same Yitzhak Levanon who was so thrilled to receive a crumb of praise from another UN probe into Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, seeing it as an encouraging sign that for once the UN would be able to rise above its inbred anti-Israel bias?

 

Yes, indeedee.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:51 | link | comments

“Rights” and lefties: Aren’t we Canadians lucky? We have so many “rights.”  In fact, you could say we are stinking with “rights.” And you don’t even have to be Canadian to partake in them. Yesterday, the Supreme Court of Canada affirmed these “rights” when it ruled that Canadian authorities had no “right” to use security certificates—a system that’s been in effect since 1977—to detain suspected foreign terrorists. The Ceeb and other mainstream outlets are crowing that the decision to uphold the “rights” of these unsavoury intruders (who can’t be deported because they claim they would be tortured back home) is a great victory for, natch, civil “rights.” Here’s how the Ceeb spins it:

The Supreme Court of Canada has struck down the security certificate system used by the federal government to detain and deport foreign-born terrorist suspects.

In a 9-0 judgment handed down Friday, the court found that the system, described by the government as a key tool for safeguarding national security, violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The high court gave Parliament one year to re-write the law that's keeping three men at the centre of the case in legal limbo.

The system was challenged on constitutional grounds by three men — Algerian-born Mohamed Harkat, Moroccan-born Adil Charkaoui and Syrian native Hassan Almrei, who have all denied having ties to al-Qaeda and other such groups.

"It's a very good decision and we're certainly very pleased," said lawyer Barbara Jackman, who represents Almrei. "What the Supreme Court decided was the law was not fair."…

On the other hand, the National Post, a refreshing voice of sanity, sees it a bit differently:

We were slightly baffled Fri- day morning, when the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Charkaoui vs. Canada. Headlines immediately flooded onto the Web declaring that the court had "struck down" or "reversed" the system whereby foreigners on Canadian soil can be detained on the issuance of security certificates by the federal Cabinet. It would be much more accurate to say that the court had reviewed every aspect of the system, found that most of it was justified by national security, and asked only for minimal changes designed to protect the rights of the arrestees. Barring stronger legal arguments against them, the certificates -- along with the safeguards already built into the system by its legislative creators --are here to stay.

The defining feature of the certificate scheme is that it allows for non-citizens suspected of being a threat to national security to be deported, and to be detained in the meantime, on the basis of information that remains secret. The court upheld these central features of the system, reasserting strongly that "non-citizens do not have an unqualified right to enter or remain in Canada" and that they can be deported without special consideration for their Charter rights to life, liberty and security of the person.

Absent a security certificate, Canada's essential obligation to a non-citizen is to give him a fair hearing in front of a judge before he is detained indefinitely awaiting deportation. The core question faced by the court was thus how to reconcile this baseline due-process requirement with the state's need to keep certain national- security information secret.

The system at issue before the court permits a minister to ask a Federal Court judge to rule on the "reasonability" of a security certificate in private, without any notice to or participation by the person named in the certificate. Such a procedure runs somewhat contrary to our legal traditions, which generally ensure that individuals are properly notified of the case against them, and have an opportunity to be heard by an adjudicator. The presence of advocates for both sides serves to ensure that the adjudicator has the facts and the most relevant law before him, and is not simply relying on cherry-picked facts and specious arguments…

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:30 | link | comments

Simon sez: Here’s an intriguing idea: Times columnist Gerard Baker suggests that U.S. presidential candidates be lined up and assessed by cranky American Idol judge Simon Cowell. (Incidentally, I happened to catch the female competition on this week’s Idol and think the contestants can, with one notable exception, be boiled down as follows: skinny white chicks who can’t sing, and fat black chicks who can belt it out a la hefty Oscar-nominated former Idol-wannabe--she sure showed them, didn't she?--Dreamgirl Jennifer Hudson.

…This could just be the germ of an idea. Since American Idol, the musical talent show, is the most successful programme in television history, watched by tens of millions of people every night, perhaps a more useful way of winnowing the presidential field would be to have them stand up and perform in front of Simon Cowell, who could offer withering assessments of their efforts: “Did you say you were the grandson of a Kenyan goat herder, Mr Obama? I think you might want to get back into the family business.”

Furthermore, since the primary elections, in which the two main parties select their presidential candidates, are now to be bunched into a short period early next year, it means that by early February 2008, we will know who those candidates will be and will face — at nine months — the longest general election campaign in history.

All this raises two intriguing possibilities. First, one of the handful of American-born citizens over the age of 35 who is not a candidate for President at the moment could emerge from nowhere as a contender in the late stages of the blood-spattered primaries.

Who could this be? On the Republican side, clearly Mr Gingrich himself is a potential contender, though, even on the sidelines he remains a divisive figure in American politics, after a bruising decade with the Clintons.

On the Democratic side, much attention will focus on Al Gore, the former Vice-President. But I doubt that he will want to risk his Oscar and Nobel-prize-winning purity by diving once again into the mucky pool of presidential politics.

More likely is that one of the current second-tier candidates in the Democratic race — Bill Richardson, the former Governor of New Mexico, pictured, for example, or even Tom Vilsack, the former Governor of Iowa, will get catapaulted into the front ranks.

The second possibility is that, as the long general election next year bores and alienates more voters there must be a similar chance of a third-party candidate emerging to take on the designated Democrat and Republican — as Ross Perot did in 1992, and again, less successfully in 1996.

Step forward, President Donald Trump?

President Comb-over? Shudder. That’s almost as scary a concept as President Hillary Clinton.

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

Jim Carrey’s numeric fixation: Some folks think the Mossad was behind 9/11. Other folks think that George W. Bush and his cabal of neo-cons were responsible (which means the Jews are on the hook either way). Then there’s Canada’s own rubber-faced clown with a frown, Jim Carrey. He’s invested the number 23 with profound significance, and has made an entire movie about his obsession. From Weekend Q:

Philosophical funnyman Jim Carrey believes all things happen for a reason, so it was no surprise to him that the script for The Number 23 came his way. In this psychological thriller from director Joel Schumacher, Carrey plays a family man who becomes obsessed with a book that appears to be based on his life.

To some, the number 23 has spiritual and mystical significance. For example, there are 23 letters in the Latin alphabet. The Knights Templar had 23 Grand Masters. Ancient Egyptian and Sumerian calendars start on July 23. Key dates in world history add up to 23 – including Sept. 11, 2001.

Naturally, the movie opens in theaters tomorrow, Feb. 23.

Carrey, 45, insists that he has encountered the number in both important and mundane events in his life. "It's always been kind of a fun thing," he says. "It's a little spooky but fun spooky." So when his agent sent him the script, the actor says he was "compelled" to do it.

Widely acclaimed for his comedies but known to take on the occasional dramatic role, Carrey knew the film would require him to go into a dark place emotionally. But he found the production to be light and fun. He credits Schumacher as well as co-stars Virginia Madsen and Danny Huston with keeping an upbeat mood on the set.

He doesn't consider himself superstitious but believes that everything in life is a creation of the mind. "It may not come in exactly literally the way you thought of it, but it comes."

Okay, Jimbo, that’s about as clear as muck, but how do the international Zionist conspiracy and global warming fit it in to it all?

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:46 | link | comments

Tom who?: I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but former Goveror Tom Vilsack has been forced to withdraw from the field of Democratic candidates vying to become the next president of the U.S.

I know. It’s a bitter pill to for me to swallow, too.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:35 | link | comments

Seeing things: You know how Moo Ahmadinejad thinks he sees green auras when nobody else can see them? It seems that Mo ElBaradei, the UN’s nuclear watchkitty who won a Nobel Peace Prize for doing absolutely nothing, also sees strange visions. Mo thinks he detects “a window of opportunity” to convince Iran to drop its nuclear program.

They’re both hallucinating.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:29 | link | comments

No oinks today: When I read this headline—"Rare praise for Israel in U.N. probe"—I thought, “wow, could be a flying pig moment.” As it turns out, though, it’s not even a semi-airborne piglet moment. From the Jerusalem Post:

In a surprising move, the United Nations anti-racism panel on Thursday praised Israel for the detailed report it had provided on issues relating to racism and discrimination, according to Israel's Ambassador to the UN in Geneva Yitzhak Levanon.

As a result, Levanon told The Jerusalem Post from Geneva, "I'm optimistic" that Israel would receive a fair hearing as the UN conducts its periodic review of the state's compliance with its convention against racial discrimination.

Levanon's appearance in front of the panel on Thursday marks the first time in nine years that Israel has had a formal hearing before the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD).

  'Israel resembles an apartheid state'

The two-day hearing in which Israel will defend its record on racism and discrimination is part of CERD's 70th session scheduled to run from February 19 to March 9. During that time it will review the records of 13 of the 173 countries which have ratified its treaty. Israel signed onto it in 1979.

Lauding the Zionists for compliantly crossing their t’s and dotting their i’s—I think that’s what you call damning with faint praise. And the Jews are so starved for any internationalist approval, as evidenced by Levanon’s  misguided assessment (he’s “optimistic,” is he? On the basis of this crumb of praise? How pathetic!) that they’re willing to ‘umble themselves before yet another absurdly skewed UN body. (The UN Committee on the Elimination and Racial Discrimination, huh? How much you want to bet that this august panel is mighty concerned with all the “racial discrimination” going on in Israel, and not excessively concerned about the discrimination occurring in the Arab/Muslim world? In the same way that the UN Human Rights contraption is obsessed with human rights infringements in the same tiny locale, but willing to overlook those taking place in the festering dictatorships that—paging Mr. Orwell—serve as the arbiters of human rights on the planet? I say phooey on the UN in all its various malign manifestations. Rather than looking for love in all the wrong places—in the wrongest of places—Israel should have the gumption to toss out these busybodies on their internationalist keesters.)

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:10 | link | comments

The way we live now: Further to the Goredolatry, conspiracy theories and judenhass that make our times seem so loopy, I am reading Nick Cohen’s book What’s Left? and came across the following quote. It was written in 1996 by Norman Cohn, author of that seminal book about the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Warrant for Genocide:

Yet it is a great mistake to suppose that the only writers who matter are those whom the educated in their saner moments can take seriously. There exists a subterranean world where pathological fantasies disguised as ideas are churned out by crooks and half-educated fanatics for the benefit of the ignorant and superstitious. There are times when this underworld emerges from the depths and suddenly fascinates, captures and dominates multitudes of usually sane and responsible people, who thereupon take leave of sanity and responsibility.

 

Now that’s a prophet.

Posted by: scaramouche at 22:40 | link | comments

Varieties of denial: Al Gore, the god of Gaia-worship, warns of some churlish folks who refuse to march in lock-step with his eco-agenda. He accuses these miscreants of “climate denial,” the inference being that those given to the practice are akin to the likes of Ernst Zundel, David Irving and other Holocaust deniers.

Thanks for the unequivocal moral equivalence, Al.

 

On the FrontPage Magazine site, Dore Gore, author of a new book about Jerusalem, explains another kind of denial, one that also disrespects the memory of six million murdered Jews but which, unlike environmental skepticism, is part of the global effort to undermine the Jewish claim to their ancestral homeland. It is called “Temple Denial”:

 

FP: What inspired you to write this book?

 

Gold: Originally, I felt it was necessary to respond to the charges that Yasser Arafat made at the end of the Camp David summit in July 2000 that denied the core of our Judeo-Christian heritage. As you might remember he tried to assert that there never had been a Temple in Jerusalem.

 

But what he essentially did was to throw a stone of historical lies into a lake and its ripples spread all over the Middle East. “Temple Denial” became a common theme at seminars in the UAE or in Jordan in the years that followed. European professors joined in this anti-biblical trend. A friend of mine in Britain, who works in the Gulf states, told me that most of his Arab contacts these days tell him that there never was an ancient Kingdom of Israel or Kingdom of Juhad.

 

I felt I must at least begin the effort to negate these trends. So in the beginning of the Fight for Jerusalem, I dealt with these issues but I also put into the book striking color photos from the Israel Antiquities Authority with some of the greatest archaeological finds of recent years that bolster the veracity of the Biblical narrative and contradict the trend Arafat sought to initiate. How can you deny there was a Kingdom of Judah when you see in my book royal seals of the Davidic dynasty—like the seal of Hezekiah, King of Judah?

 

FP: Why is the battle for Jerusalem intensifying today?

 

Gold: The battle for Jerusalem began with the war of ideas I just described, but it has since become far more intensive. One of the key figures in inciting Palestinians with the lie that Israel’s reconstruction of an access ramp to the 35 acre Temple Mount endangers the foundations of the Al-Aqsa Mosque has been Sheikh Rael Salah, the head of the northern wing of the Islamic movement in Israel. While he is an Israeli, Salah has been well-connected with Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, more generally. When I started this book I noticed that upon leaving an Israeli prison last year, Salah announced that Jerusalem will become the capital of a future global caliphate. I was stunned by his statement. I knew that Jerusalem was never the seat of any of the Islamic caliphates in the past, like Damascus or Median. His declaration indicated the role of Jerusalem was changing for some radical Muslims—clearly intensifying in manner that most foreign policy experts did not follow.

 

FP: What are the greatest threats to Israel today?

 

Gold: The greatest danger to Jerusalem comes from mistaken Western policies crafted on the basis of the assumption that in order to reduce the flames of the rage of radical Islam toward the West, Israel should be encouraged to undertake further withdrawals in the West Bank and even in Jerusalem.  I conclude my book that rather than lowering the flames of jihad, a withdrawal in Jerusalem will likely shoot up these very same flames to unprecedented heights.

 

What I uncovered is that while Jerusalem was the third most important holy city to Islam, after Mecca and Medina, nonetheless for those engaging in apocalyptic speculation about the “end of days” in Islam, its importance is actually rising. Sheikh Salah is not alone in this sense. There is a widespread literature in Sunni Arab states—some of which has appeared as bestselling books—that anticipates the coming of an Islamic Messiah called the Mahdi, who fights the anti-Christ (known as the Dajjal) in Jerusalem, and then launches a great global jihad. These books do not always have the backing of the religious establishment but they have created important undercurrents that should not be ignored.

 

Now if Israel pulled out of parts of the Old City—or even began speaking about such a possibility in the context of giving the Palestinians a “political horizon,” it would inadvertently be confirming many of these apocalyptic scenarios for the masses. It doubt that many Western embassies are aware of these undercurrents and would not be able to warn their governments that they are advocating a policy on Jerusalem that could be at a minimum highly self defeating and [would] result in what I can (sic) a new terrorist tsunami.

 

FP: How is uncovering Jerusalem’s past a key to saving it?

 

Gold: There are three choices of what to do with Jerusalem: split it with the Palestinian Arabs, which I assert would be a disaster, asking the UN to step in (we tried that in 1947 and only Israel saved the people of the city—not the UN), or leaving it united under the sovereignty of Israel. I believe that only a democratic Israel can protect the free access to Jerusalem of all the great religions. We must create a modus vivendi in Jerusalem based on the mutual respect of all the great monotheistic faiths. But that modus vivendi will be inpossible to reach if the radical Muslims succeed in spreading a culture of total denial with regard to the historical connection of the Jewish people and Christianity to Jerusalem. Classic Islam had no problem recognizing these earlier connections. Indeed the great Islamic historian al-Tabari describes the first visit of the second caliph, Umar bin al-Khatab to Jerusalem, during which the caliph asks where the Temple stood. Umar did not engage in “Temple Denial,”  but Arafat and his contemporaries did.

 

That’s probably because Umar lived at a time when that sort of denial would have gotten him laughed off his throne, and there was no sovereign Jewish entity in the middle of Dar al-Islam. Today, however, there is such an entity, and it's the impediment to an otherwise impeccable Muslim landscape. For that reason, when today’s jihadists want to advance their claims, they're not too concerned with such niggling details as the historical record. Why should they be, when they can simply rewrite it?

 

As for that mutual respect that Islam supposedly accords Christians and Jews, sadly, it doesn’t exist. As Islam sees it, non-Muslims are kafirs and are ipso facto unequal to Muslims. Christians and Jews living under Muslim can only to continue to live if they acknowledge their second class status and adhere to the humiliating dhimma laws.

 

I don’t know how anyone, especially Dore Gold, whom I greatly admire, could mistake such treatment for “mutual respect.”

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:30 | link | comments (2)

More Goredolatry: As reported by Rosie DiManno, the Toronto Star’s token non-loon:

He doesn't walk on water. But, if he did, it would surely be Evian.

Al Gore – the man who coulda-shoulda been president – has, fittingly, recycled himself.

From "Gore the Bore'' to American Idol. And, with James Brown gone to soul heaven, inheritor of the title: Hardest Working Man in Showbiz.

Who needs the Oval Office when you've got a cosmic platform from which to preach the Gospel of Global Warming Warning?

Though White House Bid No. 3 there might yet be, once the other Democratic contenders knock themselves silly in the rope-a-dope leadership undercard. The evangelizing ecologist's road tour – hottest ticket on this poor, imperilled planet – landed in Toronto last night, wreathed in gassy emissions of adoration, a rock star for the Age of Apocalypse by weather and waste.

"Hello, I'm Al Gore,'' he said by way of introduction. "I used to be the next president of the United States.''

Ba-da-boom.

"I love Al Gore!" somebody yelled from the balcony.

Riffed a bit, self-mockingly, with his exquisite newfound sense of comic timing. Lauded Toronto, in those mellifluous southern tones.

Had the audience in his palm from the get-go.

"Heed the Goracle"!, urged one placard among many welcoming signs outside the University of Toronto's Convocation Hall, where pro-demonstrators (and a polar bear) held a candlelit vigil for Kyoto, just beyond the bank of gas-guzzling limousines.

Once a policy wonk stiffy, so wooden in crowds that he left splinters, Gore has been transformed into Father Earth, ardent advocate for the fragile eco-system, suddenly in sync – arguably catalyst for – a worldwide obsession with the climatic state of the planet.

"It's the difference between watching a video and seeing it on screen," said Tom Sheppard, a 22-year-old University of Waterloo student who was prepared to part with up to $60 for a scalper ticket, which was nowhere near enough for sidewalk entrepreneurs.

"I'll get a much more impassioned view, hearing it from Gore himself. Not that I need any convincing.

"Actually, I'm hoping to become an ambassador for climate change. That's one of his programs."

They could have just gone to see the movie – An Inconvenient Truth – those 1,500-or-so (at least 500 of them VIPs, ducat-bestowed, thus circumventing the online ticket sale crush that crashed the system in minutes), who settled into the rotunda for the evening.

The modest, even humble, slideshow documentary, nominated for two Academy Awards, has already raked in $44 million, a stunning hit that's made an iconic star out of both the narrator and the monde we inhabit.

But the travelling show version that first found an audience on campuses has the centre-stage presence of Gore himself, live and in full alarmist throttle, the Mr. Greenjeans guru becoming every day a more revered celebrity draw, such that like of tinsel celebrities, Cameron Diaz et al, hang off him.

"We've seen the movie but I thought it was important for the kids to have the experience of this event,'' said Julie Quenneville, who arrived with spouse and children in tow.

"I want my kids to embrace the environment because they're the ones who will inherit it. We've already done the damage.''

And, from Gobi Kathirgamantha, another awed spectator: "Gore brought the environment back onto the agenda.''

If this éclat could be retroactively applied, Gore would have made mincemeat out of George W. Bush in 2000, rather than conceding defeat in the hanging-by-a-chad election that went all the way to the Supreme Court for validation.

Instead, back then, he gave bland speeches, ticked off the Bill Clinton electoral machine and essentially botched a campaign that was his to lose…

The wheel of fortune is truly astonishing, as evidenced by Al Gore’s incredible journey from goat to God in less than a decade.

 

Why, some admiring folks might even describe it as a “second coming.”

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:23 | link | comments (1)

Goredolatry: I don’t know what’s more disturbing—the thoughtless elevation of failed presidential candidate Al Gore to a God-like stature, or the collection of weirdos, whackos, cranks and eco-nutters who came out to hear their “Goracle” (yes, that’s what they’re calling him these days) pontificate last night.

From the Globe and Mail:

They came in their hundreds to hear him speak, and even those left standing outside the crowded hall would not be deterred from lingering in the proximity of the Baptist prophet from Tennessee.

It wasn't any old-time religion that drew these believers to Convocation Hall at the University of Toronto, but a concept they feel is every bit as crucial to humanity -- global warming -- that made them want to get close to Al Gore, the impassioned former U.S. vice-president, as he delivered his now famous Inconvenient Truth about climate change.

Like many a bygone leader who happened along at a key moment in history, Mr. Gore -- who has been sounding the environmental warning bell for years -- has suddenly inspired the kind of faith and fervour in others that he insists will be needed to overcome such a monumental problem.

"From my perspective, it is a form of religion," said Bruce Crofts, 69, as he held a banner aloft for the East Toronto Climate Action Group amid a lively prelecture crowd outside the old hall.

"The religion for this group is doing something for the environment."

While he no longer espouses traditional religion, Mr. Crofts recalled how, as a Sunday school teacher decades ago, he included Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi and Robert Kennedy as well as Jesus Christ in his lessons, as examples of great leaders who stepped forward when called upon by circumstance. In that sense, he feels Mr. Gore fits the bill.

"We don't have seats tonight, but we just felt it was important to show some support for this guy," Mr. Crofts said. "He's flown in the face of the Bush administration and a lot of negative politics in the U.S. in order to do this stuff."

Mr. Gore's Toronto appearance was undoubtedly the hottest ticket in town, judging by the many adherents milling about outside, hoping to score tickets, few of whom succeeded.

With just 1,500 seats, 500 of which had been reserved for invited guests, the hall sold out in just three minutes when tickets went on sale for $20 each on Feb. 7.

The university's website for ticket sales crashed under the weight of 23,000 people vying for the prized seats. In the intervening days, some of the lucky few took full advantage of the chance to profit from the demand, asking for up to $200 for a single ticket on various Internet sites.

Victor Storm, who owns a chain of Toronto-area bedding outlets, went online Feb. 7 and offered a $40 duvet in exchange for a ticket. He wound up surrendering a $150 duvet instead, after a fair bit of questioning over thread counts.

"Because it was so cold, it was something people warmed up to," Mr. Storm said yesterday.

Last night, before Mr. Gore gave his slideshow, it looked more like a sideshow outside, as hopefuls looked for tickets, scalpers told reporters they were not scalpers, and bona fide ticket holders ran a gauntlet of activists handing out leaflets for various causes.

There were vegans seeking new recruits, people calling for the closing of Ontario's coal-fired power plants, a Greenpeace mascot dressed as a polar bear -- even the UFO believers showed up.

"I know you won't believe this," one of them, a man named Victor Viggiani, said with a practised tongue, "but the extraterrestrial technology involved in this . . . it's free energy, man. Absolute free energy, and it'll be the end of fossil fuels."…

As G.K. Chesterton (a writer I’m loath to quote due to his flagrant Jew-hatred) noted, “When people cease to believe in something they do not believe in nothing; they they believe in anything.” And it seems the “anything” they’ve chosen to believe in at the moment is the religion of climate change as iterated by self-styled prophet and messenger of impending eco-doom, Al Gore.

In light of the adulation, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if, at some point in the future, the true believers started appended PBUH after his name in recognition of his final, perfect revelation.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:10 | link | comments (1)

Tony’s baloney: This one made me physically ill. From the Jerusalem Post:

British Prime Minister Tony Blair met with Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas on Wednesday and praised him for being committed to peace in the Middle East.

At a news conference after their meeting, Blair said the overall goal of long-stalled international talks was to ensure a secure Israel and an independent, sovereign and viable state of Palestine.

"Obviously, there's going to be a lot of negotiation and talking over the formation of the national unity government. And it's important, as I said to President Abbas, that that conforms to the principals laid down" by the so-called Quartet of Middle East peacemakers, Blair said.

Blair predicted a difficult time in future negotiations, "but I have no doubt that the president is sincerely and completely committed to this," Blair said. "I would like to pay tribute to the president's vigor and determination in moving this forward."

Abbas said the Palestinians were committed to rejecting violence, to international law and to meeting all agreements reached previously with Israel.

"We are really concerned about getting the kind of peace that is based on a two-state solution - Israel and Palestine - which live in security and peace side by side," Abbas said.

Blair spoke earlier Wednesday by telephone with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, a spokesman at Downing St. said, without providing any details.

Before his meeting with Abbas, Blair told the House of Commons on Wednesday that bringing democracy and justice to the Middle East was the best way to guarantee the future security of the West.

He told the British lawmakers he planned to tell Abbas there was a "total determination to use the new opportunity to create the chance for peace."

Blair said that establishing a proper Palestinian state was essential "for the sake of Israel as well as for all we want to achieve in the Middle East."…

Oh, brother. I haven’t heard so much hogwash since another blind, sycophantic, appeasing British Prime Minister returned from a German city with a “peace” pact. Just to be clear, Tony, Abbas is a silver-tongued liar who is about as committed to “peace” as is Hamas, the Islamo-Nazis with whom he’s joined forces. What he’s really committed to is the Peace in Our Time process, which is a whole ‘nother beast.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:01 | link | comments

Turki will all the trimmings: The Saudis, who, as custodians of the two mosques and purveyors of global jihad, have long considered themselves to be top dog in the Islamic pack. Now, along comes the Shias and their dreams of nuclear Apocalypse, and suddenly the Saudis have to take drastic action if they don’t want to be trounced by the mullahs, guys who make the Wahabi version of Islam, as nutty as it is, seem almost (almost) sane in comparison.

What’s an anxious oil tick to do? Why, wade into the trenches with offers to combat judenhass (chutzpah of the highest order, considering how deeply implicated the Saudis are in promoting it around the world), and extend a hand of "friendship" to members of a lower order who the Prophet once turned into simians and swine.

 

As this piece on the JWR site warns, it behooves us to be extremely wary of such a disingenuous offer:

The Saudis are rolling out a charm offensive and getting good publicity for it. In the latest manifestation, the outgoing Saudi ambassador, Prince Turki al-Faisal, attended a reception in Washington last month backed by American Jewish organizations to honor a State Department diplomat appointed to — here comes the chutzpah bit — combat anti-Semitism.

Prince Turki, the head of Saudi intelligence for a quarter of a century and a senior prince in line to the Saudi throne, was even glimpsed in photos shaking hands with Jews.

That might be a source of joy were it not for the anti-Semitic slurs heaped daily on Jews in the Saudi press, the anti-Semitic diatribes from evangelical-style Saudi television preachers, or the endless references in school lessons to Jews and Christians as "descendants of pigs and monkeys."

Saudi surges of warmth toward Jews crop up whenever danger lurks, but they rarely survive beyond the menace. This time around, the warmth is motivated by Iran's looming Shiite hegemony in the Persian Gulf, a direct menace to Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Muslim states in the region.

My Saudi friends explain that it is perfectly normal to seek the protection of daddy (read: America). Who else could do it? And, in the mercantile ways of the oil rich, that protection has been secured with multibillion-dollar purchases of weapons systems from America's military-industrial establishment and millions more in investments benefiting former American officials and presidents, lobbyists, and the American oil industry.

It is equally logical for the Saudis to seek America's affections through American Jews. In the Saudis' bigoted view, the Jews control America. However, the Saudis reason, the profoundly fundamentalist Saudi population does not, repeat not, need to see any of the fraternizing with Jews in the Saudi press, because the poor souls would be confused.

Amazingly, even the most progressive Saudis believe that this makes sense. The last gush of Saudi good will occurred in 1990, after Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait and was intent on annexing Saudi Arabia, too. That love story ended with 500,000 American-led, Saudi-based troops liberating Kuwait. But when these "infidels" were needed, the Saud royal family ordered the Wahhabi religious establishment it shares power with to stop criticizing the presence of these non-Muslims so close to the holy Islamic sites of Mecca and Medina.

The discipline was remarkable — and showed that the crazed Saudi imams could be reined in. Alas, once the troops left, the rants resumed in a hurry. Promises to rid Saudi schoolbooks, TV programs, and mosques of hate-mongering speech have yet to be fulfilled.

But why should American Jews, or anyone else, go along with such a charade? Is it such a great honor to be photographed with a Saudi prince or ambassador?...

No, but it does make for a colourful photo in one’s scrapbook. About the only good thing you could say about it.

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

Itchy trigger finger:

In a story about Moo balking at the latest international efforts to shut down his nuclear program (he still claims, in a brazen display of taqiyah, that Iran is suffering an energy shortfall that can only be remedied through nuclear means), he displays the finger with which he hopes to push the nuclear launch button that will incinerate Israel. Either that, or it symbolizes the position the Shias plan to hold in the Muslim world once they've bested the Sunnis ("we're number 1!").

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:20 | link | comments

 Ask a silly question…: On the NRO site, Keith Roderick, who’s apparently unfamiliar with the concept of dhimmitude, asks whether “international legitimancy for Hamas (will) lead to a future of unity and reconciliation”; more specifically, how such “unity” will affect Palestinian Christians.

I think I can answer his query: No, international legitimacy for Hamas will not lead to a future of unity and reconciliation, and Christians, as dhimmis, are likely to bear the brunt of the ensuing chaos and disharmony.

 

Knowing how Islamic primacy works, how could anyone think it would be otherwise?

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

Don’t miss it: What every American (and Canadian, and Australian, and Brit and…oh, heck, let's open it up to include every infidel) needs to know about jihad, a video flash presentation from FrontPage Magazine.

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

Jewish Israelhass in the Anglosphere: Two articles about Jews who are actively seeking Israel’s demise. The first, by Melanie Phillips, is about a new movement in the U.K. called Independent Jewish voices—essentially, Jews for a Jewish genocide. The second, by Edward Alexander, deals with Jewish anti-Zionists in the U.S., including the Meistersinger of Jewish Israelhass, Noam Chomsky.

You can put a good portion of these folks in the same category as the Jews who, way back when, opted for Hellenism over Judaism; who helped the Inquisition get established; who insisted that, all in all, the French had a pretty good case against Alfred Dreyfus; and who, more recently, served as capos for the Nazis.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:53 | link | comments

 Hateful fool: In a blog post, a Ha’aretz scribe says he’s fairly confident that Barack Obama will turn out to be good for Israel. I don’t know enough about the candidate or his convictions to weigh in on the subject. In any case, what interested me most about the post was the first comment that followed it. Someone named “clickfool” from Sussex, England, left this delightful little spoor and titled it “Toadying” (the toadying in question presumably refers to Obama’s, not clickfool’s):

It is a degrading spectacle, watching a US presidential candidate grovelling (sic) before the American Jewish Lobby.
It is amazing that non-Jewish voters don`t automatically eliminate from consideration such toadies.
The American Jewish Lobby isn`t even representative of American Jews. It is a tiny, unelected cabal of influential and ultra-rich Jews, far away from all the danger, with an extreme Zionist agenda that puts them at no personal risk.
The American Jewish Lobby is a cancer in American democracy.

 

Thanks for setting us straight, clickfool. I had always thought the cancer was the judenhass of those who fulminate about imaginary Jewish cabals.

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

Moo’s outrageous offer: He says he’ll talk--talk--about stopping his enriching providing everyone else stops theirs first.

Chutzpah in spades, has our Moo. From Ha’aretz:

 

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, speaking on the eve of a UN Security Council deadline to halt unranium enrichment, called on Western nations Tuesday to stop their own enrichment programs if they wanted his country to stop its own and return to negotiations.

Ahmadinejad told a crowd of thousands in northern Iran that it was no problem for his country to stop, as long as Western nations did the same.

 

"Justice demands that those who want to hold talks with us shut down their nuclear fuel cycle program too," he said. "Then, we can hold dialogue under a fair atmosphere."

The Iranian president also said that Iran wanted talks over its nuclear program, but would not accept preconditions to freeze uranium enrichment as demanded by a UN Security Council resolution.

"They tell us 'come and negotiate on Iran's nuclear issue but the condition is to stop your activities.' We have said that we want negotiations and talks but negotiations under just conditions," Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in a speech broadcast on state television.

 

Justice demands they get rid of the religiou nutter and his Mahdi-minded masters before any of them can put a finger on a nuclear launch button.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:21 | link | comments

 A little traveling music, please: The headline of this AP story in the Washington Post—Rice, Abbas leaving for Jordan, Europe—makes it sound like Condi and Stinky are setting off as a team. In fact, they are embarking on separate efforts, Condi to try to persuade Arab nations that they have a stake in effecting a rapprochement between Israel and the Palestinians. Stinky, however, has another agenda:

AMMAN, Jordan -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice arrived in Jordan on Tuesday for talks with King Abdullah II and envoys from other Arab countries a day after hosting an inconclusive Israeli-Palestinian summit.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas also was expected to arrive in Jordan for talks with the king. Abbas then was headed to Germany _ along with stops in Britain and France _ in a campaign to convince skeptical Western leaders that the deal he forged with the ruling Islamic Hamas reflects his moderate stand…

Rots of ruck with that one, Stinky. It’s going to be a tough sell considering you’re officially in bed with a bunch of crazed, genocidal Islamists. There was nothing very “moderate” about your stand before. Now, it’s about as “moderate” as the jihad your regime is waging against the Jews.

 

But don’t think Stinky isn’t looking forward to his international perambulations. Why, if you listen closely, you can hear him singing his favourite Willie Nelson traveling song:

 

On the road again.

Just can’t wait to get on the road again.

The life I love is scamming jizya for my ends

And I can’t wait to get on the road again.

On the road again.

Going places to see many friends.

Showing them that I can really make amends.

And I can’t wait to get on the road again.

 

On the road again

Like a weasel with the ease of a shrewd leader.

Tho’ I’m at wit’s end,

I’m insisting I’m the guy they really need here.

And the one they need here

Is one the road again.

Just can’t wait to get on the road again.

The life I love is scamming jizya for my ends

And I can’t wait to get on the road again…

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:53 | link | comments

Another woeful display of ignorance: On the one hand, you have a 1,400-year-old religion in which jihad—and I ain’t talkin’ that personal, internal struggle to lead a virtuous life according to laid down by Allah—is a duty. On the other hand, you have clueless infidels who find it too much of a chore to read up on Islamic doctrine, and Muslims who are not prepared to own up to those problematic portions of the Koran, Hadith and Sira, and which, down through the ages, have inspired the faithful to wage holy war. Put them together and you have this: a BBC World Service survey in which the majority of respondents say that the difficulties between the two worlds—Dar al Islam and Dar al Harb (although the poll didn’t describe them that way)—can be imputed to political, not religious differences:

Most people believe common ground exists between the West and the Islamic world despite current global tensions, a BBC World Service poll suggests.

In a survey of people in 27 countries, an average of 56% said they saw positive links between the cultures.

Yet 28% of respondents told questioners that violent conflict was inevitable.

Asked twice about the existing causes of friction, 52% said they were a result of political disputes and 58% said minority groups stoked tensions.

Only in one country, Nigeria, where Christian and Muslim groups often clash violently, did a majority of those polled (56%) cite religious and cultural differences between communities as the root cause of conflict.

Poll results: Common ground or conflict?

Doug Miller, president of polling company Globescan, said the results suggested that the world was not heading towards an inevitable and wide-ranging "clash of civilisations".

"Most people feel this is about political power and interests, not religion and culture," he said.

He pointed to the polarisation of communities in Nigeria as a warning sign to others, but hailed the results from Lebanon, a country frequently caught up in conflicts.

Some 78% of Lebanese strongly believed West-East tensions were politically motivated, while 68% felt common ground could be found between the West and the Islamic world…

Would these be the selfsame Lebanese who even now are trying to keep God’s Party from engulfing them? What “common ground,” I’d like to ask, do they think the West (or any non-believer) can find with Hezbollah and the other jihadists?

 

Doesn’t anyone in the world have a clue?

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:29 | link | comments

 A world turned upside down: George and Condi want to get cracking on a Peace in Our Time deal; Democrats, seeing the madness of it all, are trying to get them to back off. From the Jewish Daily Forward:

Washington - If Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas wanted to get a feel for just how upset Congress is over his decision to form a coalition government with Hamas, he should have caught Rep. Gary Ackerman’s opening comments Wednesday at the meeting of the Middle East subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Ackerman, the New York Democrat who chairs the subcommittee, had been a leading proponent on Capitol Hill of the position that the United States should be doing more to back Abbas in his power struggle with Hamas.

Not anymore.

“What has Abu Mazen done to strengthen himself? He’s capitulated to Hamas,” Ackerman said. “The Mecca Accord neither strengthens him nor helps the cause of peace…. We now have what Secretary Rice once said we could not accept: a Palestinian Authority with one foot in terror and one foot in democracy.”

Ackerman concluded that Abbas “has gutted his own credibility.”

Ackerman’s attack on the Mecca accords set the tone for the rest of the meeting. The ranking Republican on the subcommittee, Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana, asked how Congress could be expected to support funding for the P.A. when Abbas sides with Hamas. Other lawmakers followed a similar line, urging the administration to continue insisting that the new Palestinian government recognize Israel and to avoid linking the situation in Iraq to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In just one session, the Democratic-led subcommittee made it clear that at least on issues regarding the Palestinian conflict, it stands to the right of the Bush administration...

Get me some Dramamine. The unexpected disorientation is making me queasy.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:46 | link | comments (1)

Looking for peace in all the wrong places: On the heels of a “unity” government deal between Hamas and Abbas, Condoleezza Rice sees “a window of opportunity” for Peace in Our Times talks.

Condi is, what’s the word?, delusional.

 

From the New York Post:

 

…For Rice, there is another dynamic at play: The American secretary of state believes that a Sunni Arab world unified by fear of a radical Iran may finally force the Palestinians into peace with Israel. In other words, the Arabs will deliver the Palestinians, and the Americans will deliver the Israelis.

 

This is old think at its worst. Before 9/11, American policy in the Middle East rested on the premise that "moderate" Sunni states - like Egypt and Saudi Arabia - offered lasting stability in the region, by serving as a counterweight to states like Iran and Syria. George Bush repudiated that premise, insisting that true stability would flow from democracy.

 

Now, it increasingly appears that the Bush administration's democracy push is done. American diplomats are again talking up the important role of "moderate" or "reasonable" Arab states, ignoring the fact that most foreign fighters in Iraq are Saudis or that Egypt has launched an unprecedented crackdown on civil society.

 

In keeping with the effort to bolster the "moderates," the administration is trying to funnel $86 million to Abbas for his security forces. The fact that those self-same security forces are indistinguishable from the Fatah terror group known as the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, and that Fatah itself pursued a policy of terror over peace throughout its tenure in power, has not slowed the administration's eagerness to engage in a new peace process.

The logic behind today's meeting is unclear. Clever State Department diplomats believe that by describing a "horizon," or shape to a future Palestinian state, they will undercut Palestinian rejectionists and, in turn, destabilize Hamas. But embracing one terrorist to weaken another is not a foreign policy strategy, it's just unprincipled gamesmanship.

 

Similarly, the Bush administration's new fondness for so-called moderate Arab states over extremists ignores all the lessons learned after 9/11. Al Qaeda and its ilk have a foothold in the Middle East because supposedly moderate dictators and autocrats deny people basic rights. Getting back into bed with those moderates at the expense of the 300 million people of the region is a terrible mistake for which the United States has paid dearly once already. Secretary Rice is looking for diplomatic successes in all the wrong places.

 

The person who wrote the above is someone named Danielle Pletka, vice president for foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. In a sane world, she (or someone like her) and not Condi would be the Secretary of State.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:28 | link | comments

Power play in Iran: Caroline Glick says there are signs that Iran is about to implode, but that the Americans have yet to decide whether to take advantage of it. From JWR:

…The regime's fear of unrest grows by the day as the regime itself shows increased signs of disintegration. With the supreme leader Ali Khamenei reportedly suffering from the late stages of cancer, Iran expert Michael Ledeen reported this week that factional fighting for succession between forces loyal to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and forces loyal to former president and leader of the powerful Guardians Council Hashemi Rafsanjani is gaining momentum. The succession battle has engulfed the ayatollahs who are themselves turning against one another.

 

Furthermore, according to the Iran Press Service, the attack in Baluchistan that killed a dozen Revolutionary Guards troops on Tuesday was only one of many violent attacks against regime targets to have occurred in recent days. If the US and its allies act wisely, there is every reason to believe that they could successfully foment a revolution that would bring down the regime.

 

Yet it is far from clear that the US is interested in bringing down the regime. This week Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn released a report on US Farsi language broadcasting into Iran. From an analysis of those broadcasts, Coburn reached the disturbing conclusion that far from working to advance the US's stated aim of overthrowing the regime, these US taxpayer-funded broadcasts "undermine US policy on Iran, often even supporting the propaganda of the Islamic Republic of Iran."

 

Needless to say, this is not the sort of behavior one would expect from the US if the administration was seriously pursuing the overthrow of the mullahs or planning a strike against Iran's nuclear facilities…

 

Get a move on, Dubya. The sands of time in the world’s hour glass are rapidly running out.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:46 | link | comments

Unnatural urges: What do you call the overwhelming urge to lash out violently at infidels in America—as a young Muslim did the other day in Salt Lake City? An Investor’s Business Daily editorial suggests it be called “sudden jihad syndrome”:

Terror: It looks like the Muslim teen who opened fire on shoppers in a Salt Lake City mall is yet another case of "sudden jihad syndrome," a condition in which normal-appearing American Muslims abruptly turn violent.

Taken together, this and other cases add up to an invisible jihad inside America. But don't tell that to the FBI. The politically correct bureau does everything it can to avoid recognizing the obvious Islamic factor in these heinous crimes.

Sulejman Talovic, an 18-year-old Bosnian Muslim immigrant, was loaded with enough ammo to "inexplicably" kill dozens of victims — and he would have, if an alert off-duty cop hadn't returned fire and stopped him. Talovic still managed to methodically murder five and wound four others with a shotgun.

Witnesses say it was an act of coldblooded violence aimed at random victims — something otherwise known as terrorism. According to the Salt Lake Tribune, Talovic attended Friday prayers at a mosque about a block from the mall.

Yet the FBI saw no religious motive, and quickly ruled out terrorism. Nor could it find anything to indicate terrorism in several other Muslim-tied cases since 9/11, including:

• A 30-year-old Muslim man, Naveed Afzal Haq, who went on a shooting rampage at a Jewish community center in Seattle, announcing "I'm a Muslim-American; I'm angry at Israel."

• An Egyptian national, Hesham Mohamed Hadayet, who shot two and wounded three at an Israeli airline ticket counter at LAX.

• A bearded 21-year-old student, Joel Hinrichs, who blew himself up with a backpack filled with TATP (the explosive of choice in the Mideast) outside a packed Oklahoma University football stadium not long after he started attending the local mosque.

• A 23-year-old student, Mohammed Ali Alayed, who slashed the throat of his Jewish friend in Houston after apparently undergoing a religious awakening (he went to a local mosque afterward).

• The D.C. snipers — John Muhammad and Lee Malvo, both black Muslim converts — who picked off 13 people in the suburbs around the Beltway as part of what Muhammad described as a "prolonged terror campaign against America" around the first anniversary of 9/11, which he had praised.

• Omeed Aziz Popal of Fremont, Calif., who police said hit and killed a bicyclist there then took his SUV on a hit-and-run spree in San Francisco, mowing down pedestrians at crosswalks and on sidewalks before police caught up with him, whereupon the Muslim called himself a "terrorist."

• A 22-year-old Muslim, Ismail Yassin Mohamed, who stole a car in Minneapolis and rammed it into other cars before stealing a van and doing the same, injuring drivers and pedestrians, while repeatedly yelling, "Die, die, die, kill, kill, kill" — all, he said, on orders from "Allah."

• A 22-year-old Iranian honors student, Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, who deliberately rammed his SUV into a crowd at the University of North Carolina to "punish the government of the United States" for invading Iraq and other Muslim nations.

Described by other students as "kind and gentle," Taheri-azar was a student council president and a member of the National Honor Society in high school. He told the judge he was "thankful you're here to learn more about the will of Allah."

He wrote a letter to a TV station citing Quranic verses justifying his attacks and told a detective that Muslims "all over the world are being killed, and now it is the people in the United States' turn to be killed."

This is not terrorism, the FBI said. Just some nutty kid. In all these cases, the feds' first reaction was to shrug. They said the perps were lone individuals who just went ballistic after having a bad day, as if anyone could have done such crimes.

But they weren't just anyone. They were all young Muslim men. Of course, the FBI can't treat all law-abiding young Muslim men as potential killers. But neither should the agency ignore this trend...

I guess the FBI suffers from another malady: sudden ostrich syndrome.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:36 | link | comments (2)

Now is the winter of their discontent: Betcha didn’t know that Shakespeare was Muslim. Well, maybe not Muslim so much as someone who was especially prescient about the kind of travails Muslims would be facing at the outset of the second millennium. And if you don’t believe me, read this Islam Online story about how Richard III (my favourite play by the Bard) has been performed in Arabic. In Will’s hometown, no less:

LONDON — Exploring Middle East politics, tyranny and power struggle, an Arabic version play of Shakespeare's masterpiece Richard III closed Saturday night, February 17, in the birthplace of the legend poet, Stratford-upon-Avon.

 

The modern Middle East, like so many of Shakespeare’s tragedies, offers a painful plethora of examples of how not to rule,” director of “Richar III: An Arab Tragedy told Agence France-Press (AFP) in an interview.

The play, which opened on February 8 in Arabic with English subtitles, transplants the famous British playwright's play about power struggle, tyranny and family conflict in 15th-century England to the present day.

"The play is a parable of the crisis of succession turning into a nightmare and I think it can be seen as a cautionary tale," British-Kuwaiti Director Bassam said.

He drew a comparison with powerful monarchies in the Gulf, such as Saudi Arabia, and their potential for running into trouble over the transfer of power.

"I see 'Richard III' as a world that's ruled by tribal allegiances and in that world, if blood is shed within my family, it's my duty to make that compensated for," the director said.

This is not the first time Bassam, whose company features actors from Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon and Syria, has used Shakespeare's drama to explore Gulf politics.

His 2004 production "The Al-Hamlet Summit", staged in Tokyo and London, applied the same trope.

Bassam, whose work has also been performed in London, Kuwait and Cairo, hopes to stage his new production in Abu Dhabi later this year and then take the play around Europe.

Actually, Al-Bassam sounds like he kind of “gets it”—just so long as it doesn’t lead to the type of cultural appropriation so common in the Muslim world (and which gives the true believers credit for inventing everything from mathematics to duct tape). Let’s just hope his next translation isn’t of Hitler’s favourite play, The Merchant of Venice; it’s bad enough that it will be performed at this summer’s Stratford Festival in Canada.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:06 | link | comments

Incitement in the Old City: Israeli authorities are trying to determine if there’s sufficient grounds to arrest a splenetic cleric who’s been trying to whip up the masses into seethe ‘n’ stampede mode. Here’s what he said as reported in the Jerusalem Post:

During his Friday sermon in Jerusalem's Wadi Joz neighborhood, Salah urged supporters to start a third intifada in order to "save al-Aksa Mosque, free Jerusalem and end the occupation."

Salah had called on the members of the Islamic Movement's Northern Front to join him for Friday prayers in the neighborhood, to protest the building project and archaeological digs at the site of the Mughrabi Gate.

Following a violent protest almost two weeks ago, Salah, one of the most vocal opponents of the Mughrabi Gate project was barred by a court from coming within 60 meters of the Old City walls. On Monday, the Jerusalem Magistrate's Court agreed to a police request that he be barred from coming within 150 meters of the walls for 60 days.

Salah's speech also attacked Jews, saying that "They want to build their temple at a time when our blood is on their clothes, on their doorsteps, in their food and in their drinks. Our blood has passed from one 'general terrorist' to another 'general terrorist.'" He also quoted assassinated Hamas-leader Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, saying: "The powerful won't remain powerful forever and the weak won't remain weak."

Yeah, there’s nothing more dee-lish to us ritual-minded Jews than adding a dash of feisty young Muslim to our Bloody Caesars and Bloody Marys. It’s even zestier than Tabasco. And as for those “bloodentaschen” on Purim—as excruciatingly perky talk show host/foodie Rachael Ray would say, “Yummo”!

 

Seriously though, I think it’s time to stop investigating and put this blood libelist on ice before he manages to spark a rampage.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:52 | link | comments

Anna's faulty analysis: Anna Morgan, wife of Ed Morgan, head of the Canadian Jewish Congress, thinks Israel should become more like Canada. From the Sunday Star:

In these overheated days of right-wing fundamentalism and leftist apartheid rhetoric, Mohammed Saif-Alden Wattad presents a unique perspective on Arab-Jewish relations. Since both sides see him as provocative, he might, in fact, have something interesting to say.

The visiting research fellow at the University of Toronto portrays ethnic relations in the State of Israel in a way more reminiscent of our own Canadian social problems and legal solutions than a product of the impossible divides that have become so familiar in the press.

It's not that Wattad belittles the serious issues that plague the Middle East. Indeed, he lays them all out for discussion. But as a lawyer educated at Haifa University and a former law clerk to the Supreme Court of Israel, Wattad believes it is the Israeli political and legal system itself that holds the most promise for his community's future.

As an Israeli Arab, Wattad could be torn between historical links to his Arab heritage and connections to his Israeli citizenship, a country most Arabs despise. And while many Arabs in Israel feel loyalty only to their heritage, Wattad does not. As a scholar, he sees a clear distinction between nation and state. He acknowledges allegiance to the Arab nation through language and culture. But, at the same time, he feels strongly about loyalty to his country – the State of Israel.

That doesn't mean that Wattad is blind to the discrimination his community sometimes faces. He would like to see minorities in Israel receive a more equitable proportion of the state's resources.

He wants his country to be more inclusive of all of its citizens and has argued for the Jewish symbols in the national anthem and flag to be changed. In return, he is willing to concede that Arab citizens owe the full range of responsibilities to their country, including being drafted into the Israeli army.

Unlike many Arabs in the region, he accepts that the State of Israel is a political entity that is here to stay. He certainly doesn't endorse its destruction. Rather, Wattad feels he has a duty to defend his country from its enemies and that he has the right to demand equality using every democratic tool within his power – the courtroom, the Israeli parliament and the press.

What is interesting about Wattad's views is that they are so close to the way many Canadians feel about their own divided loyalties. Italian Canadians may root for Italy in World Cup soccer games and Scottish Canadians may actually like haggis, yet there is no question about their devotion to Canada (though there may be plenty of questions about their taste). And, most importantly, when it comes to their rights, our citizens turn to the Canadian courts, the legislature, and the press for protection.

As minorities, many Canadians have certainly struggled against injustice…

I think Anna and the professor are out to lunch, and wrote a letter to tell the Star so:

 

Anna Morgan paints a rosy picture of what might happen if Israel takes a cue from Canada and endeavours to be more considerate of its Arab minority. Part of making them feel more at home would be to remove those Jewish symbols such as the Star of David that tend to make them feel excluded—in other words, to divest Israel of its essential Jewishness.

 

I’m sure that would make the Arabs who live inside and outside Israel very happy—they’ve been trying to do much the same thing for decades. But it wouldn’t do much for the Jews. In fact, robbing Israel of its Jewishness—its  raison d’etre—would inevitably lead to disaster as the Arabs would be no more inclined to want to “share” power the with Jews of Israel than Arabs/Muslims want to “share” power with the Christians of Lebanon.

 

In the event, no one would ever call upon the Arab and Muslim nations of the world—and at last count there were over 50 of them—to remove those symbols which may be upsetting to their minority populations. Why, that would be absurd.

 

No, the problem here isn’t that Israel isn’t enough like Canada. The problem, as always, is that the Arabs of the region cannot abide the sovereignty of non-Muslims. And that problem isn’t going to be solved by implementing a Canada-style constitution in Israel, a nation which, aside from military service, already accords its minority citizens the full gamut of rights. Something which, it must be noted, cannot be said of minorities living in Arab and Muslim countries.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:59 | link | comments (2)

The culture of doom ‘n’ gloom ‘n’ trashy behaviour: Mark Steyn, as hilarious as he is perceptive, writes about those forces in the U.S. which are determined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. As Steyn writes, even the good news from Iraq—the capture of an al Qaeda leader, kooky Mooqy al Sadr high-tailing it back to Ayatollahville in advance of the surge—is positioned as bad news, as the masses wallow in the culture of defeat; the culture in which Anna Nicole Smith’s impending embalming and Britney Spears’s close shave lead the news. To paraphrase Karl Marx, CNN is the opiate of the people:

…There was a TV station somewhere -- was it Thunder Bay, Ontario? -- that used to show a continuous loop of a roaring fireplace all night, and thousands of viewers would supposedly sit in front of it for hours because it was such a reassuringly comforting scene. The networks could save themselves a lot of money by adopting the same approach: Run a continuous loop of a smoking building in Baghdad all night while thousands of congressmen and pundits and think-tankers and retired generals run around Washington shrieking that all is lost. America is way out of its league! A dimwitted tourist in a fearful land of strange people who don't watch "American Idol." Iraq is so culturally alien that not a single Sunni, Shia or Kurd has come forward claiming to be the father of Anna Nicole's baby!

Get a grip, chaps! In Iraq, everyone's a tourist. This al-Qaida honcho, al-Masri, is an Egyptian. His predecessor, Zarqawi, was a Jordanian. Al-Sadr is a Persian stooge. For four decades, the country was a British client. Before that, it was a Turkish province. The Middle East is a crazy place and a tough nut to crack, but the myth of the unbeatable Islamist insurgent is merely a lazy and more neurotic update of the myth of the unbeatable communist guerrilla, which delusion led to so much pre-emptive surrender in the '70s. Nevertheless, in the capital city of the most powerful nation on the planet, the political class spent last week trying to craft a bipartisan defeat strategy, and they might yet pull it off…

I'm not so sure Iraq's democracy experiment will ever succeed, especially since it is fatally hampered by an allegiance to sharia law, a system that's intrisically inequitable and the antithesis of democracy. However, I do know this: The U.S. has to do something about those persky Persians before their nukes are operational, and handing them a victory in Iraq isn't the way to do it.

 

As always at such times, I feel a song coming on. In this case, it’s inspired by my line about Mooqy Al Sadr’s decamp:

 

Nibblin’ on pita.

Puttin’ my feet up.

Glad to be outta the chaos and smoke.

The surge is a-comin’

And I am a-runnin’,

And now I look like a big scaredy-cat joke.

 

Hidin’ away again in Ayatollahville.

Searchin’ for my lost insurgency.

Some people claim that the Jews are to blame.

Just so long as they aren't blamin' me.

 

I do know the reason

I’ll stay here all season.

Has somethin’ to do with savin’ my skin.

I’m hunkerin’ down now,

Stayin’ in Tehran town now.

And when the surge settles I’ll go back ag’in.

 

Hidin’ away again in Ayatollahville.

Searchin’ for my lost insurgency.

Some people claim that the U.S. is to blame.

Just so long as they aren't blamin' me.

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

Jewish purveyors of the “big lie”: The dirty little secret of Jewish history—Jews have always been in the forefront of spreading judenhass. As it was then, so it is now, with Jews marching shoulder to shoulder with the enemies of Israel and the civilized world. By Rachel Ehrenfeld on the American Thinker site:

The most potent weapon in the arsenal of the Arab and Islamist extremists seeking the destruction of Israel and the Jewish people has always been, not bombs, not guns, not missiles, not aircraft, not even the barbarism of suicide-homicide bombers,--but propaganda. Their massive and unrelenting propaganda campaign over the past sixty years has depicted Israel as a vicious, conspiratorial aggressor against, and oppressor of, the Arab people, and "world Jewry" as parties to and supporters of this conspiracy by "Zionism" and "the Zionist entity." 

Most of the world has come to accept this big lie, as well as the thousands of smaller lies that have been used to construct it like the individual stones that form the Great Pyramid of Giza. Unfortunately, many Jews, including Israeli Jews, have come to accept it, too. Anti-Israel propaganda has been given so much credence within Israel itself that it has sapped the will of the Israeli government and sections of Israel's people to resist the incessant, murderous terrorist campaign waged against them. The acceptance of the Arab-Islamist "narrative" by many Israeli politicians, journalists, and scholars has been the principal cause of the endless, suicidal concessions that one Israeli government after another has made to the terrorists since 1993. Israel is dying a slow death by poisoning from this propaganda.

 

And within this arsenal of Arab-Islamist propaganda, by far the most devastating weapon has been those Jews who participate in manufacturing it. An article posted on the website of the American Jewish Committee for the past year, which has received renewed attention recently, documents the published rhetoric of a number of these Jewish anti-Israel propagandists (only a small fraction, unfortunately, of the total number of them). The language used by these American and Canadian Jewish college professors and other  "intellectuals" to describe Israel and Jews, as documented by  the author of this study, Professor Alvin F. Rosenfeld of Indiana University, includes the following:  "belligerent," "bloody, "brutal," "cataclysmic," "corrupt," "cruel," "dangerous," "deadly," "militaristic," "apocalyptic," "blind," "demonic," "fanatical," "insane, " and "mad." (Jacqueline Rose). Israel is "amoral," "barbaric," "brutal," "destructive," "fascistic," "oppressive," "racist," "sordid," and "uncivilized," (from the volume Radicals, Rabbis and Peacemakers: Conversations with Jewish Critics of Israel, edited by Seth Farber).

Israel is guilty of "apartheid," "state terrorism," "ethnic cleansing," "crimes against humanity," and "pure genocide."(Radicals, Rabbis and Peacemakers).  

"We take Zionism to be a form of collective insanity." (Rose) 

 

"How did one of the most persecuted peoples of the world come to embody some of the worst cruelties of the modern nation-state?" (Rose).

 

"The soul of the nation [Israel] was forfeit from the day of its creation" (Rose).

"Zionist atrocities" are part of "a race war against the Palestinians," aimed at "the extinction of a people."(Michael Neumann, a professor of philosophy at Trent University in Canada).

 

The Palestinians "are being shot because Israel thinks all Palestinians should vanish or die" (Neumann).

 

"Most [Jews] support a state that commits war crimes" (Neumann).

 

"The case for Jewish complicity [in war crimes] seems much stronger than the case for German complicity" in the Holocaust (Neumann).

"...the real scandal today is not anti-Semitism but the importance it is given. Israel has committed war crimes. It has implicated Jews generally in these crimes, and Jews generally have hastened to implicate themselves. This has provoked hatred against Jews. Why not? Some of this hatred is racist, some isn't, but who cares?" (Neumann)

"What the Nazis had not succeeded in accomplishing, we as Jews have embarked upon." (Marc Ellis, a self-styled Jewish "theologian" and professor of Jewish Studies at Baylor University).

There is much, much more like this in the books and articles reviewed by Professor Rosenfeld, all of them published within the past few years; and still more in hundreds of similar writings by these and many other anti-Israel Jews that Professor Rosenfeld's essay does not mention-through no fault of his, since a complete digest of all of these scurrilous writings by "self-hating" Jews would require a several score volumes at a bare minimum;  but these extracts will give us some idea of the mentality and bias of this faction of  "progressive" Jewish "intellectuals".

 

In addition to producing this type of overheated rhetoric against Israel, some of these Jewish haters of Zion admit that they are not entirely opposed to anti-Semitism.  And if anti-Semitism should lead to violence against Jews,

"Who cares?.... To regard any shedding of Jewish blood as a world-shattering calamity... is racism, pure and simple; the valuing of one's race's blood over all others" (Neumann).

"We should almost never take anti-Semitism seriously and maybe we should have some fun with it." (Neumann).

Many of the Jewish Zion-haters make it clear that they seek to "annihilate the Jewish state" itself (this phrase comes from Joel Kovel, a professor of philosophy at Bard College). And some are open about their support for terrorism against Jews. Steve Quester says (in (Radicals, Rabbis and Peacemakers) "[W]hen the suicide bombings started one after the other, I was like,' Okay, now everyone's got to understand how horrible the Israeli behavior is'. . . So, I just went out and bought myself a little Palestinian flag pin and wore it around all the time."…

 

The psychology of self-loathing is truly twisted—as warped in its own way as the psychology of a human being who would turn himself into a human bomb because he’s been told that that’s his ticket to a Heavenly brothel.

Posted by: scaramouche at 23:41 | link | comments (1)

United front: “Unity” seems to be breaking out all over the Middle East. Fatah is “unified” with Hamas. And now, Ahmadinejad and Boy Assad—the Mutt and Jeff of ruthless Muslim leaders—have reaffirmed their “unity”.

How sweet.

You would think that the sight of all this obnoxious unity might deter Condi Rice from trying to start up some peace talks, if only because the sheer effort makes her and her administration look weak and ridiculous. Don't be silly. The Foggy Bottom diva still harbours hopes that Stinky Abbas can somehow be spruced up sufficiently to become a proper peace partner, despite his alliance with Hamas. (Really, Condi, is America willing to “talk peace” with al Qaeda? No? Then why would you compel the only sane nation in the Middle East to even entertain the notion of “talking peace” with the same kind of jihadists? ‘Tis to laugh, Dr. Rice.)

Posted by: scaramouche at 23:18 | link | comments

War of the worlds: Whether we care to admit it or not—and many, many people would rather not—Dar al Harb is at war with Dar al Islam, and vice versa. By Shlomo Engel on the YNet News site:

…The current war between Islam and the West is over the most fundamental cultural values of the two civilizations.  

Followers of Western culture believe in the supreme value of human life, civilian rights, complete freedom of thought and human spirit, genuine pluralism of beliefs and views coexisting side by side, equal status of men and women, and a free economic and intellectual market that is constantly improving as a result of competition and the individual's right to advance.

 

Western culture also believes in the power of words and persuasion, the use of force as a last resort only, individualsism (sic), limitless self-criticism and public criticism, and all other values of freedom and equality.

 

On the other hand, followers of the Islamic culture believe in one religion and one opinion meant to overtake the world through a Muslim crusade of blood and infidel bodies.

 

The well known duty of spreading Islam by the sword reflects the essence of this belligerent, murderous culture, which is willing to sacrifice millions of human beings (both Muslims and infidels) whose value is insignificant on the altar of the Muslim ideal of conquest and force.

 

In such a belligerent, violent society, there's of course no room for civil rights or any status for women, or any aspiration for education that is not zealously religious.

Indeed, this dichotomous division to civiliazations that deals with hundreds of millions of people does an injustice to many millions of Muslims who espouse a culture of freedom and equality with all their hearts. However, as is the case with any global social phenomenon, a certain degree of generalization is required.

 

One cannot ignore Muslim murderousness in Afghanistan and the Twin Towers, in Jerusalem and on Bali, in London, Barcelona, Cairo, Iraq, and almost anywhere around the globe.

 

Zealotry unrelated to economic status

It's difficult to point to a significant social movement by Muslims that espouses the values of education, freedom, equality, and peace. On the other hand, millions of Muslims are quick to avenge and destroy and kill and burn over any caricature or utterance they do not like.

Muslims are almost completely absent from the scientific and academic world, not to mention the Muslim woman. 

This religious zealotry is unrelated to economic and social status, and is true for residents of luxurious palaces in Saudi Arabia as it is for residents of refugee camps in Gaza and Lebanon.

 

It is to be expected that merely presenting this war of civilizations will immediately elicit the regular derogatory insults of racism and fascism that are so much liked by Muslim fanatics and their innocent supporters in the West.

The Western world's great openness created a situation whereby the blatant, anti-democratic racism and inequality that is built into Muslim culture receives the same status and legitimacy as other Western cultural values.  

 

Under this cover, the violent and fanatic aggressor allows itself to fight Western culture in its own home by demanding rights of equality and freedom that it doesn't believe in, but is glad to utilize in order to achieve its own destructive objectives…

 

Ironically, the very values that enrich and ennoble the West—an ethos of fairness, equality and human rights—have also turned out to be our Achilles heel, as our enemies use them against us to bring us down.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:39 | link | comments

Partners in crime: Stinky says the deal between Fatah and Hamas is a keeper, and sings Gershwin—but just this once, George and Ira being Jews and all—to his new life partner, Ismail Haniyah:

It’s very clear our deal is here to stay.

There is no fear that it will go away.

The media and the oil ticks

And the leaders near and far

Are aghast that it’s lasted

And hasn’t blasted apart.

But, oh, my dear,

Our deal is still a go.

Together we’ll get the jizya to flow.

In time the Jordan may dry out,

The Jews’ll all die out.

We’ll have it all some day

‘Cause

Our deal is here to stay.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:15 | link | comments

The triumph of hope over wisdom: George Bush and Condi Rice had been trying to boost the deflated fortuned of their guy, “moderate” Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas by sending him a bundle of greenbacks. But then he went and got his Fatah faction embroiled in civil hostilities with Prime Minister Ismail Haniyah’s Hamas faction, and the oil ticks stepped in to broker a “unity” government which essentially put Abbas and Haniyah in the same wreck of a Jeep, with Stinky twiddling his thumbs in the backseat. 

As this VOA story relates, that put the administration in a bit of a bind: how could it in good conscience send any shekels to Stinky when he had made common cause with the genocidal Islamists?

 

Reason prevailed for once and the money surge was halted. But that doesn’t mean the ever-optimistic Condi, currently on yet another visit to the region, has lost all faith in Stinky:

The Bush administration's strategy has been to try to strengthen the hand of the relatively-moderate Mr. Abbas in his power struggle with the radical Islamic Hamas movement, which is listed by the United States as a terrorist group.

However, last week's Saudi-brokered agreement, under which Mr. Abbas' mainstream Fatah movement will form a unity government with Hamas, has raised questions about the administration's approach, and put its plan to aid the Abbas-run security forces under new jeopardy in Congress.

In Congressional testimony before her departure for the Middle East and a three-way meeting with Israeli and Palestinian leaders, Rice said she understood the imperative of ending the intra-Palestinian conflict. But she said that must not mean the abandonment of the Palestinian Authority chief's commitment to peace with Israel:

"I can't say to them that it was wrong to try to stop Palestinians from killing Palestinian children," she said.

"I can't say that to them. But what I can say to them is that the result of Mecca cannot be that the United States is expected to support the security forces that are not clearly on the side of the 'road map,' the President's two-state solution, the Quartet principles, and so forth."

The Bush administration proposed the $86 million package late last year to support an effort by U.S. military envoy Major General Keith Dayton to upgrade forces loyal to the Palestinian Authority chief.

But the new head of the House appropriations subcommittee that controls the State Department budget, New York Democrat Nita Lowey, put a hold on the money even before the Mecca agreement.

During Rice's appearance before the panel Friday, another New York Democrat, Steve Israel, said, in the wake of the Palestinian power-sharing deal, there is broad bipartisan support for withholding the funds.

"I might have been able to support $86 million for the Palestinian Authority to enhance its security capability, so that it could enforce peace agreements that it negotiated with Israel," he said. "I would be hard-pressed to support funding for a Palestinian Authority that uses taxpayer dollars from the United States to attack and provoke an American ally."

Rice said she would report back to the subcommittee after her talks in the region as to whether the administration plan remains viable. For now, she said, she still believes in the wisdom of supporting Mr. Abbas.

What “wisdom” is there in supporting a two-faced Holocaust denier whose reputation for moderation rests solely on his not being an Islamist?

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

“Little worms”—then and now: In the run-up to the Second World War, Adolf Hitler dismissed his adversaries, the ones who, at Munich, chose appeasement over confrontation, as “little worms.” As Clifford D. May writes re the 43^rd annual Munich Conference on Security policy, “a gathering of the international political elite,” not much has changed since then. From NRO:

…The conference was opened by German Chancellor Angela Merkel. She surveyed a minefield of world crises but proposed little in the way of strategies to resolve them, other than “Peace through Dialogue” — the conference’s slogan prominently displayed in German and English behind her on the stage.

Senator Joseph Lieberman asked Merkel if there was not a “global moral responsibility to stop the genocide” of black Muslims in Sudan. She agreed there was, but added that before action could be contemplated “the African Union has to make clear what it thinks.”

Russia’s Vladimir Putin was the next world leader to take the microphone. He launched into a venomous attack on America, charging that because of Washington “nobody feels secure anymore because nobody can hide behind international law,”

The possibility that international law is not meant to conceal despots was not raised with him. However, Rep. Jane Harman did ask Putin to explain why he was selling nuclear technology and sophisticated surface-to-air missile systems to the regime in Tehran. “We don’t want Iran to feel cornered in a hostile region,” the Russian president said dismissively.

Only seven weeks into his new job, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates decided not to respond to Putin in kind. Instead, he remarked that the former KGB officer’s words “almost filled me with nostalgia for a less complex time. Almost. … One Cold War was quite enough.”

Finally, there was Ali Larijani, the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, playing the role of the indignant revolutionary deigning to address the benighted emissaries of a dying order. “What is important,” he sternly instructed, “is that the world undergoes fundamental changes.”

Cunningly, he appealed for multicultural tolerance: “In the West you have adopted secularism as the basis of democracy. Our democracy is based on Islamic thoughts.” Assuming the mantle of victim, he complained that “in the West, the defamation of the Prophet of Islam is being supported.”

As for Iran’s nuclear program, he insisted it is intended only to generate electricity. “We have no intention of aggression against any country,'' he said, sounding offended by the very thought. He added that, on the contrary, “We are a victim of terrorism.” At whose hands, he did not specify.

Larijani sternly set down the rules for those wishing to question him: He was not to be asked about “suspension of uranium enrichment, the Holocaust or Israel.”

Perhaps the sharpest rejoinder came from Sen. Lindsey Graham. “It must have been difficult for you to say what you said,” he told the Iranian official. “Because it was difficult for me to listen.”

Graham observed: “No one who denies the Holocaust can be trusted with nuclear materials.” And he advised Larijani to “Go visit Dachau,” the Nazi concentration camp preserved as a memorial in Munich’s bucolic suburbs; an unintended consequence of the policy of appeasement.

In contrast with Graham and other members of the American delegation — which included also Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl — few European leaders seemed distressed by Larijani. If anything, they congratulated themselves for having invited him to Munich to begin a process of “peace though dialogue.”

As for what Larijani and his fellow Islamist revolutionaries think of their European hosts, one can only surmise. But I suspect it is not too far from the Führer’s appraisal of those he humiliated in Munich nearly 70 years ago.

 

"Peace through dialogue" strikes the right Orwellian note here—sort of like "Arbeit Macht Frei" did in its time.

 

Little annelids of the world unite! You have nothing to lose but your honour and your freedom. And, oh yeah, at least six million more Jews.

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

A failure to connect: Two seemingly contradictory stories from the Birmingham (U.K.) Post. The first reports that police are delighted with their efforts to reach out to the Muslim community in the wake of recent terror arrests:

To ease community relations, the police activated telephone advice lines in a number of languages and distributed 5,000 leaflets offering support.

The leaflets were translated into Punjabi, Hindi, Bengali and Urdu and told readers, "we want to reassure you that the police are not targeting communities or faith but suspected criminals".

The Chief Constable said: "Operation Gamble, which was the name given to an operation involving counter-terrorism arrests the week before last, was a result of a very, very long term inquiry.

 

"Six individuals have been charged with substantial offences. Those charges are very significant and have not been seen in the UK before. The work does not end now that we have arrested and charged people. The team of officers working at this level will proceed."

He said the force had been analysing evidence gathered during the raids on January 31, which are believed to have been linked to an alleged terrorist plot to kidnap and assassinate a British Muslim soldier.

"We have seized between 4,500 and 5,000 exhibits. These include computers, telephones and blackberries, all of which need to be downloaded and examined.

"I think there has been some very positive reporting from not just people who are leaders of the community, but of people who live in the West Midlands," he said…

Au contraire, Chief Constable. According to the second story—the one posted just beneath this one on the paper’s website—Muslims (are) angry about police raids.

So much for earnest, multi-lingual community outreach.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:41 | link | comments

Sharp flyer: A guy named Mo hijacked an Air Mauritania airliner yesterday, directing it to fly to the Canary Islands. But some quick thinking on the pilot's part averted a potential disaster. From AP (via caycompas.com):

TENERIFE, Canary Islands (AP) – A quick–thinking pilot thwarted a gun–toting hijacker on a flight from Africa to Spain’s Canary Islands by discreetly warning passengers he would brake hard upon landing, then speed up just as abruptly to knock the man off balance – and telling them to be ready to pounce, Spanish officials said Friday.

 

The trick worked to perfection, with travelers and crew waiting until the hijacker was on the floor to douse him in the face and chest with boiling water from a coffee machine and beat him into submission.

 

"The man deserves a medal," Air Mauritania spokesman Ahmedou Ahmedou said of the company’s veteran pilot after the ordeal Thursday evening.

 

The lone gunman brandishing two pistols hijacked the Air Mauritania Boeing 737, carrying 71 passengers and a crew of eight, shortly after it took off from the Mauritanian capital of Nouakchott for Gran Canaria, one of Spain’s Canary Islands, with a stopover planned in Nouadhibou in northern Mauritania.

 

He wanted to divert the plane to France so that he could request political asylum, said Mohamed Ould Mohamed Cheikh, Mauritania’s top police official.

 

The hijacker has been identified as Mohamed Abderraman, a 32–year–old Mauritanian, said an official with the Spanish Interior Ministry office on Tenerife, another of the islands in the Atlantic archipelago. He spoke under rules barring publication of his name. Mauritania has said the hijacker was a Moroccan from the Western Sahara.

 

The hijacker ordered the pilot to fly to France, but the crew told him there was not enough fuel. Morocco denied a request for the plane to land in the city of Djala in the Moroccan–controlled Western Sahara, so the pilot headed for Las Palmas in Gran Canaria, the original destination.

 

Speaking to the gunman during the hijacking, the pilot realized the man did not understand French. So he used the plane’s public address system to warn the passengers in French of the ploy he was going to try: slam on the brakes upon landing, then accelerate abruptly. The idea was to catch the hijacker off balance, and have crew members and men sitting in the front rows of the plane jump on him, the Spanish official said.

 

The pilot warned women and children to move to the back rows of the plane in preparation for the subterfuge, the official said.

 

It worked. As the plane landed on Gran Canaria, the man was standing in the middle aisle when the pilot carried out his maneuver, and he fell to the floor, dropping one of his two 7mm pistols. Flight attendants then threw boiling water in his face and at his chest, and some 10 people jumped on the man and beat him, the Spanish official said…

 

Great story. They should make it into a movie. I'd much rather that than, say, the Milli Vanilli biopic.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:02 | link | comments

What lies ahead: Caroline Glick says that a showdown between Bush and Iran is all but inevitable, but his administration’s pallid performance in recent weeks—the nuclear deal reached with North Korea, the first steps taken to legitimizing the Hamas-led “unity” government (along with the continuing insistence that Abbas is a “moderate”), the reluctance to take advantage of the restiveness of the Iranian people and their loathing for the regime that rules them—doesn’t elicit much optimism. From the Jerusalem Post:

…YET WHETHER or not the US is planning for a confrontation with Iran and whether or not its deal with North Korea and its continued tolerance for Abbas is aimed at preparing the ground for a confrontation with the mullahs, that confrontation will occur.

As the regime becomes less stable, the mullahs are becoming more extreme. They are ratcheting up their suppression of regime opponents throughout the country. There is little reason to doubt that they will seek to divert their people's attention from their failures by inciting hostilities against the US in Iraq or against Israel in Lebanon, Syria or the Palestinian Authority and expediting their nuclear program. Indeed, the Iranians have ample means at their disposal to initiate the confrontation with the US on a battleground most convenient to them.

Whether the US arrives at its showdown with Iran from a position of weakness or strength, willingly or unwillingly, there is no doubt that the confrontation is approaching. And the difference between initiating the confrontation and allowing Iran to initiate it with a nuclear first strike is not a trivial question. It will make a difference of millions of lives. The question of the hour is therefore whether the little time left before the war is being used wisely.

And here is the great failure. By sending a message of weakness now, in order to purchase maneuvering time that may not be obtained, the US this week has accelerated rather than distanced the moment of truth while doing nothing to build support or increase its chances of triumph when the inevitable occurs.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:46 | link | comments

A lesson from France: Yes, France. Der Spiegel Online has a good account of the ‘toon foofarah in that country—or the foofarah that might have been but that was shut down because, for once, the French stood up to the religious bullies in their midst:

…Charlie Hebdo directs its satire every week against France's right-wing establishment as well as the country's self-contented "caviar left." It reprinted cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in February of 2006 -- cartoons that provoked a wave of anti-Western hysteria in the Muslim world after they first appeared in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten. Protesters attacked the offices of Danish companies; churches and embassies went up in flames.

But the attacks also led the western media to close ranks in a remarkable way. As a gesture of solidarity, 150 newspapers in 60 countries reprinted the cartoons. The decision to do so was risky, even in Voltaire's hometown. The editor-in-chief of France Soir was fired after the popular daily published the cartoons. That of course was reason enough for Charlie Hebdo to publish them, too.

But the paper went one step further and added its own cartoon on the cover, showing Muhammad in a state of exasperation. "It's tough being loved by idiots," he complains, face buried in hands -- an allusion to suicide bombers who blow themselves up in the name of Allah and his prophet. French Muslim preachers smelled an outbreak of Islamophobia, and felt pious believers had been equated with brutal killers. Boubakeur, who directs the Paris Great Mosque, spearheaded a new movement against "fomentation of racial hatred."

Boubakeur has a scholarly, respectable-bohemian image in France. In 2003 he created the Muslim Council at the suggestion of Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, who hoped the moderate umbrella association would weaken the influence of extremists. But the cartoon controversy ended this coziness between the Muslim Council and the Interior Ministry. Pressured by radical Council members, Boubakeur began a legal counter-attack. The main charge pressed by various Muslim groups and the Muslim World League was over "public insults against a group of people because they belong to a religion."

But Boubakeur and the Muslim Council badly miscalculated the outcome. The trial against Charlie Hebdo became a tribunal against religious intolerance. Le Monde called it a "trial from another time." Charlie Hebdo editor Val said the "limits of liberty must be verified daily," and then quoted John Paul II: "Be not afraid!"

It wasn't just Islam specialists, philosophers and intellectual gliterati who rushed to defend the paper. Political celebrities also worked visits to the courtroom into the French 2007 presidential campaign. Francois Hollande, first secretary of the French Socialist Party (PS), appeared as a witness and gave an impassioned speech in "defense of freedom of opinion." Francois Bayrou, presidential candidate from the liberal UDF party, underpinned his defense of the paper on the stand by stressing his double identity as a Christian and a French citizen.

Even Sarkozy defended Charlie Hebdo, which typically portrays him as a nightstick-swinging policeman or a rabid pitbull terrier. But Sarkozy -- stumping this year as a candidate for president from the conservative UMP party -- characterized himself as a critic of "every form of censorship" in a written statement to the court. Sarkozy argued it was better to have "too many cartoons" than "no cartoons" and defended the "right to smile."

After he declared his solidarity with Charlie Hebdo, the Muslim Council gave in. An emergency session was held, and Boubakeur demanded a "calming" of the situation and lamented its "politicization."…

“Be not afraid”—that should become the motto of all those who love laughter and freedom.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:41 | link | comments

Totalitarian celebration: Fresh off his successful extortion scheme whereby he persuaded the Americans to fork over heaps of cash for a promise to partially dismantle his nuclear program, Kim Jong-Il, height challenged absolute ruler of North Korea—“Dear Leader” son of “Great Leader” to his put-upon people—is celebrating his 65^th birthday. And what a lavish, over-the-top spectacle it’s been, full of the forced frivolity, effusive tributes and sabre-rattling that are the usual hallmarks of such affairs. From the Guardian:

North Korea celebrated leader Kim Jong-il's 65th birthday today with the expected mix of public marches, lavish personal praise and fierce anti-US rhetoric.

 

"Your birth as a bright star over Mount Paektu was the greatest event as it promised the happiness and prosperity of the Korean nation," the country's official media said, hailing the man usually referred as the "Dear Leader".

 

Footage from the country's state-run television network showed crowds of brightly-dressed celebrants dancing in unison in public squares inside the capital, Pyongyang…

 

“Celebrated,” is he? About as “celebrated” as a dose of syphillis.

 

All the “celebration” reminds me of the hoopla in Iran following Moo’s announcement that they’d joined the nuclear club—people compelled to frolic in the streets while holding test-tubes full of faux-fissionable material.

 

I've said it before: those totalitarians really know how to par-tay!

 

In honour of this special day, I’ve written my own brief “homage” to Dear Leader:

 

Happy Birthday, Kim Jong-Il

You’ve had enormous shoes to fill.

But due to views that you espouse

You’re just a tiny little louse.

 

Thank you. I also do poems for weddings, retirements and Bar Mitzvahs. Rates upon request.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:17 | link | comments (5)

Brandeis U, enemy of the Jewish state?: Daniel Pipes is outraged that his invitation to speak at Brandeis University, which recently hosted a quasi “debate” between Jimmy Carter and Alan Dershowitz, has been rescinded. Brandeis’s clueless President, Jehuda Reinharz, wanted to avoid the controversy that he said would have ensued had Pipes given his talk. But what's really got Pipes hopping mad is how the president bookended him with repellent Shoah-diminisher, Norman Finkelstein, describing them both as “weapons of mass destruction.” The insult was compounded by the president’s executive assistant, who said of Finkelstein and Pipes that they “are people who tend to inflame passions, whose mission is not so much discussion and education as it is theater, a show. … If [students] want theater then it's best to go to Spingold [theater]. … But if you want serious discussion, there's lots of resources available for that already at Brandeis.” Pipes continues (the links are his):

I strenuously object to being lumped in with Finkelstein in any fashion whatsoever. Finkelstein denies the Holocaust as a uniquely evil deed, equates Israel with the Nazis, compares persons he disagrees with to Nazis, justifies Hamas and excuses Muslim antisemitism. For good measure, he adds, "I do not think there is very much genuine grief among Jewish leaders about the Nazi holocaust," for they gained from what he calls "the Holocaust reparations racket." They "blackmailed Europe, got billions of dollars and then stuffed their pockets, bank accounts and organizations with the money." Yoking me to Finkelstein betrays Reinharz's profound moral confusion - something especially regrettable in the case of the president of a major university whose moral judgment is in steady demand.

The statements by Reinharz and Hose also prompt several questions:

1. How am I, exactly, a weapon of mass destruction, Mr. Reinharz? And what do you mean by this phrase?

2. And Mr. Hose, have you taken a look at just who gets inflamed by my speeches? On Jan. 31, for example, it was a bunch of Islamist goons, and you can see them yourself on the three videos listed on my Web site, at "My Disrupted Talk at the University of California-Irvine." After preventing me from speaking, the leader of this group called for the state of Israel to be "wiped off the face of the earth." Your statement makes me wonder whose side you are on – theirs or mine?

3. What, precisely, are those scholarly resources available at Brandeis? Might Hose be referring to the University's leading specialist on "contemporary Islamic thought and practice" (the title of her course), Prof. Natana DeLong-Bas (NEJS), an apologist for Al-Qaeda whose depraved thinking was exposed in several recent articles (including "Natana DeLong-Bas: American Professor, Wahhabi Apologist" and "Sympathy for the Devil at Brandeis," from frontpagemag.com)? Or is he referring to Khalil Shikaki, a Crown Center fellow who has been credibly accused of terrorist links and has a second-to-none record in getting it wrong in his chosen field of Palestinian public opinion?

Looking at the larger picture, Brandeis has incurred a sorry record when it comes to Israel in recent years - staging that "Voices of Palestine" exhibit, hiring DeLong-Bas and Shikaki, [granting an honorary degree to the anti-Zionist playwright Tony Kushner,] appointing the muddled Prof. Shai Feldman (POL) to head the Crown Center, permitting an Islamist (Qumar-ul Huda) to serve as its Muslim chaplain and setting up the Brandeis-Al-Quds University study-abroad connection.

Over the decades, Brandeis has benefited substantially from the support of those concerned with Israel's security and welfare. Sadly, its record in this arena under Reinharz has strayed so badly that already a year ago the Zionist Organization of America called for "donors to reconsider their support for Brandeis." So long as he remains the University's president, that strikes me as sound advice.

Me too.

Posted by: scaramouche at 22:29 | link | comments

Good question: Jeff Jacoby asks “Has any population ever been less suited for statehood than the Palestinians?” 

I posed much the same question in a letter I sent to the Globe and Mail after the bakery bombing in Eilat:

 

For decades now we have been told that of all the stateless peoples in the world—Kurds, Basques, Chechens, etc.—the Palestinians are most singularly deserving of statehood. And so much time, attention and resources have been poured into trying to get them a nation that it would not be an exaggeration to describe the effort as all-consuming. Along the way, however, few people seem to want to ask the most salient question: Is a viable state something the Palestinians really want, or is the drive for statehood more a function of their desire to de-construct the viable Jewish state next door?

 

Without meaning to, the young man who blew himself up in an Eilat bakery—an attack conducted for the sole purpose of fostering unity between warring factions of Palestinians—has answered that question. If you need to blow up Israelis as a diversion to prevent your people from killing each other, and if your mutual loathing of Jews is all that is holding you together (a hatred fanned every day in the Palestinian media), you are a long way from building anything viable.

 

In fact, I’d say we are far likelier to see an independent Kurdistan or Basqueland before the Palestinians ever get their act together.

Posted by: scaramouche at 22:07 | link | comments

Useful, banal idiots: I wasn’t planning to attend any of the delightfully informative events occurring as part of Toronto’s Israeli Apartheid Week—I hear the games night, when the kiddies are invited to pin the blame on the Jew, is going to be especially entertaining. Before they run off to gather with their fellow humanitarians, though, the tender-hearted pro-Palestinian human rights crowd (among them, noted feminist, Judy Rebick, a Jew) might want to consider this: they are not really serving the interest of human rights. What they’re actually doing is partaking in some nasty slander/judenhass that serves the interest of the Islamists who want to undermine and destroy the Jewish state.

Way to go, leftoids!

From the Jerusalem Post:

It is tempting to ignore "Israel Apartheid Week," an anti-Israel hate-fest taking place this week in Canada, England and the US. The organizers of such events, though they claim to be supporting Palestinian rights, will obviously not be satisfied unless the Jewish state ceases to exist.

But there are, no doubt, decent, caring people who may come across these events, or who bought Jimmy Carter's best-selling book branding Israel an apartheid state, who may be taken in by such vitriol.

So let us consider: Is Israel an apartheid state?

In an op-ed last week in The Australian, Muslim author Irshad Manji answers: "Would an apartheid state award its top literary prize to an Arab? ... Would an apartheid state encourage Hebrew-speaking schoolchildren to learn Arabic? Would road signs throughout the land appear in both languages? Even my country, the proudly bilingual Canada, doesn't meet that standard."

She continues: "Would a Hebrew newspaper in an apartheid state run an article by an Arab Israeli about why the Zionist adventure has been a total failure? Would it run that article on Israel's Independence Day? Would an apartheid state ensure conditions for the freest Arabic press in the Middle East?"

We would only add: What other state airlifted thousands of black Africans from Ethiopia to grant them instant and full citizenship?

The absurdity of the apartheid charge is illustrated by the Arab MKs who make it. Jamal Zahalka, an MK from one of the two Arab parties represented in the Knesset, said, "Calling the occupation apartheid... is an understatement. The Israeli occupation in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip is worse than apartheid." (see www.tomgrossmedia.com) Some might find it strange that Zahalka sees the Gaza Strip as "worse than apartheid" when it has been completely controlled by Palestinians since every Israeli settler (living and deceased), soldier and road block was withdrawn from that area in 2005.

Further, Zahalka appears not to realize that "apartheid week" organizers are not just referring to the situation in the territories captured by Israel in 1967 - most of which it has been desperately trying to hand over to a Palestinian state, and where, east Jerusalem apart, it has never asserted claims to sovereignty - but to Arabs in Israel itself. As their Web site states, "Israel is in fact an apartheid state, not just a belligerent occupying power."

Zahalka himself puts the lie to this claim. He and other Israeli Arab MKs are living proof that Arab citizens of Israel, unlike blacks in apartheid South Africa, have full political and civil rights, can vote and be elected to their parliament, and can even freely (if immorally) support the enemies of the state they are sworn to represent.

Indeed, many Israeli Arabs do not vote for the Arab parties, which have become so radicalized that they ignore their constituencies, but for Jewish parties. An Arab member of the Labor Party, for example, has just become a minister in the Israeli government.

And that's just the beginning. Israelis, be they Arabs or Jews, are much freer than anywhere in the Arab world. This is relevant because the "apartheid" charge brands Israel as a human rights abuser. But what sense does it make to berate the only country in the region that does respect human rights, while ignoring the rampant abuses taking place throughout the Muslim world?

According to the American Anti-Slavery Group (www.iabolish.com): "Though slavery was legally abolished [in Mauritania] in 1980, today 90,000 slaves continue to serve the Muslim Berber ruling class. Similarly, in Sudan, Arab northerners are known to raid the villages in the South - killing all the men and taking the women and children to be auctioned off and sold into slavery."

Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries deny equal rights to women, Christians, Jews, Hindus and others. Where are the protests against Saudi apartheid?

Anyone who cares about human rights should support countries where they are respected and protest against those which don't.

Israel, like other democracies, does not have a perfect human rights record. But the Orwellian attempt to lump Israel among odious regimes, while ignoring real abusers, employs a double standard so blatant as to fit international definitions of anti-Semitism. Such libelous campaigns are themselves an abuse of the lofty cause of human rights and, in the context of calls to "wipe Israel off the map," contribute to the ultimate human rights abuse, incitement to genocide.

There is no such thing as “the banality of evil”; that was a myth concocted by a German Jewess who was conflicted about having been born Jewish in pre-Hitler era Germany.  There may, however, be such a thing as the banality of good intentions—and of otherwise good people—that serve the interests of evil.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:19 | link | comments

Terrorist on trial: And speaking of Egyptians, terrorism and global jihad (see post below), ‘the Egyptian’ (that’s his nickname) who’s alleged to have helped plan the Madrid bombings has not been recruited by Mossad or tortured in Egypt, and is keeping his mouth firmly shut. From Expatica:

MADRID – ‘The Egyptian’, one of those accused of helping mastermind the Madrid training bombings which killed 191 people almost three years ago, refused to answer questions from lawyers at the start of the trial on Wednesday into the attacks.

Rabei Osman Sayed Ahmed, who was sentenced to 10 years by an Italian court last year for his role in the attacks, was the first of the 29 accused to be called to the witness stand after the case opened at around 10.30am.

 

“I don’t recognise any of the accusations and with all respect for the chief judge and the magistrates I’m not going to answer any questions including from my own defending lawyer”, the Egyptian told the court.

 

Chief trial judge Javier Gomez Bermudez informed ‘the Egyptian’ that he had the right to answer some or all of the questions from prosecuting and defending lawyers, or to answer none at all.

 

Prosecutors are asking for a total of 38,656 years’ prison for his part in planning the attack, which also injured 1,825 people and caused two miscarriages – although under Spanish law he could only serve a maximum of 40…Madrid

 

38, 656 years, eh? That means he’d be out in the year 40663.

 

Or 4060, with good behaviour.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:14 | link | comments

Spy vs. spy: The Globe and Mail is trying to whip up all sorts of interest in a cloak and dagger tale involving Israel and Egypt. In a front page story by Mark MacKinnon and Colin Freeze we learn the whole sordid saga (“EXCLUSIVE: If the interrogation transcript of accused spy Mohamed el-Attar is to be believed, Cairo's secret agents spied on the Egyptian-Canadian for years, photographing and tracking his movements – and marriages – across Canada as he tried to recruit Arabs into espionage for Israel's Mossad”). In a related story on an inside page, we also learn how Egypt nabbed the spy and likely subjected him to heavy doses of torture, the better to extract the story that the Globe now features with great excitement on its front page.

I know that as Canadians we’re supposed to be OUTRAGED by this sort of skullduggery occurring on our pristine soil—Israel breeching our sovereignty by looking for agents in Canada; Egyptians tailing the recruiter as he went about his dirty business. But really, who could possibly be surprised by such a story? We live in an age of globalization, when jihadis live everywhere, including right here in Canada, and a citizen of one country can be plotting to unleash an act of terrorism—hello, Mohammed Atta; hello, Hezbollah attacking Jews in Argentina—in another country thousands of kilometres away.

 

Get a grip, Globe. It’s the jihad, baby, and Israel’s gotta do what it’s gotta do, as do we all. You really think CSIS, the CIA and MI5 aren’t trying to do exactly the same thing?  I’d be far more astonished if Israel was sitting on its hands and not trying to recruit spies among Arab communities in the West. Now that would be truly shocking.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:20 | link | comments

Grrrl power in Pakistan: Who says women living under sharia law wield no influence? Why, just look at what chicks can do when they set their minds on something. From the Middle East Times:

ISLAMABAD --  Pakistan authorities have agreed to rebuild a demolished mosque in Islamabad to end a standoff with female students who seized a children's library in protest, officials said Tuesday.

A bitter row pitting pro-US President Pervez Musharraf against Islamists erupted last month after authorities razed the Amir Hamza mosque on the grounds that it was built illegally on government land.

Some 200 burqa-clad young women from a madrassa (Islamic school) affiliated to the city's main Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) occupied the adjacent government-run children's library in protest.

"The government has accepted the demand for reconstruction of Amir Hamza mosque," religious affairs minister Ejazul Haq told state television. "The government is showing maximum flexibility for an amicable solution of issues related to mosques and madrassas," he added.

The minister himself laid bricks to start the reconstruction work with Muslim clerics Monday.

He said that the government had also set up a committee of government officials and Islamic scholars to resolve other similar issues in future.

"In view of these steps, there is no reason for any cleric or madrassa students to continue an attitude of confrontation," state media quoted him as saying.

The female students, wielding bamboo sticks, had refused to leave the children's library until the mosque was rebuilt and plans to demolish their seminary and other mosques were withdrawn.

Male students carrying batons, meanwhile, were perched on the roof of the Red Mosque to head off any intervention by security forces.

"Talks with the minister have made some progress" and the deadlock is likely to end, said radical Islamic cleric Maulana Abdul Rashid Ghazi, a fierce critic of Musharraf. "The girls have opened the library as a gesture of goodwill. Library members can enter the premises, but the girls will remain inside for the time being," he said…

 

On second thought, there isn’t a whole lot of women’s lib in this story. Like those women in Gaza a few months back who came when summoned to act as human shields so their menfolk could escape from a mosque, these female students are allowing themselves to be used.

Posted by: scaramouche at 03:02 | link | comments

The Devil’s in the details: Looks like that Saudi-brokered unity deal may be about to collapse. From Reuters:

RAMALLAH, West Bank (Reuters) - Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas abruptly put off an address he was due to give on Thursday about a new unity government and an official said on Wednesday the delay was due to a dispute with Hamas. 

 

Abbas had been expected to promote the deal in a speech to Palestinians before heading to the Gaza Strip to accept the resignation of Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, a Hamas leader who is supposed to lead the new unity government agreed in Mecca. 

 

Abbas adviser Nabil Abu Rdainah told Palestinian television the president would give his speech after the Gaza talks. 

 

Some Hamas lawmakers said Haniyeh would not step down until he and Abbas, the moderate Fatah leader, had finalised several unresolved issues in the Saudi-brokered deal including naming an interior minister and deputy prime minister. 

 

"Hamas has made several unacceptable conditions which cannot be implemented. The Mecca agreement cannot be re-interpreted and must be implemented immediately without any conditions," a Palestinian official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. 

 

" ... they have certain conditions on the interior minister and the foreign minister and on the executive force," he said. 

 

The fate of Hamas's 5,600-member "executive" police force is another issue which Abbas and Hamas have yet to resolve. Fatah is pushing for the force to be broken up, but Hamas wants to keep it together...

 

Of course it does. I wonder if Ladbrokes is taking bets as to how soon the shooting is going to start up again.

Posted by: scaramouche at 02:42 | link | comments

Who cut the cheese?: The EU Parliament is in a lather about a report which claims that a number of countries have been turning a blind eye to CIA malfeasance. And the fair-minded EUnuchs are also really perturbed about another critical issue—inconsistently applied cheese practices in European airports. From ATW Online:

The European Parliament is unhappy with the apparent "arbitrary" nature of new security measures for carry-on luggage introduced last November at European airports.

 

During a debate in Strasbourg, MEPs wondered whether the rules were necessary and criticized their implementation, citing rough behavior of security personnel and random application of the regulations as frequent problems. For example, mozzarella cheese is confiscated in certain airports yet allowed in others…

 

Yeah, I hate when that happens.

Posted by: scaramouche at 01:58 | link | comments

Al Sadr has left the building: After stirring up all sorts of trouble in Iraq, radical Shia cleric Hanuka, er, Moqtada al Sadr (what a horrible name) appears to have high-tailed it back to Iran.  (On the other hand, maybe not.)

I know he’s no swivel-hips, but I couldn’t resist redoing this Elvis number just for him:

 

A little less confrontation, a little less action, please.

All your instigation ain’t bringin’ ‘em to their knees.

A little les ire, a little less seethe,

A little less fire, a little more breathe.

Stuff a sock into your mouth and gulp, please suicide you.

 

Mooqy close your eyes and listen to the mullahs

Ragin’ round that big ol’ mosque.

It’s a crappy time and they’re always tryin’ to fool us.

Go along with them and you will pay the cost.

 

A little less agitation, and less insurgency.

All this conflagration’s increasin’ the urgency.

A little less bombs, a little less mad,

A little more calm, a lot less jihad.

Stuff a sock into your mouth and gulp and suicide you,

Suicide you, Mooqy.

 

Come on, Mooqy, your spiel is so gaudy.

Grab your sheet and wait for the Mahdi.

Come on, come on,

Come on, come on,

Come on, come on.

Don’t procrastinate, don’t expectorate,

Man, it’s gettin’ late, gettin’ set to annihilate.

 

A little less instigation, a little less action, please.

All your aggravation ain't nothin’ but lunacy.

A little less nuts, a little more sane,

A little less guts, a little more brain.

Stuff a sock into your mouth and gulp and suicide you,

Suicide you, Mooqy.

Posted by: scaramouche at 01:26 | link | comments

 Mosque mirth: Zarqa Nawaz, the devout sister who’s trying to put the “fun” back in “fundamentalism” through her Ceeb-produced sitcom, Little Mosque on the Prairie, responds to interested believers on an Islam Online live discussion. As an example of the back-and-forth, here's a query from “Anne” and Nawaz’s unintentionally funny response:

Salaam Sister,

I applaud your efforts to introduce Muslims to the west in a comedic manner. I truly believe that we need to use humor to diffuse the pervasive negative image we face in the media.

I find, however, that in many chat rooms Muslims are up in arms over little aspects of your show- the woman wears hijab in her house, the actors are not Muslim, the Imam shook hands with a woman, etc. Have you received any negativity from our community about using this forum to protray (sic) the lives of Muslims?

God willing, the response is more positive than negative.

Sadly, I have only seen clips but my mother, the Orthodox Christian loves it. It parallels many of the stories I tell her of Muslim life-like dealing with the partition issue etc.

 

Dear Anne,

Thank-you for your kind comments. Overall the response of the community has been positive alhumdullilah. Although I created the series, I did not direct any of the first eight episodes or write all of the episodes myself. We work as a team and I am the only Muslim on the creative team because comedy/television writing is not a career choice that Muslims have gone into in great number yet. So there are issues of adab that are challenging to communicate to non-Muslim actors and the other members of the team. So yes there are some aspects of behaviour that will seem out of the normal behaviour of Muslims. For example, I tried to explain to the team that an Imam would not look at a sister as she bent over. This was considered very innocent to the non-Muslim writers. However, after that show aired and Muslims wrote that they didn't think an Imam would necessarily behave in this manner, the non-Muslim writers did finally understand why this particular scene may not have reflected the authentic behaviour of Muslims. Of course the intention of everyone on the show is not to offend Muslims and it helps me greatly when the Muslim community writes to the show to indicate what aspects they enjoyed and which could be improved. These comments are taken very seriously by the creative team and will be used to improve the show as we go forward Inshallah. I ask everyone to be patient with the creative team because making this show is a learning process for everyone and Inshallah much good will come out of it.

 

For instance, Inshallah, lots of infidels will be bamboozled into feeling all warm and fuzzy about a harmless, peaceful religion.

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:02 | link | comments (2)

How infidels can celebrate Valentine’s day and drive the Islamists crazy: By wearing stuff like this.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:38 | link | comments (1)

 He’s good enough. He’s smart enough. And, doggone it, people like him. Sort of: Stuart Smalley’s alter ego, failed radio shock jock Al Franken, has announced his bid to became a senator of Minnesota.

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:24 | link | comments

Ceeb comedy: Don't miss the hilarity on Ceeb sitcom Little Mosque on the Prairie. On tonight's episode, "A new white convert to the mosque causes problems for the community."

Sounds like a hoot. Let me guess what it's about. One of those "reverts" who gets a little too ardent about his (or her--the blurb doesn't specify the gender) new faith, but who, unlike would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid, finds a different kind of outlet for his/her ardency?

Hey, I could write these plot lines in my sleep.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:51 | link | comments (3)

Glick's scorecard: The invaluable Caroline Glick explains how to tell our friends from our foes, a skill that seems to be on the decline these days.

Posted by: scaramouche at 17:23 | link | comments

UNICEF slam:  Given your druthers, where would you rather grow up? In Western Europe, struggling to come to terms with its new identity as a branch of dar al Islam? Or in the U.S. of A., the primary impediment to the Islamists’ global march to power?

According to a UNICEF report—UNICEF being one of those wonderful UN agencies so beloved of the internationalists—by every indication, it is far, far better to be a child growing up in, say, the Netherlands, than it is to be a child in the U.S. or the U.K.

 

Not to cast doubt on the insights offered by a UN agency, which I’m sure have nothing to do with the political proclivities and/or antipathies of those who wrote this report, but isn’t it interesting that the two nations front and centre in the so-called “war on terror” are ranked bottom of the heap, well below much poorer nations such as Portugal and Greece?

 

Oh, and just so you know, Canada, currently embroiled in military operations in Afghanistan, didn’t do so hot either.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:17 | link | comments (3)

 Islamic Brotherhood Week: When I turned on the laptop and read the headlines this morning, I couldn’t help but think of that old Tom Lehrer song, "National Brotherhood Week." In my mind, though, the lyrics were revised to capture the new spirit of “brotherhood”. Instead of

Oh, the Protestants hate the Catholics,
And the Catholics hate the Protestants,
And the Hindus hate the Moslems,
And everybody hates the Jews.

 

I’m hearing

 

Oh the Sunnis hate the Shias

And the Shias hate the Sunnis,

And the Shias hate the Christians,

And everybody hates the Jews...

Notice how judenhass is forever. Like diamonds.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:25 | link | comments (2)

Re-education kicks in: You knew it was bound to happen. From the Ceeb:

The town council in Hérouxville amended its provocative immigrant code of conduct Monday night to remove certain rules.

Council adopted the changes, which include removing references to "no stoning of women in public" and "no female circumcision."

Councillors said the rules were open to misinterpretation by journalists who have flocked to the Mauricie town of 1,200 since it adopted the code of conduct in January.

The town's leaders denied the amendments had anything to do with a visit from a delegation of Muslim women on Sunday as part of a mission to educate residents about their beliefs and practices.

The code itself will remain enshrined in the town's public documents. The Canadian Islamic Congress is still considering filing a human rights complaint about the rules. 

Quebec Premier Jean Charest has ordered a commission to look into the debate over the reasonable accommodation of cultural and religious beliefs.

Seven out of 10 towns in the neighbouring region have moved to support Hérouxville's code of conduct.

I’m confused. Does that mean that public stoning of women and female genital mutilation are now permitted in Herouxville?

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:30 | link | comments (1)

Clueless, feckless Eurabians: The EUnuchs “reflect” on Iran’s impending nuclear capability, “reflecting” that even though there’s no possible way the mullahs will be deterred from their goal, the U.S. should nonetheless try to placate them with “comprehensive security guarantees,” whatever those are. As if it’s all about Iran feeling “insecure” and not about the implacable desire to entice the Mahdi to return by bringing on the Armageddon. From the Financial Times:

The full text of an internal European Union document on Iran reveals that officials from the bloc are pessimistic about the chances of stopping Iran from getting enough fissile material for a nuclear bomb.

The reflection paper, written by the staff of Javier Solana, EU foreign policy chief, circulated to the EU’s 27 governments last week, concedes that Iran will probably acquire sufficient capacity to enrich uranium for a weapons programme “at some stage”, adding that the programme has been held back by Tehran’s own technical shortcomings, rather than international pressure.

The document, obtained by the Financial Times and reproduced below, mirrors EU officials’ private comments that, although negotiations with Iran will probably fail, they have to be attempted.

EU member states believe that their chances of success would be bolstered if the US offered Tehran comprehensive security guarantees; sceptics of negotiations will point to the paper’s findings to bolster their arguments for a military attack on the country’s nuclear facilities. The paper itself does not recommend any such course, commending instead the EU’s current “twin track” policy of mixing incentives and disincentives.

Iran insists its purposes are purely peaceful.

The paper says that Iran’s economy is vulnerable because of economic mismanagement, with foreign investment all but drying up and a real inflation rate of about 20 per cent per annum. But it concludes that “the problems with Iran will not be resolved through economic sanctions alone”, as Iran has shown great resilience to outside pressure in the past…

Well, what do you expect? French President Jacques Chirac (another of those useless leaders with the initials “J.C.”) has already written off the six million Jews of Israel with a shrug and a sigh and not a shred of regret for their fate.

 

Once again, thanks for rien, EUnuchs.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:09 | link | comments

Seige mentality: The headline of a Reuters report in the Toronto Star picks up on Ismail Haniyeh’s idea that the West’s refusal to fund his regime of genocidal Islamists (i.e. fork over the jizya he believes is his due) constitutes an “aid siege.” (The quotation marks are mine, not the Star’s):

Hamas PM appeals for lifting of aid seige

 

Deal to share power with Fatah ‘will of Palestinian people’

 

Feb 13, 2007 04:30 AM

GAZA Strip–Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh appealed yesterday to the United States and other Middle East mediators to restore economic aid to the Palestinian Authority in response to a Hamas-Fatah unity deal.

"Today, there is a cautious, pessimistic U.S. position towards this agreement," Haniyeh, a Hamas leader, said in a speech.

"I say to the quartet and to the European Union that this is the will of the Palestinian people, and they should respect it and they should work to end the status of siege," he said…

Yeah, it’s a frikkin’ Stalingrad, Ismail.

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

Pussy-footing in the Telegraph: The same sort of folks who can’t abide uppity Jewish dhimmis being sovereign in Israel also can’t stand sharing power with Christian dhimmis in Lebanon. These sorts of folks are apt to take out their anger in exactly the same way in both countries—by blowing up innocent bystanders. From the Telegraph:

At least three people have been killed after bombs ripped apart two buses in a Christian area of Lebanon, on the eve of the second anniversary of the killing of Rafik Hariri, the country's former prime minister.

 

Initial reports put the death total far higher, and police have said that the final count could enter double figures.

This morning's attacks targeted people travelling to work in Beirut from the area around Bikfaya, the home town of former President Amin Gemayel, whose son was assassinated by gunmen in November.

 

Pierre Gemayel was a prominent Christian politician and, like Mr Hariri, a critic of the Hizbollah opposition and its Syrian backers.

 

The blasts wrecked the buses and other vehicles on a mountain road about 15 miles northeast of Beirut. Body part and pools of blood were left scattered across the road.

It is understood that the driver of the second bus stopped his vehicle and got out when he saw the first bus explode in front of him. His own bus then exploded.

 

Tension has been running high in Lebanon since nine people were killed in street clashes last month between supporters and opponents of the Western-backed government.

 

Pro-government groups had planned a mass memorial in Beirut's Martyrs Square on Wednesday to mark Mr Hariri's assassination, despite fears of friction with opposition supporters camped out nearby since Dec 1 as part of a campaign to topple the anti-Syrian government.

 

Why is the Telegraph being so timid here? Why not come out and put a name to these generic “opposition supporters”? And the name is Hezbollah, “Allah’s Party,” the Iranian-backed militia doing its bit to claw back Lebanon—all of Lebanon—for dar al-Isalm.

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

Decoding the poll: Good news! Unlike their testy brethren in Eurabia, Canadian Muslims are generally content with their lot here in the Great White North. According to a just-released CBC-Environics poll, the majority of Muslim-Canadians think they’re fitting in just fine, despite all the agita stirred up by 9/11. Their only real complaint: the same one shared by most Canadians—the crappy weather:

…In general terms, the poll found that 73 per cent of Canadian Muslims describe themselves as "very proud" to be called Canadians, even if many of them see their religion as coming first in certain instances. As well, they have very little sympathy for extremists or terrorist groups and they aren't crazy about the northern climate — it tops the like least list.

Asked about the arrests last summer of the 18 Muslim men and boys who were allegedly plotting terrorist attacks in southern Ontario, 73 per cent of the Muslim respondents said these attacks were not at all justified; and 82 per cent said they had no sympathy for those who wanted to carry them out.

"The good news," says Environics vice-president Keith Neuman, is that despite everything that's gone on over the past few years, "these numbers do not suggest a minority that is feeling isolated and resentful." 

Canada's Muslims have different priorities, the poll suggests. Unemployment and immigration issues are more important to them than the health care and environmental concerns that are driving other Canadians.

The pollsters maintain the upbeat tone, even though some churlish folks (like moi, for instance) could put a less than positive spin on this next part:

There are also differences over how much and to what extent minority communities should "blend in" with the Canadian norm.

Almost half (49 per cent) of the general Canadian population feel new immigrants should blend in with the rest of the country, while 40 per cent feel they should be encouraged to maintain their religious and cultural practices. For Canadian Muslims, these numbers are 15 and 65 per cent respectively.

The differences are more pronounced when it comes to women: 81 per cent of non-Muslim Canadians feel ethnic minorities should adapt to mainstream Canadian beliefs about the rights and roles of women, whereas only 36 per cent of Canadian Muslims feel that way, the poll suggests.

Sounds like Muslims have bought into the multicultural business even more than Canadians have, especially since the doctrine allows them to maintain their sharia-based attitudes toward women, ones that don’t exactly mesh with the larger society’s. No problem with that, right? In fact, while we’re at it, why not import some of these laws and give them legal teeth right her in Canada?

A majority of the Muslim respondents (53 per cent) would also like to see Islamic Sharia law adopted for divorce and other family disputes, and a much larger number, 86 per cent, of Canadian Muslims do not feel governments should ban the wearing of headscarves by Muslim women in public, including public schools.

I’m not sure if participants were asked whether they’d like to see other aspects of Islamic law adopted as well, but there seems to be nary a trace of alarm on the pollsters’ part over the prospect of sharia law—law which is clearly antithetical to our own—making inroads here in Canada.

Nor are any alarm bells being sounded over the following:

Many of these concerns are more strongly backed by young Muslims under 30, the survey suggests, and Haideh Moghissi, a York University sociologist who has worked extensively in this area, says these should probably be seen as more of a "political gesture than a religious one" by those who have felt their community "bearing the brunt of this suspicion and fear" since 9/11.

Poor little fellers, having to bear the brunt of all that unfounded suspicion and fear. No wonder they’re more inclined to resort to “political” gestures. But don’t worry. The motivation for these ideas has nothing to do with their religion, which makes a clear separation between the “political” and the “religious,” at least according to a Gaza U sociologist who’s counting on the ignorance of us credulous infidels.

But even though these young ‘uns would like to see sharia become the law of the land for domestic issues, and even though they and other Muslims are inclined to a more traditional view of women’s role in society rooted in Islamic teachings, that doesn’t mean they want to keep their wives swathed in a black pup tent when out in public and barefoot and preggers in the kitchen. No siree, Abdul:

In fact, almost 60 per cent of Muslim women do not wear any kind of covering on a regular basis, the survey found. And 72 per cent of the respondents said they were not too worried or not worried at all about Muslim women taking on more modern roles in Canadian society.

They’re probably not too worried or not worried at all because, community attitudes being what they are (see that 81 per cent figure cited above), the odds are that Muslim women, many locked away in their multiculti-sanctioned ghettos, are unlikely to want to take on more modern roles in Canadian society.

 

But don’t tell the pollsters or the Ceeb. It’ll spoil all their “good news.”

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

Undeniable evil: As anyone with half a clue knows by now, the hairy Islamic Hitler’s denial of the genocide of Europe’s Jews has one very clear purpose: it is his way of laying the groundwork for the upcoming annihilation of Israel’s Jews. From the Weekly Standard:

…Just as Hitler sought to "liberate" humanity by murdering the Jews, so Ahmadinejad believes he can "liberate" humanity by eradicating Israel. The deniers' conference as an instrument for propagating this project is intimately linked to the nuclear program as an instrument for realizing it. Five years ago, in December 2001, former Iranian president Hashemi Rafsanjani first boasted that "the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything," whereas the damage to the Islamic world of a potential retaliatory nuclear attack could be limited: "It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality." While the Islamic world could sacrifice hundreds of thousands of "martyrs" in an Israeli retaliatory strike without disappearing--so goes Rafsanjani's argument--Israel would be history after the first bomb.

It is precisely this suicidal outlook that distinguishes the Iranian nuclear weapons program from those of all other countries and makes it uniquely dangerous. As long ago as 1980, Khomeini put it this way: "We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land [Iran] burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world."

Anyone inclined to dismiss the significance of such statements might want to consider the proclamation made by Mohammad Hassan Rahimian, representative of the Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who stands even higher in the Iranian hierarchy than Ahmadinejad. A few months ago, on November 16, 2006, Rahimian explained: "The Jew"--not

the Zionist, note, but the Jew--"is the most obstinate enemy of the devout. And the main war will determine the destiny of mankind. . . . The reappearance of the Twelfth Imam will lead to a war between Israel and the Shia." The country that has been the first to make Holocaust denial a principle of its foreign policy is likewise the first openly to threaten another U.N. member state with, not invasion or annexation, but annihilation.

Yet it's all confusing. Why, if Iran wishes Israel ill, does it deny the Holocaust rather than applaud it? Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial has been especially well received in the Arab world, where it has won praise from Hezbollah, the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, and Hamas. Yet in the Arab world, Hitler is admired not for building highways or conquering Paris, but for murdering Jews. How can Holocaust denial be most prevalent in a region where admiration for Hitler remains widespread? To unlock this paradox it is necessary to examine the anti-Semitic mind.

Brother Hitler and Eichmann the Martyr

Holocaust denial is anti-Semitism at its most extreme. Whoever declares Auschwitz a myth implicitly portrays the Jews as the enemy of humanity: The assumption is that the all-powerful Jews, for filthy lucre, have been duping the rest of humanity for the past 60 years. Whoever talks of the "so-called Holocaust" implies that over 90 percent of the world's media and university professorships are controlled by Jews and are thereby cut off from the "real" truth. No one who accuses Jews of such perfidy can sincerely regret Hitler's Final Solution. For this reason alone, every denial of the Holocaust contains an appeal to repeat it…

There are those who tell us not to worry, who say that the lessons of holidays such as Chanukah and Purim prove that, as He has done so often in the past, God will come through in the crunch and won’t permit the Jewish people to be destroyed. And it is indeed tempting to give in to these soothing thoughts, maybe recite a few psalms, and adopt a que sera, sera approach to the onrush of events. After all, it’s out of our hands, right?

 

As for me, pace T.S. Eliot, who once rightly observed that “Human kind cannot bear very much reality,” I prefer to stare reality right in its hideous face and describe exactly what I see as loudly and as plainly as possible.

 

It may not prevent a second Shoah—I have to accept that in all probability it won’t—but I cannot and I will not be pacified by stories about plucky Jewesses and/or miraculous lights.

 

If that makes me a “bad Jew,” so be it.

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:13 | link | comments (4)

Aura boy: Did you happen to catch The Police at the Grammy Awards last night? If you closed your eyes, it was like 1980 all over again—except for the grey hair and crow’s feet, of course. In homage to the reunited trio who will be going on tour thirty years after they got together, I’ve rewritten the words to their first hit, the song they performed last evening. And if they want to use my lyrics in concert to publicize a grave threat to mankind, no problemo:

Mahmoud,

You don’t have to put on the green light.

They know you’re ardent.

You don’t have to sell them on your will to fight.

Mahmoud,

You don’t have to give us all a fright.

Build those nukes for Mahdi

‘Cause you want him to come back tonight.

 

Mahmoud, you don’t have to put on the green light.

Mahmoud, you don’t have to put on the green light.

Put on the green light, put on the green light,

Put on the green light, put on the green light,

 

You think that we’re Great Satan.

You’re hyperventilatin’.

Have to tell us just how you feel

So you rave like a lunatic.

We know your mind is evil.

You want a great upheaval.

Told us once and told us again

That you plan the Apocalypse.

 

Mahmoud, you don’t have to put on the green light.

Mahmoud, you don’t have to put on the green light.

You don’t have to put on the green light.

Put on the green light, put on the green light.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:04 | link | comments (1)

"Phobic" in France: Nicholas Sarkozy is probably France’s last, best hope to fend off the Muslim conquest, but to the folks over at Islam Online—and to the dhimmified leftoid French people cited in this article—he’s nothing more than un grand Islamophobe:

PARIS — French Interior Minister and Elysee aspirant Nicolas Sarkozy has taken a U-turn on his traditional backing of Muslim issues, sounding an Islamophobic tone recently that risks alienate Muslim voters in the upcoming polls, a French analyst said on Monday, February 12.

 

"Sarkozy's past achievements for Muslims have been eclipsed by his clear Islamophobic discourse recently," Vincent Geisser, a researcher at the French national centre for scientific research, told IslamOnline.net on Monday, February 12, February 11.

 Positive discrimination, funds for mosques and helping establish the umbrella Muslim body for the sizable minority along with his support for immigrants threatened with deportation were seen as the trump cards of Sarkozy to win the votes of Muslims and immigrants in the April polls.

 

"Sarkozy once described himself as 'the lawyer of Muslims' in his book La Religion, La République, L'espérance," said Geisser.

Geisser, the author of Islamophobia, said the centre-right presidential candidate has raised the ire of Muslims recently.

"He staunchly rallied behind Charlie Hebdo, which reprinted the lampooning Prophet cartoons."

 

Sarkozy defended the publication of the blasphemous cartoons by the satirical weekly, saying he accepted that "in the name of freedom, you can laugh at everything."

 

The umbrella body French Council for the Muslim Faith (CFCM) denounced Sarkozy's stance in a strongly-worded statement.

Following an emergency meeting on Wednesday, February 8, the Council issued a statement denouncing the "politicization" of the case…

 

French journalist Michael Darmond said that Sarkozy's stance on the 2005 riots in the suburbs had strained his ties with Muslims, who make up the majority of immigrants.

 

"Sarkozy has been in troubles with the Muslim minority since the suburb riots," he told IOL.

 

France was hit by a deadly wave of riots in 2005 following the death of two youths of immigrant background while fleeing police.

The deaths ignited pent up frustration among young men, many of North African origin, at racism, unemployment, marginalization and mistreatment by police.

 

Adding insult to injury, Sarkozy described the youths of immigrant backgrounds as "scum" and "rabble."

 

Sarkozy was criticized on air for his Islamophobic tone when a French Muslim girl attending a talk show hosting Sarkozy heckled the presidential hopeful and accused him of bias against Muslims.

 

Sarkozy was quick to reiterate that Muslims are expected to respect French laws, not to oppress girls or take more than one wife and stop slaughtering sheep at homes…

 

No sheep slaughter at home? What outrageous bigotry!

 

Sounds like it may be time for Sarkozy to move to Herouxville, Quebec.

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

Crossing the line: There’s a fine line between scepticism and stupidity. As proof I offer the following story about U.S. Senator Christopher Dodd and other top Democrats who are “sceptical” about claims that Iran is fueling the insurgency in Iraq. From Breitbart.com:

Top US Democrats have expressed skepticism about US government claims that Iran is secretly channeling weapons to militants in Iraq, arguing the issue is best resolved through negotiations rather than confrontation.

The comments followed a US press conference in Baghdad, during which senior defense officials insisted that Iranian-built bombs smuggled into Iraq had killed at least 170 US and allied soldiers since June 2004 and wounded 620 more.

 

A compact disc distributed at the press conference contained photographs of alleged Iranian weapons seized in Iraq -- a Misagh-1 ground-to-air missile, explosively formed projectiles, or EFPs, and mortar shells manufacturing, according to their markings, in late 2006.

But the disclosures came less than a week after Congress released a scathing report by acting Pentagon Inspector General Thomas Gimble, in which he argued that former US undersecretary of defense Douglas Feith had manufactured "inappropriate" intelligence reports linking Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda to bolster the case for an invasion.

 

And several Democratic senators said Sunday these circumstances were fueling their suspicions about the Bush administration's real motives.

 

"I look at this with a degree of skepticism, based on the record that these intelligence operations have provided us in the past," said Christopher Dodd, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who has expressed an interest in running for president in 2008.

 

Dodd told CBS television he had no doubt that Iran played a role in the current developments in Iraq, but believed the issue should be resolved through diplomatic initiatives.

"It seems to me until we engage them in some way on a multiple of issues, including this one, it's only going to get worse," the Connecticut senator noted…

 

Engage away, Chris. They’re still going to blow you to Kingdom Come.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:17 | link | comments

Howard’s unminced words: Aussie P.M. John Howard is catching all sorts of heck for criticising Barack Obama’s campaign promise to withdraw all American troops from Iraq by March 2008 (a neat trick considering that’s eight months before the presidential election); Howard says such a move would be a gift to al Qaeda, who would be X-ing off the days on its calendar in keen anticipation. But an opinion piece in the Sydney Morning Herald defends the Prime Minister for daring to speak the truth, a scarce commodity in political discourse these days:

…Howard's comments were undiplomatic. It is unusual for an Australian political leader to support, or oppose, a particular candidate or party in another nation's election. It may have been for the better if the statement had not been made.

Yet it is a fact that Howard's comment has had such a big impact outside of Australia precisely because he was essentially correct. A designated and unconditional US withdrawal from Iraq by March 2008 would amount to a defeat for the multinational force and a victory for the insurgency, along with al-Qaeda, in Iraq. This should be recognised by those who oppose the allied commitment in Iraq as well as those who support it…

These days the truth is often a scarce commodity in opinion pieces in the mainstream press, too.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:57 | link | comments

Re-education in Herouxville: Herouxville, a small town in Quebec, earned the opprobrium of the nation when it passed a measure outlawing a slew of practices it preferred not to see being practiced in their community. Since such practices—among them, wife burning, female genital mutilation and refusing to allow women to drive motorized vehicles—seemed to pertain to a specific culture (and a specific country, i.e. Saudi Arabia), Herouxvillers were accused of racism, bigotry, prejudice, xenophobia and Islamophobia, and no less a voice of authority than the Globe and Mail, Canada’s newspaper of record, railed against this un-Canadian approach to dealing with cultural differences.

Now granted, passing such a measure might seem a tad redundant, especially since many of the items mentioned are already proscribed by the law. However, for those of us who can see through the sham of multiculturalism, a doctrine that ensures intolerance by tolerating it in the name of cultural diversity, Herouxville’s pro-active measure to protect its culture seems rather, dare one say, refreshing. But who are we kidding? Most Canadians, clueless, dhimmified, and happy to remain so, don’t see it that way. For them and their elites, it’s the mean-spirited folks of Herouxville who pose the real threat to our way of life. For that reason, the infamy of Herouxville cannot be allowed to go unanswered. Its denizens must be subjected to rigorous re-education to compel them to get with the multiculti agenda, the holy bovine to which Canadians submit and genuflect with the unthinking zeal of true believers. As the Ceeb reports, re-education efforts are already underway:

A group of Muslim women visited a rural Quebec town Sunday to try to dispel myths about the Islamic faith after Hérouxville adopted a controversial code of norms aimed at immigrants.

About 14 women from the Canadian Islamic Congress met with approximately 50 residents to tell them about their faith. On Jan. 25, Hérouxville's town council adopted a code of societal norms that would-be immigrant newcomers would have to follow if they choose to settle in the Mauricie town outside of Trois-Rivières.

Among the norms, a man cannot stone a woman to death and faces are not to be covered except at Halloween. Children are not allowed to carry weapons to school, including the traditional Sikh kirpan, which is a ceremonial dagger. 

"We came here to confirm and affirm that we are Quebecers too," said May Haider, one of the Muslim women from the Montreal area.

She said that following the gathering, the delegation of women met with town councillors including André Drouin, who spearheaded the code of norms, for a two-hour meeting in which they helped draft a revised code of norms that wouldn't offend minorities. 

Drouin said the council may modify the code somewhat. The council plans to discuss the norms at the next town meeting and make changes if warranted.

The Canadian Islamic Congress still hasn't decided whether to lodge a formal complaint with Quebec's Human Rights Commission.

Here’s the link to the Canadian Islamic Congress’s website, so you can judge for yourself the kind of “tolerance” and cultural norms it supports. According to a Montreal Gazette article posted on the site, Muslim organization are planning to file a human rights complaint:

Canadian Muslim groups say they will file a complaint with the Quebec Human Rights Commission against the town of Herouxville over its widely reported "norms" for prospective immigrants.

The Canadian Islamic Congress and Canadian Muslim Forum announced yesterday they'll prepare a joint complaint because they contend the Jan. 25 town council resolution detailing behaviours expected of anyone settling there "clearly propagates negative stereotypes of Canadian minorities," the groups said in a statement.

They contend the norms violate Section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which calls for preservation and enhancement of Canadians' multicultural heritage.

The norms established by the town of 1,300 which is 165 kilometres northeast of Montreal, advise newcomers, for instance, that women and men are considered equal, that women can drive and that it's unacceptable to stone women to death in public, burn them alive, or throw acid on them.

"They're quite racist remarks," Imam Zijad Delic, national executive director of the Canadian Islamic Congress, said by telephone from Ottawa. "They are adding oil on fire for no reason."

The norms characterize minorities as oppressive toward women and violent, he said, adding that they cite acts that don't even occur in Canada…

You mean there’s no absolutely female genital mutilation or honour killing occurring anywhere in Canada? Good to know. But that’s not the point, is it? The point is that there are people in Canada and around the world who would be very happy to see these and other niceties of Islamism become the law of the land—all the lands.

No doubt the Human Rights Commission will disagree and require Herouxville to rescind its norms. And as punishment (and part of the re-education program), it could sentence Herouxvillers to view an entire season of Little Mosque on the Prairie—in one sitting.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:19 | link | comments

One Mo’ time: Mohammed ElBaradei, head UN nuclear watchkitten, demonstrates his utter cluelessness yet again in an interview with Der Spiegel Online:

SPIEGEL ONLINE: The United States government is threatening to capture or kill Iranian agents in Iraq and Tehran has announced it will install thousands of centrifuges for the enrichment of uranium in Natanz. Are we witnessing a dramatic escalation of the conflict?

 

ElBaradei: If we continue on the same course, we could see a spiral of escalation. There is an urgent need for creative diplomacy and leadership. Diplomacy is pressure and engagement, and I very much hope that we can find the right balance. A durable, peaceful solution will not come through pressure only. It will ultimately come at the negotiating table.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: You don't sound very optimistic.

ElBaradei: The United Nations resolution itself recognizes the importance of finding a negotiated solution that will allow for the development of relations and cooperation with Iran. Clearly the sanctions were the expression of concern by the international community. I think the message was heard loud and clear in Iran.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: So why not simply wait until Iran gives in and stops its nuclear program?

ElBaradei: My concern is that if we only focus on sanctions, that might lead to confrontation on both sides, ending in an uncontrolled chain reaction. My worry right now is that each side is sticking to their guns: The international community is saying "sanctions or bust," and Iran is saying "nuclear enrichment capability or bust." Ultimately sanctions are useful to send a message, but they have to be followed by an effort to create conditions for negotiations.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: So how could this happen?

ElBaradei: I hope now we can put our heads together. I have been calling for a simultaneous time-out: That means Iran would take a break from all its enrichment-related work and at the same time, the UN Security Council would put a hold on implementing sanctions. We could agree through dialogue on the basic objectives and principles to govern the negotiations and then have a three-month time-out in the hope of achieving a comprehensive settlement which would not only cover nuclear issues, but security, economic and political concerns as well.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Do you see any signs that Iran would consider stopping its enrichment activities even for a short period?

ElBaradei: Iran is very keen to see an affirmation of its right to enrich uranium under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Nobody is questioning this right, what is at stake is confidence building. Until confidence is restored, Iran should put a hold on enrichment-related activities, and to restore this confidence Iran needs to commit to being fully transparent and to start giving the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) the full access we need for verification. This includes inspections under the Additional Protocol…

Not going to happen, Mo. They’ve already stated their firm preference for non-transparency, and it’s transparent to anyone who cares to google the word “Mahdi” why that should be. Or are you still labouring under the delusion that Moo and the boys are enriching uranium to top up their energy needs and not to bring about the Apocalypse?

Posted by: scaramouche at 21:59 | link | comments (1)

Obama build up: Barack Obama, clean-favored and imperially slim Democratic candidate for the highest office in the land, is getting a big push from the mainstream media—and my bullshit detector has gone into overdrive. Get a load of this, er, load which tries to turn a man who so far has no platform, no clear policies, and no ideas beyond such thinking-inside-the-box generalities as ending the war and bringing people together, into a combination of Honest Abe Lincoln and John F. Kennedy. From the Ceeb:

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (CP) - Democrat Barack Obama called on Americans to help him "transform this nation" Saturday, launching his 2008 campaign to become the first black U.S. president with promises to end the Iraq war and divisive politics.

The first-term Ilinois senator rallied thousands of cheering supporters in frigid weather at the Old State Capitol, evoking the bold aims of Abraham Lincoln who stood on the steps in 1858 to denounce slavery and plead for unity.

"In the face of impossible odds, people who love their country can change it. That's what Abraham Lincoln understood," said Obama, 45, who presented himself as an untainted vehicle for the ambitious dreams of a new generation.

"We can build a more hopeful America," he said in a rousing 20-minute speech that slammed a "failure of leadership" during George W. Bush's presidency while deriding the influence of lobbyists and special interests.

"They think they own our government but we are here to take it back," he said.

"The time for that kind of politics is over. It is through."…

Riiight. I bet he also plans to find a cure for cancer, put an end to global climate change and persuade Americans that the biggest impediment to world peace isn’t the “terrorists” so much as it is Americans’ unfounded  fear of the “terrorists.”

A Lincoln for our times? I think not. More like a sexier version of Jimmy Carter, but with a Muslim middle name.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:44 | link | comments

Enough already: Here’s a good summary of judenhass past and present, and the current existential threat it poses to Israel and the Jewish people. From the Jerusalem Post:

This week over 100 Jewish leaders, academics and activists from Israel and the Diaspora will gather in Jerusalem to attend the Global Forum on Anti-Semitism convened by the Foreign Ministry. The conference could become the launching pad for a concerted new worldwide effort to take the offensive in the war of ideas.

What a bitter irony that the Zionist founding fathers predicted that statehood would lead to Jewish normalization, bringing an end to anti-Semitism.

Today, one only has to open a newspaper to be confronted with depressing articles predicting gloom and doom for the Jewish future, notably in Europe. They include a chilling common theme: For the first time in 60 years the world is once again being inundated with shrill accusations that Zionists/Jews (they are interchangeable) represent evil incarnate and, like a cancer, must be excised.

In addition to these Nazi-like genocidal threats, Israel is facing a renewed existential danger.

It is noteworthy that virtually every catastrophe in Jewish history was preceded by periods of intensive demonization. It happened before the Crusades, the exile from Spain, pogroms in Eastern Europe and also preceded the Nazi Final Solution. It is happening again today. As in the Middle Ages, Jews are being accused of poisoning wells, spreading plague and being culpable for all the woes facing humanity.

The difference now is that Israel has become the "Jew among the nations" - a new target of anti-Semites. The Jewish state is no longer merely demonized. There are increasing calls even from some Western liberals for Israel to be dissolved as a failed venture. It is bizarre that, aside from the United States, much of the world - in particular, enlightened Europe - against all logic views Israel as a prime source of evil, posing a greater threat to peace than even rogue states like Iran or North Korea.

EUROPEAN Jews courageous enough to face the truth feel they have been catapulted back in time to the 1930s. But today even many of their former liberal allies have forsaken them. In such a hostile, anti-Jewish environment they doubt whether Europe can provide a future for their children as Jews.

The frenzied hatred and delegitimization of Israel even unites traditionally opposing groups. Substantial numbers of Christians and Muslims, leftists and liberals, right-wingers and skinheads, Shi'ites and Sunnis - and, alas, even an ever-increasing number of misguided Jews - march together with the mad mullahs, demonizing Israel under the banner of "We are all Hizbullah."

There are even targets of Islamist terror who complain that if only Israel had not been created they would not now be confronted by "desperate Muslims."

On top of all this, there is now also the looming threat from the crazed Iranian fanatics bent on obtaining nuclear weapons. They exploit the poisonous atmosphere in order to create the rationale for our destruction. Our newspapers publish essays warning of a second Holocaust. And there are predictions that many Israelis will flee the country to avoid a nuclear catastrophe…

The madness of the world is truly breathtaking, and just when you think it can’t possibly get worse for Israel and the Jewish people, it does. In fact, I’ve decided that the entirety of Jewish history, excluding those relatively brief periods of the calm before the next torrent—and there’s always one looming on the horizon—can be captured in a single phrase: “But wait, it gets worse.”

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:21 | link | comments (1)

Best dis of the day: American Secretary of Defence Robert Gates to Vlad “the Impaler” Putin, Moo's nuke-enabler who’s been frothing at the mouth over American militarism—“One cold war was quite enough.”

Quite.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:03 | link | comments

Liar, liar pants on fire: The latest blast of taqiyah from the glorious Islamic republic: Iran poses absolutely no threat to the continued existence of that illegitimate entity born in the wake of a genocide in Europe that never occurred. By an AP scribe in the San Francisco Chronicle:

Iran's nuclear program is not a threat to Israel and the country is prepared to settle all outstanding issues with the International Atomic Energy Agency within three weeks, its top nuclear negotiator said Sunday.

Ali Larijani, speaking at a forum that gathered the world's top security officials, said Iran doesn't have aggressive intentions toward any nation.

"That Iran is willing to threaten Israel is wrong," Larijani said. "We pose no threat and if we are conducting nuclear research and development we are no threat to Israel. We have no intention of aggression against any country."

Iran insists it will not give up uranium enrichment, saying it is pursuing the technology only to generate energy. The United States and some of its allies fear the Islamic republic is more interested in enrichment's other application — creating the fissile core of nuclear warheads.

In Israel, Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev dismissed Larijani's comments, saying Iran's government was trying to convince the international community that their intentions are benign.

"The fact is that they have failed in this attempt and there is a wall-to-wall consensus that the Iranian nuclear program is indeed military and aggressive and a threat to world peace," he said.

The IAEA, led by Mohamed ElBaradei, has said it has found no evidence that Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons. But the watchdog has suspended some aid to Iran and criticized the country for concealing certain nuclear activities and failing to answer questions about its program.

"I have written to Mr. ElBaradei to say we are ready to within three weeks to have the modality to solve all the outstanding issues with you," Larijani said at the forum.

On Friday, the IAEA suspended nearly half the technical aid it provides to Iran, a symbolically significant punishment for nuclear defiance that only North Korea and Saddam Hussein's Iraq had faced in the past.

That decision was in line with U.N. Security Council sanctions imposed on Iran for its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment. The suspension must still be approved by the 35 countries on the IAEA's board of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

"Today we announce to you that the political will of Iran is aimed at the negotiated settlement of the case and we don't want to aggravate the situation in our region," Larijani said. "We know that this issue can be settled won in a constructive dialogue and we welcome that."... 

“Constructive dialogue”—yeah, that’ll work. It should give the Armageddon-minded mullahs just enough time to put the finishing touches on the nukes that’ll rouse their messiah from his centuries-long slumber.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:01 | link | comments

Power play: A measure of the influence wielded by a notably testy but influential minority in Britain—a gala evening held the other night honouring the 100 most influential Muslims in the country. Fittingly, the roster of honourees has been dubbed “the Muslim Power 100 list.”

 Well, what else would you call it?  From the Independent:

They range from lords to lawyers, from authors to sporting icons, pre-eminent academics to giants of industry. And they all have two things in common: all are Muslim - and all have made an outstanding contribution to British society.

Last night, the inaugural Muslim Power 100 list was announced at a glittering ceremony in the Hilton Hotel on Park Lane in London. Established to recognise Muslims who have made "significant contributions to the social, cultural and economic well-being of Britain", the awards have been praised by commentators as a timely public reminder of the positive contribution the vast majority of Britain's 1.8 million-strong Muslim community.

On the list are cricketer turned politician Imran Khan, Labour peer Lord Patel of Blackburn, and actor Art Malik, along with boxer Amir Khan, singer Yusuf Islam, formerly Cat Stevens, and Harrods boss Mohamed al Fayed.

The list, sponsored by the Islamic Bank of Britain (IBB), was compiled from some 6,000 nominations, and judged by a 16-strong panel including Sir Iqbal Sacranie, Lord Bhatia and Dr Ghayassuddin Siddiqui of the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain.

A spokesman for the IBB, Sultan Choudhury, said yesterday's event was the culmination of nine months' preparation and voting. "We wanted to highlight the positive contributions made by British Muslims to society - contributions that are in complete contrast with media connotations that somehow Muslims are linked to terrorism, are not as educated, or are segregating themselves. The opposite is true - we are integrating and contributing across a wide range of fields."…

Except, of course, for that tiny minority of home-grown extremists who are linked to terrorism, and who were too busy plotting the next tube attack or soldier-beheading to make the gala event. But let's not cast a pall on all the hoopla by dwelling on them.

Posted by: scaramouche at 01:11 | link | comments (2)

Mecca, baby: Hamas spins the roulette wheel—and wins big. From YNet News:

The unity agreement signed in Mecca last Thursday marked a major victory for Hamas. Khaled Mashaal and Ismail Haniyeh could not have hoped for a greater achievement.

Even amid the pressure exerted by the Suadi king, Hamas would not waver and came out stronger as far as the internal Palestinian arena is concerned, and much stronger in the eyes of the Arab world and the international community.

Hamas did not relinquish its rule or ideology, did not recognize Israel or renounce terror and did not agree to acknowledge past agreements with Israel. In return for this inflexible stance it received the unity government that it wanted so much. 

 

Hamas sought a unity government to promote the lifting of the economic and political siege imposed on the Palestinians by the international community’s and end the infighting.

The organization wanted Fatah’s participation in the new government so as not to bear sole responsibility for the economic, social and political failures in the Authority and to gain the legitimacy to remain in power and continue instilling fundamental values in Palestinian society.

In Mecca Hamas won the jackpot. The agreement, along with millions of dollars from the Saudi king, will help Hamas recover from its economic crisis, strengthen its hold on government and arrive at the next elections in a position to win the presidency as well as the elections for the Legislative Council…

 

In this crazy mixed-up world of ours, terrorism, genocide and judenhass pay big dividends, provided you’re willing to stick to your guns (both literally and figuratively).

 

And once again, in the great crap shoot of life, Jews roll the dice—and lose.

Posted by: scaramouche at 00:40 | link | comments

The fruits of Mecca: A commenter on the Al That Jaz.net site hails the Mecca accord as a possible “first step in the give and take necessary for the formation of the independent nation that the Palestinian people want.”

We give; they take. And down the road, an independent nation called Palestine that takes in all of the “occupied” land.

Well, isn’t that the independent nation that the Palestinian people really want?

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

Israeli “apartheid” in black and white: I take issue with some of Irshad Manji’s notions. She believes, for example, that it is possible to bring about a reformation of Islam but has yet to explain how that is possible when its teachings and its Prophet are considered perfect; The question I always want to ask Muslims like Manji and Salim Mansur who “get it” about the jihad but who remain committed to their faith is this: How is it possible to amend perfection? As well, some of Manji’s scholarship is a bit dicey, which tends to detract from her credibility when speaking to other Muslims; that and her being a mouthy Ismaili Lesbian, of course. Nonetheless, one must applaud her willingness to speak truth to the powers-that-be of her religion—something she does knowing full well it could get her killed—and for daring to debunk the collective lunacy of the Islamists and their leftist infidel enablers—like Jimminy “Cricket” Carter”—as she does in this piece in The Australian.

…It's precisely because I embrace intellectual pluralism that I respectfully challenge Jimmy Carter's recent critique of Israel as an apartheid state. To be sure, I've long admired the former US president. In my book The Trouble with Islam Today I cite him as an example of how religion can be invoked to tap the best of humanity. In no small measure, it was Carter's appreciation of spiritual values that brought together Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian president Anwar Sadat, compelling these former foes to clasp hands over a peace deal.

Which is why Carter's new book disappoints so many of us who champion co-existence. Entitled Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, the book argues that Israel's conduct towards Palestinians mimics South Africa's long-time demonisation of blacks. Of course, certain Israeli politicians have spewed venom at Palestinians, as have some Arab leaders towards Jews, but Israel is far more complex - and diverse - than slogans about the occupation would suggest. In a state practising apartheid, would Arab Muslim legislators wield veto power over anything? At only 20per cent of the population, would Arabs even be eligible for election if they squirmed under the thumb of apartheid? Would an apartheid state extend voting rights to women and thepoor in local elections, which Israel did for the first time in the history of Palestinian Arabs?

Would the vast majority of Arab Israeli citizens turn out to vote in national elections, as they've usually done? Would an apartheid state have several Arab political parties, as Israel does? In recent Israeli elections, two Arab parties found themselves disqualified for expressly supporting terrorism against the Jewish state. However, Israel's Supreme Court, exercising its independence, overturned both disqualifications. Under any system of apartheid, would the judiciary be free of political interference?

Would an apartheid state award its top literary prize to an Arab? Israel honoured Emile Habibi in 1986, before the intifada might have made such a choice politically shrewd. Would an apartheid state encourage Hebrew-speaking schoolchildren to learn Arabic? Would road signs throughout the land appear in both languages? Even my country, the proudly bilingual Canada, doesn't meet that standard.

Would an apartheid state be home to universities where Arabs and Jews mingle at will, or apartment blocks where they live side by side? Would an apartheid state bestow benefits and legal protections on Palestinians who live outside of Israel but work inside its borders? Would human rights organisations operate openly in an apartheid state? They do in Israel.

For that matter, military officials go public with their criticisms of government policies. In October 2003, the Israel Defence Forces' chief of staff told the press that road closures in the West Bank and Gaza were feeding Palestinian anger. Two weeks later, four former heads of the Shin Bet security service blasted the occupation and called on Ariel Sharon to withdraw troops unilaterally, which later happened in Gaza. Would an apartheid state stomach so much dissent from those mandated to protect the state?

Above all, would media debate the most basic building blocks of the nation? Would a Hebrew newspaper in an apartheid state run an article by an Arab Israeli about why the Zionist adventure has been a total failure? Would it run that article on Israel's independence day? Would an apartheid state ensure conditions for the freest Arabic press in the Middle East, a press so free that it can demonstrably abuse its liberties and keep on rolling? To this day, the East Jerusalem daily Al-Quds hasn't retracted an anti-Israel letter supposedly penned by Nelson Mandela but proven to have been written by an Arab living in The Netherlands.

Even the eminence grise of Palestinian nationalism, the late Edward Said, stated flat out that "Israel is not South Africa". How could it be when an Israeli publisher translated Said's seminal work, Orientalism, into Hebrew? I'll cap this point with a question that Said himself asked of Arabs: "Why don't we fight harder for freedom of opinions in our own societies, a freedom, no one needs to be told, that scarcely exists?"

I disagree: some people still need to be told that Arab "freedoms" don't compare to those of Israel. The people who need reminding are those who now push the South Africa analogy a step further by equating Israel with Nazi Germany. To them, Zionists are committing hate crimes under the totalitarian nightmare that they dub "Zio-Nazism" (like neo-Nazism).

When it comes to granting citizenship, Israel discriminates in the same way as an affirmative action policy, giving the edge to a specific minority that has faced genocidal injustice. Does this amount to Nazism? Spare me. As a Muslim, I could become a citizen of Israel without having to convert. After all, Israel was one of the few countries anywhere to grant shelter, then citizenship, to the Vietnamese boatpeople who sought political asylum in the late 1970s. I don't have to wonder how Syria compares on that score.

Now for the ultimate proof of Israel's flimsy credentials as a bunker of Hitlerian hate: It's the only country in the Middle East to which Arab Christians are voluntarily migrating. And they are also thriving there, notching much higher university attendance rates than the Arab Muslim citizens of Israel, and enjoying better overall health than Jews.

The Holy Land is gut-wrenching and complicated. As much as I applaud Israel's efforts to foster pluralism, I condemn its illegal Jewish settlements and less visible crimes such as the diversion of water away from Palestinian towns. These contradictions of the Israeli state should be exposed, discussed, even pilloried. And they are: openly as well as often. So there's little point in deciding whose camp is the paragon of vice or virtue. The better question might be: who's willing to hear what they don't want to hear? That's the test of whether a country is more than black or white.

If that’s the test, then the Palestinians and their champions have failed miserably. Not that it matters. As the world’s designated victim du jour (and week, and year, and decade), they have a hammerlock on virtue, even if they are governed by a bunch of toga-clad thugs who want to ethnically-cleanse the Jews clear out of Israel. However, trying to inject some clarity into the procedings—as Irshad Manji is endeavouring to do—is ultimately an exercise in futility.  The Islamists and infidel elites have agreed that there is only one acceptable narrative—the one where the Jews are the Nazis and the Arabs are the Jews—and are using it to undermine and destroy Jewish sovereignty in Israel. What we see today is Jew-hatred and genocide masquerading as “justice” and “compassion” and concern for “human rights.” And because it is decked out in this grotesque frippery, it is even uglier and more repellent that the Hitlerian variety of judenhass, which at least made no bones about what it really was. 

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:37 | link | comments (1)

 

Warning: Death squads are bad for one’s health: It must be the shot of Stinky and the gang toga’d up like a bunch of superannuated Bluto Blutarskys, because everything’s making me laugh today—even the bad stuff. For example, here’s a report about that Iraqi health ministry official who was arrested for engaging in some rather unwholesome activities. From the Penninsula (Qatar):

baghdad • US-backed Iraqi troops engaged in a major security sweep to break illegal militias’ reign of terror in Baghdad and arrested the Iraq health ministry’s second highest official yesterday. And, 55 people were killed in violence around the country.

The US military accused Hakim Al Zamili, the health ministy’s deputy secretary, of providing millions of dollars to the capital’s Shi’ite death squads. “Special Iraqi Army Forces captured a senior ministry of health official who is suspected of being a central figure in alleged corruption and rogue Jaysh Al Mahdi infiltration of the ministry,” a US statement said.

Jaysh Al Mahdi (JAM) is the Arabic term for the Mahdi Army, a powerful militia group loyal to radical cleric Muqtada Al Sadr. Iraqi Health Minister Ali Al Shamari reacted sharply to the arrest, saying: “This is a violation of the health ministry and of the sovereignty of Iraq.”...

A violation of the health ministry and Iraq’s sovereignty? Hilarious.

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

 

Our own worst enemy: Melanie Phillips on the moonbat Jews who are helping put the nails in the coffin of Eretz Yisrael—and Western civilization:

…The phenomenon of this Jewish fifth column for Arab and Muslim terror is now doing serious damage to the struggle for survival not just by Israel but by the west in general. Two writers have recently produced withering critiques of these people and the harm they are doing: Bruce Bawer, author of While Europe Slept, and Professor Alvin Rosenfeld, whose article has horrified American liberal Jews who refuse to acknowledge their own faces in Caliban’s mirror.

One of the most painful aspects of all of the Jewish tragedy is that, throughout the unending history of Jewish persecution — from the medieval Christian converts to Marx and beyond —Jews have figured, for a variety of reasons, as prominent accomplices of those who wished to destroy the Jewish people. These signatories are firmly in that lamentable tradition. And since today’s principal battleground is — as the Islamists well understand but we in the west do not — the battleground of ideas, the contribution of these Israel-bashing Jewish intellectuals to the cause of those who hate Jews, the west and human rights is immense...

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:46 | link | comments

 

Quel surprise!: France falls for the “unity government” hoax. (I’m sorry, but that Reuters shot of the Palestinian leadership dressed a la Animal House is one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen.)

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:38 | link | comments

Sicko space cadets: Guess what the following is:

 

A cartoon from a Palestinian newspaper? The logo of the University of Toronto's Israel Apartheid Week? A pin worn by Louise Arbour?

Nope, it's the symbol of those wacky Raelians—remember them?—who, according to this article in the CJN, are looking to boost their profile with this sick little item.

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

Say it ain’t so, Joe: What is it with former leaders whose initials are J. C.? First we had Jimmy Carter, humanitarian and Jew-hater, opining in his windy polemic that Israel treats Palestinians exactly like black South Africans in apartheid-era South Africa. Now we have Joe Clark, former Conservative prime minister of Canada and a man who, until Boy Assad arrived on the scene, was the most chin-challenged politician on the planet, slamming the Harper government because of its firm support for Israel.

We know what Carter’s Israelhass stems from: his firmly-held religious convictions which see Jews as demonic and Deicidal; also, from scads of Saudi cash. Clark’s objections have a more secular basis. He’s a dyed-in-the-wool internationalist who, during his term as Brian Mulroney’s foreign minister, adored wining and dining on the diplomatic circuit, hobnobbing with all those friendly multilateratists who despised that “sh---ty little country.” Joe, never the sharpest knife in the drawer, can’t figure out why Harper would want to alienate all those nice Muslims and Europeans by siding with Israel and the Bush-led U.S. when all the One World utopians (infidel branch and Islamist branch) agree that the Jews and the Americans have cooties. From the CJN:

MONTREAL - Former prime minister Joe Clark pointedly criticized Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s stance on the Israeli-Arab conflict, saying the current Conservative government has put Canada’s “balanced and careful” Middle East foreign policy in jeopardy.

In a Jan. 31 address at McGill University, Clark said Harper made a “mistake” in making withdrawal of support from the Hamas-led Palestinian government his first major foreign policy action after taking office just over a year ago.

Clark also termed “ill-judged” Harper’s strongly pro-Israel position during Israel’s war against Hezbollah in Lebanon last summer.

Clark said he finds “troubling” the Conservative government’s “closeness to the foreign policies of the United States administration” to the exclusion of Canada’s interests in the rest of the world.

Clark was Progressive Conservative prime minister for nine months in 1979-80, and minister of external affairs under prime minister Brian Mulroney from 1984 to 1991.

Since October, he has been a professor of practice for public-private sector partnerships at McGill’s Centre for Developing Area Studies.

He said Harper is moving away from the “constructive role” Canada has developed over the past 25 years in the Middle East under successive Liberal and Progressive Conservative governments, without making clear where he is going.

Canada, he said, worked hard over the years to be a “reliable interlocutor” between Israelis and Arabs. “Not many other countries have that reputation,” he said.

The Harper government, he suggested, appears not to understand the “complexity on the ground… One of the lessons I learned was the Palestinian issue is very much symbolic for the developing world.”

Clark disputed Harper’s opinion, stated in a year-end interview, that Canada has been been “completely absent” from the Middle East in the past decade.

“Apart from being flatly false, that rebuke is even more unsettling as either a warning shot, or an unguarded statement of belief, by the prime minister who so dominates this government.”

He said Harper should acknowledge that he erred, as Clark himself had to do on “one celebrated occasion.” He was referring to the diplomatic crisis he set off just two days after being sworn in as prime minister when he announced Canada would move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, fulfilling a campaign promise.

He quickly dropped the plan in the wake of outrage from the Arab and Islamic world.

Clark interprets sending Foreign Minister Peter MacKay to the Middle East last month as an attempt to “repair the damage of the hard lines” Harper took upon coming into office.

Clark’s address was a broad critique of the Harper government’s foreign policy in general. He said he hoped his remarks would spark public debate on where Harper is taking Canada in the international arena. He said others have similar concerns but are not in a position to raise them openly.

“There has not been much public debate about what motivates the changes, or what their consequences might be. Moreover, there is no evidence that they are the result of advice from the foreign ministry or other customary sources, including the platform or resolutions of Mr. Harper’s party.”

He said Harper is taking too much direction from the Bush administration and letting Canada’s relations with rest of the world deteriorate. This may be shortsighted, he said, because the United States’s reputation and authority is declining in the world, while the relative power of other countries, notably China and India, is growing.

Clark said he has no trouble with a Canadian government being close to the White House, but said that “what is troubling is focusing on one relationship so exclusively.”

This is undermining Canada’s relations elsewhere, especially with developing countries, and a waste of the multilateral skills this country has been known for.

Canada is most effective internationally when it is, “simultaneously, as close as possible to the U.S. and as active and independent as possible in the wider world,” Clark said.

“Those are not opposite positions. They are the two sides of the Canadian coin, and both must be given attention or we debase our currency.”

As close as Mulroney was to Washington, Clark noted, the Palestinians’ right to self-determination was one of the key issues on which Canada and the United States disagreed while Clark was external affairs minister.

Since World War II, Canada has built trust and earned respect in parts of the world where the United States “might only generate envy or fear.” The consequence is that developing nations may look elsewhere to less exemplary countries than Canada for influence.

Boker tov, Joe. It isn’t 1984 anymore. Iran’s getting nukes, Hezbollah’s putting the moves on Lebanon, and Hamas is in the driver’s seat in Gaza. And, oh yeah, lots and lots of angry, alienated “yoots” around the world are getting up to all sorts of jihadi hijinks. If you think we can somehow buy our way out of the jihad by throwing money at “developing nations” or that we can “mediate” our way out by playing “honest broker” between the Islamic Nazis and their intended Jewish victims, you’re as brain dead as that other dhimmified J.C.

I was tempted to say you’re as dangerous, too, only no one knows who you are.

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:53 | link | comments (3)

 

“Amity” in Gaza: The Globe and Mail’s Mark “Malarkey” MacKinnon reports that Palestinians are so thrilled that Abbas and Haniyah have found a way to let bygones be bygones that “Fireworks and celebratory gunfire lit up the sky over the violence-plagued Gaza strip last night.”

 

What, no celebratory car swarms?

 

The great thing about the “power-sharing agreement” is that both sides get what they want. Hamas gets to remain the same genocidal jihadist outfit it’s always been while Fatah gets to bamboozle the infidels into restarting the jizya and forcing the Jews to participate in another round of intifada-sparking Peace in Our Time negotiations. It’s a win-win situation for everyone—everyone who wants to get rid of Israel and restore the Middle East to its previous pristine state of unalloyed Muslim purity (a.k.a. dar al Islam), that is.

 

And it’s not like Haniya had to open a vein or anything. Even though he had to agree to let a few Fatah-heads into his cabinet, Hamas remains firmly in charge. The only other thing he had to do was agree to “respect” and previously-signed agreements between Israel and the Palestinians.

 

Big whoop. No doubt Haniyah is planning to give these worthless bits of paper all the “respect” he thinks they deserve.

 

I know we weren’t privy to the closed-door discussions in Mecca, but I have it on good authority that at one point Haniyah grabbed the microphone and burst into a spirited karaoke of Aretha Franklin’s “Respect.” Here are lyrics he improvised for the occasion:

 

(oo) What you want

(oo) Stinky, I got

(oo) What you need

(oo) You know that I got it

(oo) All you’re askin’

(oo) Is for a little “respect” for the faux “agreements”

(Just a little bit)

Hey Stinky (just a little bit)

For the fake “agreements” (just a little bit).

 

I ain’t gonna do you wrong

While we’re talkin',

And maybe we can stop

The kafirs’ squawking.

All they’re askin’

Is for a little “respect” for their fake “peace” treaties,

“Respect" for those fake “peace” treaties.

 

Oo, their jizya

Is sweeter than honey

And they’re about to give us

A lot o’ their money

All I gotta do (oo) for now

Is fake a little respect when we get home. (re re re re)

Yeah, Stinky.

Just fake a little "respect" (re re re re)

When we get home, now (just a little bit).

 

R-E-S-P-E-C-T

For the J-I-H-A-D.

R-E-S-P-E-C-T

Push the Jews into the sea.

 

Oh, sock it to ‘em, sock it to ‘em

Sock it to ‘em, sock it to ‘em
A little respect (sock it to’em, sock it to’em,
Sock it to ‘em, sock it to ‘em).
Whoa, Stinky (just a little bit),
A little respect (just a little bit).

I don’t get tired (just a little bit).
I keep on tryin' (just a little bit).
And I’m allowed (just a little bit)
To do some lyin’ (just a little bit)
’Bout my “respect” (re, re, re, re).

 

When we come home

They'll cheer and scream (just a little bit)

'Cause "Palestine"

Is still our dream.

And so I'm willin'

To fake a little "respect" (just a little bit),

Fake a little "respect...

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

 

Human beatbox on Australian Idol: He bangs, he bangs!

Posted by: scaramouche at 20:55 | link | comments

 

“Unity” in the P.A.: Oh, goody. Stinky Abbas and Ismell Haniyah seem to have buried the hatchet for the moment—too bad it wasn’t in each other. Now that a Saudi-brokered “unity government” is a done deal, you can expert the two factions to turn their attention from killing each other and get back to killing the Jews.

 

Soon enough gullible Western governments, seeing this rapprochement as a bold step forward, will want restart the flow of jizya that they couldn’t, in good conscience, send to a Hamas-only government.

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:40 | link | comments (1)

Durban in T.O.: A friend just sent me the agenda of the upcoming Israeli Apartheid Week, a now annual event for Islamists and their moonbatty enablers held at the University of Toronto. Here’s the list of programs:

Monday Feb 12th 2007

“Apartheid: Turtle Island, South Africa, Palestine”
Speakers: Bonita Lawrence, Shaheen Ariefdien, Hazem Jamjoum
Moderator: Judy Rebick

Location: Ryerson University (Main Building) LIB 72
Directions: 350 Victoria Street. Exit at Dundas Station. Walk East on Dundas, and then North on Victoria Street)
Time: 7pm

Tuesday Feb 13th 2007 (2 events: 12pm and 7pm)

12pm:
Film Screening: “Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance”

Location: Sidney Smith (room 2128)
Directions: 100 St. George Street (Exit from St. George subway Station and walk South a little past Harbord)
Time: 12pm

7pm:
“The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine”
Speakers: Azada Rahi, Zac Smith, Issam Al Yamani
Moderator: Kole Kilibarda

Location: University of Toronto, Tanz Neuroscience Building, Room 6/7 (Theatre)
Directions: 6 Queen’s Park Crescent West (On the North-East Corner of College and Queen’s Park (right next to Queen’s Park Subway Station)
Time: 7pm

Wednesday Feb 14th 2007 (2 events: 12pm and 7pm)

12pm:
RALLY AGAINST RACIST POLICE INACTION AND IMPUNITY!
Hundreds of Indigenous women have been murdered or have gone missing over the last 30 years. Today we come together to demonstrate against the complicity of the colonizer state and its institutions - police, RCMP, coroners offices and the courts, in the ongoing genocide against First Nations. Indigenous communities are over-policed and indigenous girls make up the fastest growing prison population yet their deaths go uninvestigated and their killers unpunished.

Organized by NO MORE SILENCE

Location: Outside Police headquarters at Bay and College
Directions: Exit at College Subway Station and walk half a block west.
Time: 12pm

7pm:
“Apartheid in Present-day Palestine”
Speakers: Walter Lehn, Jon Elmer, Nimer Sultany
Moderator: Zein Ayoub

Location: University of Toronto, Tanz Neuroscience Building, Room 6/7 (Theatre)
Directions: 6 Queen’s Park Crescent West (On the North-East Corner of College and Queen’s Park (right next to Queen’s Park Subway Station)
Time: 7pm

Thursday Feb 15th 2007, 7pm

“Ideologies of Genocide and Apartheid”
Speakers: Gabi Piterberg, Joel Kovel
Moderator: Navid Anvari

Location: University of Toronto, Tanz Neuroscience Building, Room 6/7 (Theatre)
Directions: 6 Queen’s Park Crescent West (On the North-East Corner of College and Queen’s Park (right next to Queen’s Park Subway Station)
Time: 7pm

Friday Feb 16th 2007, 7pm

“Debunking the Myth of Israel as a Democracy”
Speaker: Jamal Zahalka
Moderator: Rafeef Ziadah

Location: OISE Auditorium (Ontario Institute of Secondary Education)
Directions: Next to St. George Subway Station (exit on Bedford Street), 252 Bloor Street West
Time: 7pm

Saturday Feb 17th 2007 (2 events: 1pm and 7pm)

1pm:
BOYCOTT CHAPTERS/INDIGO DAY OF ACTION
Please join CAIA and allies to protest Israeli Apartheid and highlight the support it receives from the Heseg Foundation. Please visit www.caiaweb.org for more information about Heseg and the Chapters/Indigo connection.

Organized by the Coalition against Israeli Apartheid

Location: Israeli Consulate at 180 Bloor Street West
Directions: Exit at St. George Subway Station and walk East on Bloor St. till you get to Avenue Rd.
Time: 1pm

7pm:
Join SAIA for TRIVIA NIGHT!
PLUS music by Rubin, Bona Mohammad, and many more!
Light refreshments will be served
Bring your family and friends - this is a child-friendly event
Most importantly…Bring your game!

Your game? Oh, you mean like “World-Wide Zionist Conspiracy Monopoly” and “Holocaust Denial Boggle” (well, it does “boggle” the mind)? Woo hoo. Fun times.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:33 | link | comments (3)

 

Bass-ackwards in Oz: Sydney Morning Herald correspondent Ed O’Loughlin reports from the scene in Gaza, where after weeks of civil war Fatah forces are beginning to succumb to their “jitters.”

 

Here’s how Ed, who clearly doesn’t have a clue, opens his piece:

AFTER weeks of fraternal violence, many Palestinians accuse the US of stoking civil war in the Palestinian territories as part of a wider proxy struggle with Iran, Syria or the Islamic world in general. If that is so, the White House's strategy risks going badly wrong.

Um, I think you’re a little mixed-up there, Ed. The U.S. isn’t “stoking a civil war.” If anything, it’s trying to stoke yet another round of those interminable Peace in Our Times talks. And it isn’t the U.S.’s proxy war. It’s Iran’s. The mullahs—Shia Islamo-fascists with global ambitions who want to bring on the Apocalypse—have been at the centre of most of the bad stuff in the region, supporting Hellzbollocks in Lebanon, Hamas in the P.A., and the “insurgents,” both Shia and Sunni, in Iraq. All with the support and approval of its acolyte Syria, a country Mark Steyn has aptly described as “Mini-Me to Iran’s Dr. Evil.”

 

Get a grip, Ed. You’re losing it.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:00 | link | comments (2)

 

Blindness and bromides at York: An Egyptian-born engineer, Mamdouh Shoukri, has been tapped as the new president of Toronto’s York University. The university, a hotbed of anti-Zionism where leftoids and Islamists have joined forces to trash Israel in an offensive, in-your-face manner, is the Ontario version of Montreal’s Concordia, a.k.a. Gaza U.

 

The appointment of an Egyptian is a perfect choice for a university in a paralytic state of de-Nile about the ugliness of Jew-hatred on its campus. From the Toronto Star (with my snarky comments in italics in brackets):

York University has long been known as one of Canada's most diverse campuses. (“Diverse”: code for “we have tons of angry Muslim students”.)

That reputation will soon start at the top.

When Mamdouh Shoukri, an Egyptian-born engineer, becomes the new president of York in the summer, he will be the first Muslim appointed as the permanent head of a Canadian university.

"This is Canada. It's a mosaic," Shoukri, 59, said yesterday in his first media interview since being named the seventh president in the history of Canada's third-largest university. (A mosaic where the tiles been so brainwashed by the doctrine of multiculturalism—the true meaning of which we really don’t understand—that we have no problemo tolerating the intolerance of Islamists, especially on campus.)

"I see this as the leadership role at a progressive Canadian university, which will have a diverse population, whether it's among the students or among the faculty and staff.

"This is the nature of the country we live in and this is what we do." (This is what we do—we pretend everything is okey-dokey and turn a blind eye to ‘the nature’ of the jihadist threat.)

Shoukri, currently vice-president of research and international affairs at McMaster University in Hamilton, had his appointment confirmed Tuesday night at a meeting of York's board of governors.

A highly regarded mechanical engineer, researcher and academic administrator, Shoukri will take over from Lorna Marsden, who is retiring June 30 after 10 years in the post.

Under Marsden, the Israel-Palestinian debate became a flashpoint at York, which has one of the largest Jewish populations at a Canadian university. Critics on both sides have accused the administration of being heavy-handed and stifling debate. (A deft bit of understatement. During Marsden’s term, the university became an inhospitable place for Jewish students who support Israel. A friend of my sisters’ who has been writing her doctoral thesis says that, going to York, she knows how Jewish students attending German universities after Hitler came to power must have felt. In such a toxic environment, “stifling the debate” would be more than welcome, since there is no “debate”; there is only seething, rage and relentless hostility—a climate that's hardly conducive for learning.)

The Ontario Human Rights Commission is examining York's long-standing practice of cancelling classes on high Jewish holidays. (A policy that’s been on the books for decades due to the large Jewish enrollment, but which many Muslim students, whose numbers have been rising precipitously, object to.)

Shoukri, who came to Canada 35 years ago to study at McMaster, said it was too early for him to pass judgment on such debates at York. But, he said, "every group within (the university's) diverse population ... should be assured that they have a president who works for them."(Too early? He’s been vice chancellor there for years now. You’d think the man might have formed an opinion by now. I guess he needs some more time, to really get a handle on things.)

Student groups expressed pride at Shoukri's appointment.

"Most importantly, his selection is based on his credentials," said Kamal Haseeb, president of York's Muslim Association. "The fact he's Muslim just solidifies the acceptance of all groups and faiths.

"The diversity on campus is not always reflected at an administrative level. This is great to see."

Adam Hummel of Hillel at York, known as the centre for Jewish life on campus, called Shoukri's selection "very Canadian" and a reflection of York's population.

"And, I couldn't be prouder," Hummel said. (Brown-nosing putz.)

Hummel said he hoped Shoukri's appointment would "wipe the slate clean" on the tone of Israel-Palestinian debate on campus. York Federation of Students president Corrie Sakaluk said "it's great to see York making history." (Yes, Adam. The appointment of a Muslim president—it’s like a new day dawning. I’m sure he’ll bring a whole new tone of sanity and fair-mindedness to the “debate.”)

One senior York official said Shoukri's ethnicity had no bearing on his hiring.

"We didn't hire him because he's a Muslim," said the person, who asked not to be identified. "We hired him because of who he is – a fantastic researcher, a fantastic educator, a great administrator. (No doubt he has steller academic credentials—and the fact that he’s a Muslim didn’t hurt.)

"We're very proud that we could hire him no matter what his ethnic background." (Okay, now you doth protest too much.)

Shoukri, who believes his ethnic background will fade as a topic after the initial media hype, said his list of long-term objectives includes building on York's diversity, interdisciplinary studies and accessibility as well as being "at the leading edge of linking university research and education to the needs of society. (I doubt it. Count on the media to mention Shoukri’s being the “first Muslim president of a Canadian university” in every report.)

"I think this is the sign of a progressive university in the 21st century." (Indeed.)

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:25 | link | comments (2)

 

Two stories: Interesting juxtaposition of stories in the dead tree version of leftoid rag the Toronto Star. On the left hand side (fitting location), an article about efforts to bring the two fractious factions of Palestinians together in a “unity government” and derail their civil war. On the right hand side, a piece about how casualties of that war are being treated for their wounds in an Israeli hospital in Ashkelon.

 

Hmm. Wonder how that second one, which collides with the accepted leftoid view of Israel—as a racist, apartheid state—managed to slip through.

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:41 | link | comments

Their feets too big: The essence of British “virtue” as explained by Ceeb correspondent Adrienne Arsenault. They may loathe the Zionists and revile the U.S., but they really care about the environment and are wracked by self-disgust because they believe their oversized “carbon footprints” are treading all over the planet. Or, as the great Fats Walker would have said, they think their “pedal extremities really are obnoxious”:

…In the U.K. today, "Doing the right thing" by the environment has become a national obsession.

And while many people may be confused about what the 'right thing' is, Britons by and large are not. A recent Mori poll says 48 per cent here consider global warming more of a threat to the world than poverty, war or terrorism.

Another poll, from YouGov, an internet marketing firm, suggests only one in five would object to citizens being fined for polluting too much.

Brits may secretly revel in these warm, sunny winter days, but they are determined to do something about them.

The carbon footprint

Another indicator of how serious Britons are about climate change is the phrase "carbon footprint." If you don't use it in a serious sentence at least a few times a week in this country, you just aren't with it.

It is just a catchphrase, of course, to describe how much we as individuals hurt the environment. Everything we do that pollutes forms our footprint.

When we fly, leave the tumble dryer on, buy those bananas from the D.R., we add to our personal tally of carbon emissions, making our footprint bigger. And big is bad.

The best estimate, and it's really more of a guess, is that the average British lifestyle generates about six tonnes of carbon emissions a year. That's enough to fill about three hot air balloons…

But when you factor in the hot air generated by Ken Livingstone, George Galloway, Harold Pinter and various Beeb reporters and pundits, the average shoots way up to ten.

Hey, I think we may have hit on a new power source.

Posted by: scaramouche at 14:06 | link | comments (2)

 

More ‘toon rage: This time in France. From the BBC:

 

Two French Muslim groups have begun a lawsuit in a Paris court against magazine Charlie Hebdo over cartoons satirising the Prophet Muhammad.

The groups say the magazine "insulted people on the basis of religion" in a case seen as a test of free speech.

Charlie Hebdo reprinted Danish cartoons that provoked a violent backlash in the Muslim world a year ago.

The newspaper Liberation republished the cartoons on Wednesday in solidarity with the magazine.

But the Union of French Islamic Organisations and the Paris Grand Mosque said Charlie Hebdo's decision to publish the cartoons "was part of a considered plan of provocation aimed against the Islamic community in its most intimate faith".

It was "born out of a simplistic Islamophobia as well as purely commercial interests".

Muslims regard images of the Prophet Mohammed as blasphemous…

You don’t say. I thought the real “blasphemy” was dhimmis refusing to acknowledge and accept their dhimmitude. Silly moi.

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

School daze in the U.K.: Readin’, writin’ and racism, all funded by the guardians of the one true faith: From the Daily Mail:

The principal of an Islamic school has admitted that it uses textbooks which describe Jews as 'apes' and Christians as 'pigs' and has refused to withdraw them.

Dr Sumaya Alyusuf confirmed that the offending books exist after former teacher Colin Cook, 57, alleged that children as young as five are taught from racist materials at the King Fahd Academy in Acton.

In an interview on BBC2's Newsnight, Dr Alyusuf was asked by Jeremy Paxman whether she recognised the books.

She said: "Yes, I do recognise these books, of course. We have these books in our school.

"These books have good chapters that can be used by the teachers. It depends on the objectives the teacher wants to achieve."

In another exchange, Dr Alyusuf insisted the books should not be scrapped, saying that allegedly racist sections had been 'misinterpreted'.

The school is owned, funded and run by the government of Saudi Arabia.

Mr Paxman asked: "Will you now remove this nonsense from the Saudi Ministry of Education from your school?"

Dr Alyusuf replied: "Just to reiterate what I said earlier, there are chapters from these books that are used and that will serve our objectives. But we don't teach hatred towards Judaism or Christianity - on the contrary."

On the contrary. I’m sure the school is devoted to a doctrine of love and understanding, cherry-picking only the sweet, sweet fruit from Islamic teachings and ignoring the bitter, poisonous ones.

See, it all depends on what you choose to extract.  

Posted by: scaramouche at 13:14 | link | comments (2)

 

Bravo, Harper: I thought he was going a bit wobbly, what with designating Wajid Khan to be his “expert” on the Middle East, but Prime Minister Stephen Harper has shown once again that he’s a man of principle who “gets it” about Israel and the global jihad. And maybe, just maybe, the Liberals are beginning to "get it," too. (Or maybe, as always, they're willing to talk the talk--because talk is cheap--but not walk the walk). From the National Post:

OTTAWA - Prime Minister Stephen Harper issued a staunch defence yesterday of his government's support for Israel, saying it has proven the Jewish state can count on Canada for more than encouraging words.

Mr. Harper made clear his support for Israel during last summer's fighting between Hezbollah and Israeli forces would not be a one-off event.

"When faced with such threats, Israel will always have a steadfast friend in Canada's new government," Mr. Harper said at a dinner sponsored by the Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy.

Mr. Harper, who received a standing ovation, pointedly revisited the Israeli- Hezbollah conflict as an example of his government's willingness to stand up and be counted on the side of Israel.

"Over the past year, we got a pretty sharp reminder that it's one thing to offer supportive words to Israel when it's convenient, and quite another to stand firm in its hour of need," he said. "Israel had a friend when it mattered."

In separate remarks, Liberal leader Stephane Dion also struck a supportive chord, telling the audience that when Israel's right to exist is threatened; it is an "attack on the values of every democracy."

Mr. Harper's vocal support for Israel has been unswerving despite criticism from the opposition that the government has abandoned Canada's traditional neutral role in the Middle East.

The Prime Minister said there are no "shades of grey" when a battle pits a democratic state against terrorist groups seeking to destroy it and its people.

Such clarity of vision is astonishing—and worthy of a standing ovation.

Enjoy it while it lasts, though, because come election time I fear Canadians are going to succumb to climate-change hysteria and elect the guy with the dog named Kyoto—a man far more predisposed to consider "nuance" and "shades of grey" than Harper.

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:36 | link | comments (1)

Miss Condoleezza’s Lament: This one’s for the “guys and dolls” at the State Department, a.k.a. Foggy Bottom. It’s a little ditty sung by head “doll,” Condi Rice (who accompanies herself on piano):

It says here…

“The average Secretary of the State Department

Who starts out resolute and clear

Due to sheer proximity will assimilate

The culture of accommodation,

Amorality and fear

Affecting the spine and the power to cogitate.”

In other words

When the flurry of global events makes you all agog,

A person can develop a “fog.”

You can debrief her all day

In all manner of grey

And much-nuanced words.

Till the thought comes that maybe this job that she has

Is one for the birds.

Because all that she ever seems able to do

Is to shovel turds.

A person can develop “the fog.”

It says here…

“The Secretary who’s single-minded,

Devoted to her task

Shows a neurotic tendency...

See note.

Oh, see note.

Note: Chronic, pervasive syndromes,

Confusion, anxiety,

Which results in the need to state

Boilerplate by rote.”

In other words

Just from hangin’ around with a bunch of State layabouts

A person just can’t figure it out.

You can fill up her head

With those feelings of dread

‘Bout the Zionists.

You can say there’s a chance

That Fatah’s going to dance

With the Islamists,

But the odds are they’re still going at it

With teeth, nails, guns, bombs and fists.

A person just can’t figure it out.

And furthermore,

By pretending Abbas

Is the partner for whom we have wished

A person

Can become all farmisht.

When they’re killing each other in Gaza

And blame Jews for the crime

Even tho’ it was Fatah corruption

That made Hamas seem sublime.

Then she tries to restart the “peace process”

For the fourteenth time.

A person can become all farmisht.

Farmisht, farmisht, from dirt that’s been dished.

With evasions and persuasions

And nothing at all accomplished.

From an absence of ongoing clarity

And a feeling she’s trapped in a bog

A person

Can develop a bad, bad fog.

Posted by: scaramouche at 10:48 | link | comments

More Little Mosque in the ‘Burbs: Joe Warmington, a Toronto Sun columnist, had an interview with would-be mosque-builder, Islamist imam Zafar, in the Satuday paper. Not surprisingly, the imam insists that all those terrible things he’s reputed to have said—lies, all lies. He’s not a fiery jihadist. Far from it. He’s just a warm ‘n’ cuddly cleric with a humanitarian interest in overseas injustice. And anyone who says otherwise is a blithering bigot:

…Many didn't even realize Newmarket had its first mosque, which is really nothing more than a gutted bungalow on two acres, complete with pond. It still has a damaged Toronto Maple Leafs flag hanging from a pole and a rusted shinny hockey net.

 

It's a start. The Muslim community has bigger plans for their new place of worship. "We have fully complied with the town's requirements," Bangash said.

 

People have nothing to be afraid of, he said, adding much of what he is quoted to have said he actually didn't say.

He is, though, the former editor of the Crescent International newspaper which after Sept. 11, 2001 did describe Osama Bin Laden as a person who "stands up to the West in the name of Islam" and that there was a "far greater tragedy taking place in Iraq, Palestine and now in Afghanistan."

 

He insists stories where he is quoted as saying the U.S. knew about the potential attacks on 9/11 or that Canada is a "fully paid-up member of the Anglo-Saxon Mafia, which is responsible for most of the recorded genocides in the world" are not his.

 

After reading this stuff, however, you can see why people might be concerned. Fresh off last summer's charges against 17 young Muslim men on an alleged terror plot, there's certainly nothing wrong with asking some questions.

 

"Are you a racist? Are you are terrorist?" is what I asked him. Might as well clear the air, is what I thought.

 

"Absolutely not," he said. "Not at all. Of course not. I think it's important people understand we neither advocate violence of any kind, nor do we spread hatred."

 

He says not many are upset at all. "I don't think there are too many," he said.

 

"What has happened is some people have misread things and that has been deliberately done. There are some groups who are themselves racist, essentially, and don't want to see a mosque going up in Newmarket."

 

The more I questioned him the more defensive he seemed to get. His calm demeanor became more agitated when he said: "I am opposed to Israeli state policies. They are perpetrating terrible crimes against the Palestinian people."

 

I asked if he considered that a radical opinion?

"How could that be radical? Is it permissible to starve millions of people?"

 

For many locals, what's happening in the West Bank is a long way from York Region. Even Pakistan-born Bangash, with whom I left on amiable terms, agrees. "These are my personal views and have nothing to do with the mosque," said the Canadian for 33 years.

 

Thirty-three years in our multiculti theme park, and still an unrepentant jihadist.

 

Maple syrup-dipped taqiyah, anyone?

Posted by: scaramouche at 19:17 | link | comments (1)

 

Al Aqsa is falling down, falling down, falling down…: The other day Ehud Olmert, bar none the worst prime minister in Israel’s history, tried to butter up the Hashemites by acceding to their King’s demand that they be allowed to build a prayer tower on the Temple Mount, Judaism’s holiest site; some Jews, the sillies, had wanted to build a synagogue there. Today, the King repaid the show of goodwill by giving in to Islamic hysteria about Israeli archaeological excavations compromising the structural integrity of the gold-domed mosque—a hysteria that's the architectural equivalent of blood libel.

 

Proving once and for all that no "good deed" goes unpunished, and that Olmert is a horse’s patoot.

Posted by: scaramouche at 18:46 | link | comments

 

Stage struck: The head of the international organization that wants to hobble the U.S. economy by forcing the Americans to comply with an unworkable global environment plan presided over by Europeans (whose countries don't face the same stringent cutbacks being demanded of the U.S.), says climate change has driven the world to a ‘critical stage.’

 

Would that the world community were as worked up about the global religious plan (and the hairy Islamic Hitler) that have driven the world to a ‘critical stage.’

Posted by: scaramouche at 12:54 | link | comments

Little Islamist Mosque in the 'burbs: Newmarket, a town due north of Toronto and considered part of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), is set to approve construction of a new mosque. No problem with that, of course. In our multiculti wonderland, where every tile in the glorious national mosaic contributes to the great, big, beautiful picture, one is free to practise the religion of one's choice. Even if some of the pebbles happen to preach a particularly noxious brand of faith-based hatred. From the National Post:

A new 1,700-square-foot mosque that has caused a stir in Newmarket appears poised to receive final approval, after town council rejected a request by local residents to hold a public meeting on the matter.

"The reality is that it is an obligation of this council to deal with this application the way it would any other application," Mayor Tony Van Bynen said yesterday. "Anyone who has met the site plan criteria is equally eligible and entitled to come to Newmarket."

The town issued a press release extending a welcome to its first mosque.

Concerns raised by local residents are not directed at the Mulock Drive mosque but at the man behind it, Imam Zanfar Bangash, an Islamic scholar based in the Toronto area whose views have been labelled anti- American and anti-Israeli.

The mosque has already been zoned a place of worship. Town council has been asked to consider a request for 50 onsite parking spots. The building, a bungalow, is meant to be a satellite location of a larger, well-established Richmond Hill mosque, run by the Islamic Society of York Region.

Prior to hearing deputations on the application, Mayor Van Bynen cautioned the packed municipal chambers that council will not tolerate "statements of hearsay, assumptions, discussions of personal views or comments about identifiable individuals."

"I think its important to understand that the issue before council and the authority of council is restricted to the land use application," the Mayor said in an interview. "Anything beyond that is not a matter of issue for the council."

Zanfar Bangash, director of The Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought, used to edit the Crescent International newspaper, which after Sept. 11, 2001, described Osama Bin Laden as a person who "stands up to the West in the name of Islam".

The Post seems to have gotten the imam