Check this.
The modern liberal bed wetter will not like historical facts.
Leave it to the Derb
Ouch! [John Derbyshire]
Still not yet quittin' time? All right, a little more of Alistair Horne on life in old France. Though you might want to save this one for after dinner. The subject here is François Ravaillac, who on May 14, 1610 assassinated Henri IV while the monarch was stuck in a traffic jam.
On 27 May, still protesting that he had acted as a free agent on a divinely inspired mission, Ravaillac was put to death. Before being drawn and quartered, the lot of the regicide, on the Place de Grève scaffold he was scalded with burning sulphur, molten lead and boiling oil and resin, his flesh then torn by pincers. Then his arms and legs were attached to horses which pulled in opposite directions. One of the horses "foundered," so a zealous chevalier offered his mount; "the animal was full of vigour and pulled away a thigh." After an hour and a half of this horrendous cruelty, Ravaillac died, as the mob tried to prevent him receiving last rites. When he finally expired,
the entire populace, no matter what their rank, hurled themselves on the body with their swords, knives, sticks or anything else to hand and began beating, hacking and tearing at it. They snatched the limbs from the executioner, savagely chopping them up and dragging the pieces through the streets.Children made a bonfire and flung remains of Ravaillac's body on it. According to one witness, Nicholas Pasquier, one woman actually ate some of the flesh. The executioner, supposed to have the body of the regicide reduced to ashes to complete the ritual demanded by the law, could find nothing but his shirt.
Phew! Still, at least he wasn't subjected to water-boarding.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ODEyNDYyODE0ZWE2MzUxMzgxYjkxZDAxZTU0ZjNkMmE=
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Youtube war vids
from WJS Opinion Journal.
ouch!
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/bminiter/?id=110010956
THE WESTERN FRONTNot According to Script Hollywood gets shown up by pro-war YouTube videos and a didactic antiwar cat. BY BRENDAN MINITER Friday, December 7, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST
The guns of war have fallen silent for Hollywood. Studio executives, who could once count on Americans filling theaters for just about any war movie they produced, are finding this year's war flicks to be a bunch of duds. "Lions for Lambs," Robert Redford's case against the war in Afghanistan, is a flop. It stars Mr. Redford, Meryl Streep and Tom Cruise and may not make back its $35 million price tag. Brian De Palma's "Redacted" played to empty seats. Even "The War," Ken Burns's much-anticipated World War II documentary that aired on PBS in September, met a less-than-explosive reception.
But Americans haven't lost their taste for war footage. They've just found a better place to see the type of war film they actually enjoy watching. Some of the hottest videos on YouTube are of actual battles that have taken place in Afghanistan and Iraq. This is footage that often hasn't made its way onto the nightly news or CNN--although some of it has--but it's largely unadulterated film that shows American soldiers in action, bringing the full weight of American military might to bear against the enemy. And in most of these films, it's clear who the enemy is.
Some of the are amateur productions and others are professionally produced, such as two films that have drawn about 700,000 viewers each: "Insurgent Snipers vs. U.S. Marines," put together by the History Channel, and "Iraq Marine Battle Fallujah." In the latter, U.S. Marines are seen assaulting Fallujah. The film, just 4 1/2 minutes, plays to the tune of Dire Straits' 1985 hit "Brothers in Arms," and is a better tribute to the men who fight the nation's wars that anything Hollywood has put out since John Wayne's 1968 film "The Green Berets."
Another film, this one billing itself as "Iraq War (The Great Footage Ever!)," was posted in February and has already drawn more than 1.3 million viewers. It runs a little less than 10 minutes and features shots of U.S. military attack aircraft and U.S. Marines in Iraq. The Marines, who fill the final half of the film, are shown kicking in doors, burning photographs of Saddam Hussein, and blasting insurgents with seemingly every weapon in the U.S. arsenal. It's raw, upfront military aggression targeted at bad guys, interspersed with lighter moments of kicking soccer balls around with Iraqi children and training Iraqi soldiers. It too is compelling video.
Yet another film winning attention--"Battle on Haifa Street, Baghdad, Iraq"--was posted nine months ago and has been seen by more than 1.8 million viewers. In nearly three minutes of combat footage, viewers can watch a battle scene play out where American and Iraqi soldiers attack and appear to kill insurgents in urban Baghdad. Another short film--"U.S. Marines in Iraq Real Footage Warning Graphic"--plays to American rock music, runs just five minutes. It is an adrenaline rush all the way through and has been seen by some 1.1 million people.
Not every online film is pro-war. One, available here, is a 23-minute discussion of whether the Iraq war is illegal under international law. Narrated by a talking cat, it has been seen by more than 600,000 people. It's anyone's guess how many of them have actually been swayed by the cat's arguments.
Today cameras are ubiquitous and production software is easy enough to use that nearly any American with an interest in doing so can put together a film and post it online for public viewing. That many of the videos showing up on the Internet are just as or even more compelling to watch than what Tinsel Town throws up on the silver screen is both an indictment of Hollywood as well as an opportunity. It's of little mystery now what kind of war films consumers want to see. Most of them involve the good guys winning.
Mr. Miniter is assistant editor of OpinionJournal.com. His column appears Tuesdays.
ouch!
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/bminiter/?id=110010956
THE WESTERN FRONTNot According to Script Hollywood gets shown up by pro-war YouTube videos and a didactic antiwar cat. BY BRENDAN MINITER Friday, December 7, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST
The guns of war have fallen silent for Hollywood. Studio executives, who could once count on Americans filling theaters for just about any war movie they produced, are finding this year's war flicks to be a bunch of duds. "Lions for Lambs," Robert Redford's case against the war in Afghanistan, is a flop. It stars Mr. Redford, Meryl Streep and Tom Cruise and may not make back its $35 million price tag. Brian De Palma's "Redacted" played to empty seats. Even "The War," Ken Burns's much-anticipated World War II documentary that aired on PBS in September, met a less-than-explosive reception.
But Americans haven't lost their taste for war footage. They've just found a better place to see the type of war film they actually enjoy watching. Some of the hottest videos on YouTube are of actual battles that have taken place in Afghanistan and Iraq. This is footage that often hasn't made its way onto the nightly news or CNN--although some of it has--but it's largely unadulterated film that shows American soldiers in action, bringing the full weight of American military might to bear against the enemy. And in most of these films, it's clear who the enemy is.
Some of the are amateur productions and others are professionally produced, such as two films that have drawn about 700,000 viewers each: "Insurgent Snipers vs. U.S. Marines," put together by the History Channel, and "Iraq Marine Battle Fallujah." In the latter, U.S. Marines are seen assaulting Fallujah. The film, just 4 1/2 minutes, plays to the tune of Dire Straits' 1985 hit "Brothers in Arms," and is a better tribute to the men who fight the nation's wars that anything Hollywood has put out since John Wayne's 1968 film "The Green Berets."
Another film, this one billing itself as "Iraq War (The Great Footage Ever!)," was posted in February and has already drawn more than 1.3 million viewers. It runs a little less than 10 minutes and features shots of U.S. military attack aircraft and U.S. Marines in Iraq. The Marines, who fill the final half of the film, are shown kicking in doors, burning photographs of Saddam Hussein, and blasting insurgents with seemingly every weapon in the U.S. arsenal. It's raw, upfront military aggression targeted at bad guys, interspersed with lighter moments of kicking soccer balls around with Iraqi children and training Iraqi soldiers. It too is compelling video.
Yet another film winning attention--"Battle on Haifa Street, Baghdad, Iraq"--was posted nine months ago and has been seen by more than 1.8 million viewers. In nearly three minutes of combat footage, viewers can watch a battle scene play out where American and Iraqi soldiers attack and appear to kill insurgents in urban Baghdad. Another short film--"U.S. Marines in Iraq Real Footage Warning Graphic"--plays to American rock music, runs just five minutes. It is an adrenaline rush all the way through and has been seen by some 1.1 million people.
Not every online film is pro-war. One, available here, is a 23-minute discussion of whether the Iraq war is illegal under international law. Narrated by a talking cat, it has been seen by more than 600,000 people. It's anyone's guess how many of them have actually been swayed by the cat's arguments.
Today cameras are ubiquitous and production software is easy enough to use that nearly any American with an interest in doing so can put together a film and post it online for public viewing. That many of the videos showing up on the Internet are just as or even more compelling to watch than what Tinsel Town throws up on the silver screen is both an indictment of Hollywood as well as an opportunity. It's of little mystery now what kind of war films consumers want to see. Most of them involve the good guys winning.
Mr. Miniter is assistant editor of OpinionJournal.com. His column appears Tuesdays.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
isalm/iran again
This is the same group of f*cko's that banned women riding bicycles because of thigh motion or something.............
Very pathetic the supposed feminists of The West, this is a real issue but they would rather in fight with us righties than challenge real inequity.
Of course us righties won't cut off anyone's heads like those islamo guys
from NRO, link at the end
I Wonder if the Spooks Noticed This One [Michael Ledeen]
Yeah, the nuclear issue is important to the mullahs, but not as important as boots. Women's boots, that is. This is probably too delicate an issue for the male chauvinist fluffmeisters over at the Intelligence Community—the guys who wrote their celebrated Estimate on the Iranian nuclear weapons program (NOT), but it turns out that the mullahs, in their relentless efforts to ban fun from Iranian life, are cracking down on women again. Top to bottom, so to speak. Hats aren't good enough, and boots that show the shape of the ankles are verboten.
Tehran, 12 Dec. (AKI) - Women have been banned from wearing boots and on the streets of Tehran.Police chief, General Ahmad Radan, announced the ban on Wednesday saying that boots could only be worn if they were covered by pants."If boots are not covered by pants that fall to the ankles, they show the female shape and that is therefore in contradiction with Islamic dress code," said Radan.Iranian women can no longer leave home with their pants pushed inside their boots and they can no longer wear hats without a veil."A hat is not an adequate substitute for a veil or a hijab," he said. " If someone really wants to wear a hat, they can put it on the veil."
Hey, when the Muslims proclaim their caliphate it's gonna be hell for the fashion business. Maybe that's why the French are getting tougher on Iran?
h/t: Weasel Zippers
12/12 11:12 PM
Very pathetic the supposed feminists of The West, this is a real issue but they would rather in fight with us righties than challenge real inequity.
Of course us righties won't cut off anyone's heads like those islamo guys
from NRO, link at the end
I Wonder if the Spooks Noticed This One [Michael Ledeen]
Yeah, the nuclear issue is important to the mullahs, but not as important as boots. Women's boots, that is. This is probably too delicate an issue for the male chauvinist fluffmeisters over at the Intelligence Community—the guys who wrote their celebrated Estimate on the Iranian nuclear weapons program (NOT), but it turns out that the mullahs, in their relentless efforts to ban fun from Iranian life, are cracking down on women again. Top to bottom, so to speak. Hats aren't good enough, and boots that show the shape of the ankles are verboten.
Tehran, 12 Dec. (AKI) - Women have been banned from wearing boots and on the streets of Tehran.Police chief, General Ahmad Radan, announced the ban on Wednesday saying that boots could only be worn if they were covered by pants."If boots are not covered by pants that fall to the ankles, they show the female shape and that is therefore in contradiction with Islamic dress code," said Radan.Iranian women can no longer leave home with their pants pushed inside their boots and they can no longer wear hats without a veil."A hat is not an adequate substitute for a veil or a hijab," he said. " If someone really wants to wear a hat, they can put it on the veil."
Hey, when the Muslims proclaim their caliphate it's gonna be hell for the fashion business. Maybe that's why the French are getting tougher on Iran?
h/t: Weasel Zippers
12/12 11:12 PM
Sunday, December 2, 2007
Are Journalists really this stupid???
The only thing needed for EVIL to prosper is for good men to stand back and do nothing...... can't remember who that was .
Beats me, Sherlock [Mark Steyn
From Der Spiegel, a report on how Europe's most tolerant city no longer seems quite so tolerant:
With the number of homophobic attacks rising in the Dutch metropolis, Amsterdam officials are commissioning a study to determine why Moroccan men are targeting the city's gays.
Gee, whiz. That's a toughie. Wonder what the reason could be. But don't worry, the University of Amsterdam is on top of things:
Half of the crimes were committed by men of Moroccan origin and researchers believe they felt stigmatized by society and responded by attacking people they felt were lower on the social ladder. Another working theory is that the attackers may be struggling with their own sexual identity.
Bingo! Telling young Moroccan men they're closeted gays seems certain to lessen tensions in the city! While you're at it, a lot of those Turks seem a bit light on their loafers, don't you think?
Any researchers who haven't fully signed on to the "social stigmatization" argument might like to dust off the reports following the stabbing in 2002 of Paris' first openly gay mayor, Bertrand Delanoe, by a Muslim immigrant, Azedine Berkane. Le Monde reported the views of M Berkane's neighbors:
“He was a bit like us,” said one. “We’re all homophobic here, because it’s not natural.”“It’s against Islam,” said another. “Muslim fags don’t exist.”
As I say somewhere in my book: If you think Iraq's Kurds and Arabs, Sunni and Shia are incompatible, what do you call a jurisdiction split between post-Christian secular gay potheads and anti-whoring anti-sodomite anti-everything-you-dig Islamists? If Kurdistan’s an awkward fit in Iraq, how well will Pornostan fit in the Islamic Republic of Holland?
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NzllMzVjMmI4MGVkODMzZmU3ZWFkMmY0ZWY1ZDhlNjA=
Beats me, Sherlock [Mark Steyn
From Der Spiegel, a report on how Europe's most tolerant city no longer seems quite so tolerant:
With the number of homophobic attacks rising in the Dutch metropolis, Amsterdam officials are commissioning a study to determine why Moroccan men are targeting the city's gays.
Gee, whiz. That's a toughie. Wonder what the reason could be. But don't worry, the University of Amsterdam is on top of things:
Half of the crimes were committed by men of Moroccan origin and researchers believe they felt stigmatized by society and responded by attacking people they felt were lower on the social ladder. Another working theory is that the attackers may be struggling with their own sexual identity.
Bingo! Telling young Moroccan men they're closeted gays seems certain to lessen tensions in the city! While you're at it, a lot of those Turks seem a bit light on their loafers, don't you think?
Any researchers who haven't fully signed on to the "social stigmatization" argument might like to dust off the reports following the stabbing in 2002 of Paris' first openly gay mayor, Bertrand Delanoe, by a Muslim immigrant, Azedine Berkane. Le Monde reported the views of M Berkane's neighbors:
“He was a bit like us,” said one. “We’re all homophobic here, because it’s not natural.”“It’s against Islam,” said another. “Muslim fags don’t exist.”
As I say somewhere in my book: If you think Iraq's Kurds and Arabs, Sunni and Shia are incompatible, what do you call a jurisdiction split between post-Christian secular gay potheads and anti-whoring anti-sodomite anti-everything-you-dig Islamists? If Kurdistan’s an awkward fit in Iraq, how well will Pornostan fit in the Islamic Republic of Holland?
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NzllMzVjMmI4MGVkODMzZmU3ZWFkMmY0ZWY1ZDhlNjA=
Muscular Christianity
I'm an admitted islamo-basher.
I'm not fearful of them(an islamophobe), I despise them and think they are 3rd world f#cks who should mind there manners.
The reason the islamic world is the third world is their culture.
There is no peace without VICTORY
The limp wristed Liberals need to buck up or convert to Islam, then we know who our enemies are.
Taking a stand [Mark Steyn
The Washington Post's "On Faith" section offers some hilariously convoluted prose by Professors John L Esposito and John O Voll on the current scene. Opening sentence:
In a world in which Islamophobes blur the distinction between the barbaric acts of Muslim extremists and terrorists and the religion of Islam, two recent legal decisions in Sudan and Saudi Arabia will reinforce accusations that Islam is an intolerant religion.
As John Hinderaker at Power Line points out, that's "one of those sentences where the second clause takes away what the first clause asserted". The second sentence is almost as good:
After years of civil war and bloodshed and having failed to effectively respond to what some describe as genocide in Darfur, Sudan’s government and judiciary have captured global attention with...
"Having failed to effectively respond to what some describe as..." Think we've got enough weaselly qualifying speed-bumps in there, lads? Shouldn't it be "Having been accused by some of failing to respond as effectively as has been argued they might have done to what some might describe as genocide if they weren't on top of all the nuances as we are..."?
Messrs Esposito and Voll now get down to the meat of their piece: Their main problem with tossing British schoolteachers in the slammer over teddy-bear names and giving 19-year old Saudi women 200 lashes and six months in jail for the crime of getting gang-raped isn't that blameless grade-school teachers are getting imprisoned and rape victims are getting lashed, but that such stories play into the hands of "right-wing extremists" who paint stereotypical portraits of Islam as intolerant. And that's a bad thing - not the lashing and jailing, but the right-wing stereotypes:
At a time when Islam is under siege from Muslim extremists and extremists from the Far Right in Europe and America, the judiciaries of Sudan and Saudi Arabia have managed to reinforce the vilification of Islam...
Fortunately, the professors offer an easy solution. Instead of writing about torturing women, we should all torture our prose style into equivalist mush suggesting Islam is no different from the Buddhists or Episcopalians or any other religion in having its overheated elements:
All our futures depend upon an ability to agree upon a global ethic, based upon mutual understanding and respect, that transcends our religious and cultural differences. Whatever our differences, there can never be an acceptable excuse for injustice and intolerance in the name of our religions.
Who are these guys? As the sign-off explains:
“On Faith” panelist John L. Esposito is professor of religion, international affairs and Islamic studies at Georgetown University. He also is founding director of the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service.
John O. Voll is professor of Islamic history and associate director of the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding
Ah. That I understand
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTdiY2IyMTE4ZDM5MmM3MzQxYWI2Y2MyODNlMjcyNzU=
I'm not fearful of them(an islamophobe), I despise them and think they are 3rd world f#cks who should mind there manners.
The reason the islamic world is the third world is their culture.
There is no peace without VICTORY
The limp wristed Liberals need to buck up or convert to Islam, then we know who our enemies are.
Taking a stand [Mark Steyn
The Washington Post's "On Faith" section offers some hilariously convoluted prose by Professors John L Esposito and John O Voll on the current scene. Opening sentence:
In a world in which Islamophobes blur the distinction between the barbaric acts of Muslim extremists and terrorists and the religion of Islam, two recent legal decisions in Sudan and Saudi Arabia will reinforce accusations that Islam is an intolerant religion.
As John Hinderaker at Power Line points out, that's "one of those sentences where the second clause takes away what the first clause asserted". The second sentence is almost as good:
After years of civil war and bloodshed and having failed to effectively respond to what some describe as genocide in Darfur, Sudan’s government and judiciary have captured global attention with...
"Having failed to effectively respond to what some describe as..." Think we've got enough weaselly qualifying speed-bumps in there, lads? Shouldn't it be "Having been accused by some of failing to respond as effectively as has been argued they might have done to what some might describe as genocide if they weren't on top of all the nuances as we are..."?
Messrs Esposito and Voll now get down to the meat of their piece: Their main problem with tossing British schoolteachers in the slammer over teddy-bear names and giving 19-year old Saudi women 200 lashes and six months in jail for the crime of getting gang-raped isn't that blameless grade-school teachers are getting imprisoned and rape victims are getting lashed, but that such stories play into the hands of "right-wing extremists" who paint stereotypical portraits of Islam as intolerant. And that's a bad thing - not the lashing and jailing, but the right-wing stereotypes:
At a time when Islam is under siege from Muslim extremists and extremists from the Far Right in Europe and America, the judiciaries of Sudan and Saudi Arabia have managed to reinforce the vilification of Islam...
Fortunately, the professors offer an easy solution. Instead of writing about torturing women, we should all torture our prose style into equivalist mush suggesting Islam is no different from the Buddhists or Episcopalians or any other religion in having its overheated elements:
All our futures depend upon an ability to agree upon a global ethic, based upon mutual understanding and respect, that transcends our religious and cultural differences. Whatever our differences, there can never be an acceptable excuse for injustice and intolerance in the name of our religions.
Who are these guys? As the sign-off explains:
“On Faith” panelist John L. Esposito is professor of religion, international affairs and Islamic studies at Georgetown University. He also is founding director of the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service.
John O. Voll is professor of Islamic history and associate director of the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding
Ah. That I understand
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTdiY2IyMTE4ZDM5MmM3MzQxYWI2Y2MyODNlMjcyNzU=
Sunday, November 4, 2007
I know let's deport them
Let's deport both groups and let them sort it out back where they came from. Not that they are assimilated Norsk'ers or anything
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2007/11/turks-vs-kurds-in-oslo.html#readfurther
Turks vs. Kurds in Oslo
by Baron Bodissey
The conflict on the border between Iraq and Turkey is not confined to Anatolia and Mesopotamia. According to Aftenposten, violence has broken out between Turks and Kurds in Oslo and other Norwegian cities.I can’t find any stories about this in English, but Tundra Tabloids (which tipped me to the story) has a report on it, and the blog Islam in Europe has posted a digest of the news stories, which is reproduced below:
A brutal fight broke out when counter-demonstrators met up with a legal protest held by the Norwegian Turkey-Committee in Oslo, Saturday afternoon. Twenty-thirty counter-demonstrators suddenly showed up. Some of them had clubs with them, said Finn Belle of the Oslo police. The counter-demonstrators held flags that symbolize Kurdish independence.One man in the demonstration process was attacked by two counter-demonstrators. He was hit in the head by two people with clubs, such that one of the clubs broke.
According to an Aftenposten photographer the men attacked for more than 10 seconds before police managed to separate them from each other.Belle says that an ambulance was summoned but that he does not know how seriously injured the man was.- - - - - - - - -
One of the counter-demonstrators was caught by plain-clothed policemen, while the other disappeared in the crowd. The Norwegian Turkey-Committee demonstrated against PKK terrorists. About 450 people had gotten permission from a police to march in Oslo. The mood was irritable and tense. Some of the Turks were on their way to attack the counter-demonstrators but were held back by police and by fellow demonstrators.Kurds and Turks in Norway demonstrated Saturday in more cities around the country, reports NTB. In Bodø, 250 Kurds demonstrated peacefully, reports Avisa Nordland. They held an appeal in the city square against Turkey’s plans to attack in Kurdish areas in North-Iraq. In Trondheim about 50 people demonstrated against Turkey’s presence in Kurdish areas.The demonstrations were related to Iraq giving permission to Turkey to strike against PKK guerrillas based in Northern Iraq.
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2007/11/turks-vs-kurds-in-oslo.html#readfurther
Turks vs. Kurds in Oslo
by Baron Bodissey
The conflict on the border between Iraq and Turkey is not confined to Anatolia and Mesopotamia. According to Aftenposten, violence has broken out between Turks and Kurds in Oslo and other Norwegian cities.I can’t find any stories about this in English, but Tundra Tabloids (which tipped me to the story) has a report on it, and the blog Islam in Europe has posted a digest of the news stories, which is reproduced below:
A brutal fight broke out when counter-demonstrators met up with a legal protest held by the Norwegian Turkey-Committee in Oslo, Saturday afternoon. Twenty-thirty counter-demonstrators suddenly showed up. Some of them had clubs with them, said Finn Belle of the Oslo police. The counter-demonstrators held flags that symbolize Kurdish independence.One man in the demonstration process was attacked by two counter-demonstrators. He was hit in the head by two people with clubs, such that one of the clubs broke.
According to an Aftenposten photographer the men attacked for more than 10 seconds before police managed to separate them from each other.Belle says that an ambulance was summoned but that he does not know how seriously injured the man was.- - - - - - - - -
One of the counter-demonstrators was caught by plain-clothed policemen, while the other disappeared in the crowd. The Norwegian Turkey-Committee demonstrated against PKK terrorists. About 450 people had gotten permission from a police to march in Oslo. The mood was irritable and tense. Some of the Turks were on their way to attack the counter-demonstrators but were held back by police and by fellow demonstrators.Kurds and Turks in Norway demonstrated Saturday in more cities around the country, reports NTB. In Bodø, 250 Kurds demonstrated peacefully, reports Avisa Nordland. They held an appeal in the city square against Turkey’s plans to attack in Kurdish areas in North-Iraq. In Trondheim about 50 people demonstrated against Turkey’s presence in Kurdish areas.The demonstrations were related to Iraq giving permission to Turkey to strike against PKK guerrillas based in Northern Iraq.
Eight 9-11 hijackers were registered to vote
Absolutely amazing
http://media.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YmFjYTE3NGJiNTE1M2FlMTA2NzUyNDA5NDIyOGRlOTE=
Eight 9-11 hijackers were registered to vote [Tom Gross
This information has been out there for some time, but mostly right-of-center journalists such as Jeff Jacoby at the Boston Globe and John Fund at the Wall Street Journal have mentioned it.
There has been remarkably little reference to it in the so-called mainstream media.
“Now, in the context of the current debate over the granting of driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, will there be renewed focus on this chilling reality?” asks Mark Finkelstein of NewsBusters.org.
http://media.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YmFjYTE3NGJiNTE1M2FlMTA2NzUyNDA5NDIyOGRlOTE=
Eight 9-11 hijackers were registered to vote [Tom Gross
This information has been out there for some time, but mostly right-of-center journalists such as Jeff Jacoby at the Boston Globe and John Fund at the Wall Street Journal have mentioned it.
There has been remarkably little reference to it in the so-called mainstream media.
“Now, in the context of the current debate over the granting of driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, will there be renewed focus on this chilling reality?” asks Mark Finkelstein of NewsBusters.org.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Monday, October 22, 2007
Damn Dirty Hajji
Better siad than I could have.
http://phibetacons.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTI2ZDcxNTJhMGNmMTJhNzkzOThiM2NlYjgwMDRjNmQ=
Foot Washing Baths Coming to NYU [Carol Iannone
A couple of weeks ago, the New York Post reported that the foot washing basins are coming to New York University.The Muslims also have to wash their arms, ears, nostrils, faces, necks, and heads, so they may still need the sinks.
Here is a description of the washing before prayer from an Islamic website. (I've lost the link but there are numerous websites giving these instructions.) This is done five times a day every day:
— Before Wudu you make your intention. Then start with washing the hands as far as the wrists. You perform this 3 times.
— Rinse out the mouth with water using the right hand. You perform this 3 times.
— Wash the nostrils by sniffing up water and blowing it out. You perform this 3 times.
— Wash the face 3 times .
— Wash each arm up to the elbow. You perform this 3 times.
— Wipe or rub the head with the inside of the fingers. You perform this once.
— Clean the inside of the ears with the index fingers and the back of the ears with the thumbs. You perform this once.
— Wipe the back of the neck. You perform this once.
— Wash the feet up to the ankles. You perform this 3 timesThe website also says that there are special rules for situations where water is not readily available, but the example offered is the desert.
CAIR has published guides for employers, schools, prisons, hospitals, etc., on the special needs of Muslims that they say must be accommodated in these places. These pamphlets appear to be the source for a lot of what we're hearing of Muslim demands. For example, they insist that no Muslim should be expected to serve or sell alcohol. They do not say that Muslims should avoid taking jobs where alcohol is part of the work. On the washing business, they recommend using the sinks in restrooms for the ritual washing. In hospitals and nursing homes, aides should help Muslims who cannot perform the ritual washing by themselves. Students in public schools should be allowed to perform the ablutions and the prayers. In schools or the workplace, Muslims performing the prayers cannot be approached for any reason but an emergency and no one may walk in front of them. In public schools, they want qualified Islamic experts to be brought into the classrooms to explain Islam, and they call it an error to say that Allah is the Muslim God. He must be seen as the same God as of Judaism and Christianity, even though Islam calls Abraham a Muslim and says he nearly sacrificed Ishmael not Isaac, and the Muslim "Jesus" cannot be called the Son of God, did not die on the cross, and was not resurrected, all of which completely negates the entire Christian faith. One wonders how this can be going on in public schools when the Supreme Court has ruled that even voluntary prayer is disallowed, when we have people mounting lawsuits to take "under God" out of the pledge and going into paroxysms of protest at the merest hint of God or Christianity in the public sphere. So much fear is focused on Muslims being violent that this kind of thing is being overlooked. People are grateful that they're just washing their feet instead of becoming suicide bombers. But it is proof that Muslims are not assimilating, that they expect America to accommodate them, and not vice versa, and that it is not just jihad but everyday ordinary Muslim practices that will present problems to America. One recalls how the supporters of mass immigration always insist that new immigrants are assimilating just as immigrants did in the past, and how they call people racists, nativists, and xeonophobes for the mildest demurral. But it is obvious from reading the guides that Muslims are counting on their growing numbers to make more and more demands on society while the rest of us sputter in protest or sheepishly go along. They are not even willing to modify or adapt an intrusive practice that is inconsiderate and discourteous to the majority of people with whom they work and study who must use the resrooms for ordinary purposes. As for the idea of installing special foot basins, it is obviously an unwarranted public accommodation of religion, but because the Muslims' washing their feet in the sinks is so repellant (leading to "wet floors, dirty conditions," and "uncomfortable moments"), and because political correctness and the principle of non-discrimination has gone so far, and because of the practiced nonchalance of today in which everything is supposed to be accepted, no one protests. Not even those who would grow hot with rage at any public display of Christianity.
The CAIR guides also make plentiful use of the concept of "diversity." And Islamic spokesmen have learned to use the language of rights, pluralism, inclusiveness, in their debased multiculturalist meanings, to further their encroachments, such as demanding halal foods in public school lunchrooms. A spokesman on televison seemed to think that this is what America owes Muslims, that this is the promise of inclusiveness, tolerance, pluralism, etc., that there should be this much accommodation of Muslim demands. And of course no one is telling him otherwise. No one is telling him that if they want this level of religious observance, America allows them to create their own religious schools with their own money, not to renovate the public scools to fit their customs. Likewise, when it comes to serving or selling alcohol, no one is telling them that American freedom and prosperity means that Muslims do not have to take jobs that require dealing with alcohol. But it's not just the Left to blame for this state of affairs. The Right with its claims of America as a "universal nation" is also to blame. Theodore Dalrymple writes about how Scotland and Italy are succumbing to sharia laws. Dalrymple lives in Europe so he doesn't see that it is also happening here, despite all the happy talk about Muslims in America assimilating better than in Europe. I believe that Muslims would adapt if they met any resistance, but they see all this diffidence and fatuous servility toward them and so their only thought is to proceed with their sense of entitlement and make more demands. (A Muslim student at NYU did feel uncomfortable, which could be the basis for some kind of change in behavior: "Having other students 'just walking in and seeing us have our feet in the sink - it's awkward,' she added.") The president has unfortunately led the way in this, albeit out of good intentions. He has gone so far into the "universalism" that he has come to believe that America stands for nothing but openness and inclusiveness, has no culture whatsoever, and exists only to accommodate every group that deigns to gift us with their presence in full multicultural fashion. Thus his annual White House iftar dinner celebrating Ramadan. According to one article: "President and Mrs. Bush host an iftar dinner every year because they want people around the world to know how much they respect Islam and the many Muslims living in the U.S. who are free to worship as they want, and are an integral part of our society," said Gordon Johndroe, spokesman for the White House National Security Council. Actually it sends the opposite message. Not that they are part of us, but that they are separate and require separate homage to their religion at the White House. Also, the dinner is meant to prove that Bush is not an enemy of Islam, but those who believe that are not going to be put off by the annual dinner. The dinner just encourages them to expect more servility and to look for other ways in which Muslims are not being specifically served or accommodated. It is not really called for that an American president host White House dinners in honor of Islam in order to show Muslims that he respects them. The American Constitution respects them and he is supposed to uphold the Constitution. Actually, believe it or not, time was when we would expect the groups to show that they respect America, not that our president would have to make a display of showing his respect toward them. And of course the WH makes no mention of the fact that Muslims' being "free to worship as they want" is presenting a burden to others and is producing behavior that is entirely out of keeping with American standards of public comportment. Furthermore, the president has accepted the Muslim view of God. Cal Thomas expresses dismay that Bush has professed on Al Arabiya television that the Muslim God is the same as the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jesus that we know from the Bible. Bush does this explicitly in the name of "universality," indicating that becoming universal means eventually losing what is most dear.
10/18 11:38 AM
http://phibetacons.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTI2ZDcxNTJhMGNmMTJhNzkzOThiM2NlYjgwMDRjNmQ=
Foot Washing Baths Coming to NYU [Carol Iannone
A couple of weeks ago, the New York Post reported that the foot washing basins are coming to New York University.The Muslims also have to wash their arms, ears, nostrils, faces, necks, and heads, so they may still need the sinks.
Here is a description of the washing before prayer from an Islamic website. (I've lost the link but there are numerous websites giving these instructions.) This is done five times a day every day:
— Before Wudu you make your intention. Then start with washing the hands as far as the wrists. You perform this 3 times.
— Rinse out the mouth with water using the right hand. You perform this 3 times.
— Wash the nostrils by sniffing up water and blowing it out. You perform this 3 times.
— Wash the face 3 times .
— Wash each arm up to the elbow. You perform this 3 times.
— Wipe or rub the head with the inside of the fingers. You perform this once.
— Clean the inside of the ears with the index fingers and the back of the ears with the thumbs. You perform this once.
— Wipe the back of the neck. You perform this once.
— Wash the feet up to the ankles. You perform this 3 timesThe website also says that there are special rules for situations where water is not readily available, but the example offered is the desert.
CAIR has published guides for employers, schools, prisons, hospitals, etc., on the special needs of Muslims that they say must be accommodated in these places. These pamphlets appear to be the source for a lot of what we're hearing of Muslim demands. For example, they insist that no Muslim should be expected to serve or sell alcohol. They do not say that Muslims should avoid taking jobs where alcohol is part of the work. On the washing business, they recommend using the sinks in restrooms for the ritual washing. In hospitals and nursing homes, aides should help Muslims who cannot perform the ritual washing by themselves. Students in public schools should be allowed to perform the ablutions and the prayers. In schools or the workplace, Muslims performing the prayers cannot be approached for any reason but an emergency and no one may walk in front of them. In public schools, they want qualified Islamic experts to be brought into the classrooms to explain Islam, and they call it an error to say that Allah is the Muslim God. He must be seen as the same God as of Judaism and Christianity, even though Islam calls Abraham a Muslim and says he nearly sacrificed Ishmael not Isaac, and the Muslim "Jesus" cannot be called the Son of God, did not die on the cross, and was not resurrected, all of which completely negates the entire Christian faith. One wonders how this can be going on in public schools when the Supreme Court has ruled that even voluntary prayer is disallowed, when we have people mounting lawsuits to take "under God" out of the pledge and going into paroxysms of protest at the merest hint of God or Christianity in the public sphere. So much fear is focused on Muslims being violent that this kind of thing is being overlooked. People are grateful that they're just washing their feet instead of becoming suicide bombers. But it is proof that Muslims are not assimilating, that they expect America to accommodate them, and not vice versa, and that it is not just jihad but everyday ordinary Muslim practices that will present problems to America. One recalls how the supporters of mass immigration always insist that new immigrants are assimilating just as immigrants did in the past, and how they call people racists, nativists, and xeonophobes for the mildest demurral. But it is obvious from reading the guides that Muslims are counting on their growing numbers to make more and more demands on society while the rest of us sputter in protest or sheepishly go along. They are not even willing to modify or adapt an intrusive practice that is inconsiderate and discourteous to the majority of people with whom they work and study who must use the resrooms for ordinary purposes. As for the idea of installing special foot basins, it is obviously an unwarranted public accommodation of religion, but because the Muslims' washing their feet in the sinks is so repellant (leading to "wet floors, dirty conditions," and "uncomfortable moments"), and because political correctness and the principle of non-discrimination has gone so far, and because of the practiced nonchalance of today in which everything is supposed to be accepted, no one protests. Not even those who would grow hot with rage at any public display of Christianity.
The CAIR guides also make plentiful use of the concept of "diversity." And Islamic spokesmen have learned to use the language of rights, pluralism, inclusiveness, in their debased multiculturalist meanings, to further their encroachments, such as demanding halal foods in public school lunchrooms. A spokesman on televison seemed to think that this is what America owes Muslims, that this is the promise of inclusiveness, tolerance, pluralism, etc., that there should be this much accommodation of Muslim demands. And of course no one is telling him otherwise. No one is telling him that if they want this level of religious observance, America allows them to create their own religious schools with their own money, not to renovate the public scools to fit their customs. Likewise, when it comes to serving or selling alcohol, no one is telling them that American freedom and prosperity means that Muslims do not have to take jobs that require dealing with alcohol. But it's not just the Left to blame for this state of affairs. The Right with its claims of America as a "universal nation" is also to blame. Theodore Dalrymple writes about how Scotland and Italy are succumbing to sharia laws. Dalrymple lives in Europe so he doesn't see that it is also happening here, despite all the happy talk about Muslims in America assimilating better than in Europe. I believe that Muslims would adapt if they met any resistance, but they see all this diffidence and fatuous servility toward them and so their only thought is to proceed with their sense of entitlement and make more demands. (A Muslim student at NYU did feel uncomfortable, which could be the basis for some kind of change in behavior: "Having other students 'just walking in and seeing us have our feet in the sink - it's awkward,' she added.") The president has unfortunately led the way in this, albeit out of good intentions. He has gone so far into the "universalism" that he has come to believe that America stands for nothing but openness and inclusiveness, has no culture whatsoever, and exists only to accommodate every group that deigns to gift us with their presence in full multicultural fashion. Thus his annual White House iftar dinner celebrating Ramadan. According to one article: "President and Mrs. Bush host an iftar dinner every year because they want people around the world to know how much they respect Islam and the many Muslims living in the U.S. who are free to worship as they want, and are an integral part of our society," said Gordon Johndroe, spokesman for the White House National Security Council. Actually it sends the opposite message. Not that they are part of us, but that they are separate and require separate homage to their religion at the White House. Also, the dinner is meant to prove that Bush is not an enemy of Islam, but those who believe that are not going to be put off by the annual dinner. The dinner just encourages them to expect more servility and to look for other ways in which Muslims are not being specifically served or accommodated. It is not really called for that an American president host White House dinners in honor of Islam in order to show Muslims that he respects them. The American Constitution respects them and he is supposed to uphold the Constitution. Actually, believe it or not, time was when we would expect the groups to show that they respect America, not that our president would have to make a display of showing his respect toward them. And of course the WH makes no mention of the fact that Muslims' being "free to worship as they want" is presenting a burden to others and is producing behavior that is entirely out of keeping with American standards of public comportment. Furthermore, the president has accepted the Muslim view of God. Cal Thomas expresses dismay that Bush has professed on Al Arabiya television that the Muslim God is the same as the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jesus that we know from the Bible. Bush does this explicitly in the name of "universality," indicating that becoming universal means eventually losing what is most dear.
10/18 11:38 AM
Saturday, October 20, 2007
A no derr moment on guns
No derr. This was also the mement I decised that there is some hedging of the facts by big media
http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071020/COMMENTARY/110200004
'Gun-free' school zones?
Larry ElderOctober 20, 2007
This time, it was Cleveland. A 14-year-old suspended high school student entered Cleveland's Success Tech Academy, a gun in each hand, and opened fire, wounding four. Later, we learn the shooter's past included violent confrontations, mental problems and at least one previous suspension. A month earlier, he told a friend he intended to shoot up the school. But no one apparently took his behavior seriously enough to notify authorities.
Meanwhile, a high school teacher in Oregon, with a permit to carry a concealed weapon plus training, sought permission to carry her firearm to school. In fear of her former husband, against whom she filed and received two restraining orders, she wanted the ability to protect herself if he showed up. Furthermore, she argued that even without the fear of her ex-husband, the Second Amendment and Oregon state law allow her to carry her firearm to work. Her school district, however, prevents her from carrying a firearm to school.
This raises a question. Do shooters consider schools "gun-free zones"? Do they consider it unlikely that any authority figure — whether teachers or, in some cases, security guards — poses an armed threat? But in some school shooting cases, guns helped to end shooting sprees and minimize loss of life and injury.
In Edinboro, Pa., a 14-year-old middle-school student opened fire at a school graduation dance held at a local restaurant. The shooter killed one teacher and wounded two students and another teacher. The armed teenager was apprehended by the restaurant owner, who grabbed his own shotgun from his office. Staring into the shotgun, the teen dropped his gun and surrendered.
In Pearl, Miss., a 16-year-old sophomore entered Pearl High with a hunting rifle under his overcoat. He opened fire, killing two students and wounding seven. Assistant Principal Joel Myrick, ran to his truck and retrieved the .45 automatic he kept there. Running back, he spotted the shooter in the parking lot. Ordering the teen to stop, the vice principal put his gun to the shooter's neck and held him until police arrived.
At Appalachian Law School, in Grundy, Va., a disgruntled student on the verge of his second suspension entered a school building and shot and killed the dean and a professor. He then shot four students, killing one. Hearing the shots, two students, Michael Gross and Tracy Bridges, ran to their cars to retrieve their guns. With guns aimed at the shooter, Mr. Bridges ordered him to drop his weapon. When the shooter turned and saw Mr. Bridges' gun, he laid down his weapon and put his hands in the air. (My pro-Second Amendment documentary, "Michael and Me," goes into detail about this incident, as well as others.)
Professor and economist John Lott checked 280 separate news stories in the week after the Appalachian Law School shooting, and only found four that mentioned the students who stopped the shooter had guns. The Washington Post, for example, said the students "helped subdue" the killer. Newsday wrote the shooter was "restrained by students." The Richmond (Va.) Times-Dispatch, however, wrote that the shooter "was wrestled to the ground by fellow students, one of whom aimed his own revolver at [the killer]." Four months later, the Times-Dispatch detailed the students' actions, including the second student's use of a gun.
What do felons think about an armed citizenry? A survey of convicted felons by the National Institute of Justice found 74 percent of the felons agreed that, "One reason burglars avoid houses when people are home is that they fear being shot during the crime." The survey also asked these felons whether they had abandoned at least one crime because they feared the intended victim might be armed. Thirty-nine percent said they abandoned at least one crime; 8 percent had abandoned such a crime "many" times; 34 percent admitted being "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"; and nearly 70 percent knew a "colleague" who had abandoned a crime or been scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by a victim packing heat.
A survey of 23,113 police chiefs and sheriffs across the country found 62 percent of agreed that "a national concealed handgun permit would reduce rates of violent crime." About 80 percent of rank-and-file police officers, according to polls, support the right of trained citizens to carry concealed weapons.
Israel gets it. Since the 1970s, on school campuses in Israel, policy requires teachers and parent aides to arm themselves with semi-automatic weapons. The result? School shootings have plummeted to zero.
As for Cleveland, would allowing authority figures to arm themselves have reduced casualties, or perhaps even deterred the shooter in the first place? No one can say for sure. But no doubt at least some Cleveland parents now believe the benefits of armed campus adults outweigh the costs.
Larry Elder is a nationally syndicated columnist, radio talk-show host and author.
http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071020/COMMENTARY/110200004
'Gun-free' school zones?
Larry ElderOctober 20, 2007
This time, it was Cleveland. A 14-year-old suspended high school student entered Cleveland's Success Tech Academy, a gun in each hand, and opened fire, wounding four. Later, we learn the shooter's past included violent confrontations, mental problems and at least one previous suspension. A month earlier, he told a friend he intended to shoot up the school. But no one apparently took his behavior seriously enough to notify authorities.
Meanwhile, a high school teacher in Oregon, with a permit to carry a concealed weapon plus training, sought permission to carry her firearm to school. In fear of her former husband, against whom she filed and received two restraining orders, she wanted the ability to protect herself if he showed up. Furthermore, she argued that even without the fear of her ex-husband, the Second Amendment and Oregon state law allow her to carry her firearm to work. Her school district, however, prevents her from carrying a firearm to school.
This raises a question. Do shooters consider schools "gun-free zones"? Do they consider it unlikely that any authority figure — whether teachers or, in some cases, security guards — poses an armed threat? But in some school shooting cases, guns helped to end shooting sprees and minimize loss of life and injury.
In Edinboro, Pa., a 14-year-old middle-school student opened fire at a school graduation dance held at a local restaurant. The shooter killed one teacher and wounded two students and another teacher. The armed teenager was apprehended by the restaurant owner, who grabbed his own shotgun from his office. Staring into the shotgun, the teen dropped his gun and surrendered.
In Pearl, Miss., a 16-year-old sophomore entered Pearl High with a hunting rifle under his overcoat. He opened fire, killing two students and wounding seven. Assistant Principal Joel Myrick, ran to his truck and retrieved the .45 automatic he kept there. Running back, he spotted the shooter in the parking lot. Ordering the teen to stop, the vice principal put his gun to the shooter's neck and held him until police arrived.
At Appalachian Law School, in Grundy, Va., a disgruntled student on the verge of his second suspension entered a school building and shot and killed the dean and a professor. He then shot four students, killing one. Hearing the shots, two students, Michael Gross and Tracy Bridges, ran to their cars to retrieve their guns. With guns aimed at the shooter, Mr. Bridges ordered him to drop his weapon. When the shooter turned and saw Mr. Bridges' gun, he laid down his weapon and put his hands in the air. (My pro-Second Amendment documentary, "Michael and Me," goes into detail about this incident, as well as others.)
Professor and economist John Lott checked 280 separate news stories in the week after the Appalachian Law School shooting, and only found four that mentioned the students who stopped the shooter had guns. The Washington Post, for example, said the students "helped subdue" the killer. Newsday wrote the shooter was "restrained by students." The Richmond (Va.) Times-Dispatch, however, wrote that the shooter "was wrestled to the ground by fellow students, one of whom aimed his own revolver at [the killer]." Four months later, the Times-Dispatch detailed the students' actions, including the second student's use of a gun.
What do felons think about an armed citizenry? A survey of convicted felons by the National Institute of Justice found 74 percent of the felons agreed that, "One reason burglars avoid houses when people are home is that they fear being shot during the crime." The survey also asked these felons whether they had abandoned at least one crime because they feared the intended victim might be armed. Thirty-nine percent said they abandoned at least one crime; 8 percent had abandoned such a crime "many" times; 34 percent admitted being "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"; and nearly 70 percent knew a "colleague" who had abandoned a crime or been scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by a victim packing heat.
A survey of 23,113 police chiefs and sheriffs across the country found 62 percent of agreed that "a national concealed handgun permit would reduce rates of violent crime." About 80 percent of rank-and-file police officers, according to polls, support the right of trained citizens to carry concealed weapons.
Israel gets it. Since the 1970s, on school campuses in Israel, policy requires teachers and parent aides to arm themselves with semi-automatic weapons. The result? School shootings have plummeted to zero.
As for Cleveland, would allowing authority figures to arm themselves have reduced casualties, or perhaps even deterred the shooter in the first place? No one can say for sure. But no doubt at least some Cleveland parents now believe the benefits of armed campus adults outweigh the costs.
Larry Elder is a nationally syndicated columnist, radio talk-show host and author.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
carry a gun
Thought I'd post some of what I've learned about always being armed.
It sucks having to be armed all the time, no chance to relax.
HINT, you have to dress around the gun. Deal with it. Most folks have to make some minor wardrobe changes, others have a bigger problem.
Inside the waist band holsters conceal better but require a 1 inch bigger waisted pants. Are you willing to buy all new pants. I did.
Both skinny and fat people have challenges, medium has some advantages.
Wear the gun, you will get used to it and no one has xray vision that can spot it. You, by your actions will give it away. So be cool. Don't always be checking/touching it, etc.....
Be willing to use it, Perps will evaluate if you will shoot. Will you??
Women bitch about concealment, but they have potentially the easiest time. They just want to wear things not conducive to concealed carry. Life is about choices.
Practice.
Shoot IDPA.
It sucks having to be armed all the time, no chance to relax.
HINT, you have to dress around the gun. Deal with it. Most folks have to make some minor wardrobe changes, others have a bigger problem.
Inside the waist band holsters conceal better but require a 1 inch bigger waisted pants. Are you willing to buy all new pants. I did.
Both skinny and fat people have challenges, medium has some advantages.
Wear the gun, you will get used to it and no one has xray vision that can spot it. You, by your actions will give it away. So be cool. Don't always be checking/touching it, etc.....
Be willing to use it, Perps will evaluate if you will shoot. Will you??
Women bitch about concealment, but they have potentially the easiest time. They just want to wear things not conducive to concealed carry. Life is about choices.
Practice.
Shoot IDPA.
Saturday, October 13, 2007
Children and retirement
The Euro's now have a state sponsored retirement program, there by eliminating the need for Euro's to have children.
This is blatantly false, most social retirement programs are almost 'pay as you go' therefore needing taxpayers to fund the seniors retirements. Well who are taxpayers?? yup, the seniors own children. The replacing European children's numbers with 3rd world(mostly islamic) immigrants does not seem to be working out so well. The immigrants tend to take out more $ in social benefits than the taxes they are paying.
This is blatantly false, most social retirement programs are almost 'pay as you go' therefore needing taxpayers to fund the seniors retirements. Well who are taxpayers?? yup, the seniors own children. The replacing European children's numbers with 3rd world(mostly islamic) immigrants does not seem to be working out so well. The immigrants tend to take out more $ in social benefits than the taxes they are paying.
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Guns in schools in Norway
Worth a post
Being the gun guy I am. no school shootings fo far gee, I wonder why?
http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article1948234.ece
Armed for first day of schoolHundreds of thousands of students had their first day of school on Monday. Some of them had to learn to carry guns and be prepared to shoot -- polar bears.
Helga Therese Tilley Tajet (from left) Eliza Harris and Helene Birkelund Erlandsen started their school year with a course on weapon use and survival in the Arctic.
PHOTO: OLE MAGNUS RAPP
Reindeer can also be encountered on Svalbard, like here at the Norwegian Polar Institute's research station in Ny-Ålesund, which got a dusting of new snow over the weekend.
Students on the Arctic archipelago of Svalbard aren't allowed to leave their village without a shotgun and ammunition. That's because hungry polar bears can be behind every swing on the island.
Although no one wants to shoot a polar bear, and they're indeed protected by national law, the huge white animals can quickly outrun a human. And humans don't have a chance if confronted by an aggressive bear.
So everyone on Svalbard needs to be able to defend him- or herself, and students undergo weapons training every year.
"We feel more secure and look forward to learn a lot more," said Helga Therese Tilley Tajet of Moelv. She's studying meteorology at the University of Oslo and will concentrate on the Arctic marine climate for the next six months at the university on Svalbard, UNIS.
The students are also trained in Arctic survival techniques in addition to how to use a weapon. "It's absolutely necessary," said UNIS director Gunnar Sand. Much of the course work involved is carried out in the field, and the students also go trekking in their free time.
The school lends out weapons, ammunition, tents, sleeping bags, survival suits, snow scooters and other equipment that's essential in the Arctic landscape.
"Polar bears are one thing," Sand noted. "Even more dangerous is the extreme cold, and the winds. There also are dangerous glaciers, steep cliffs, and it's a long way between settlements."
Being the gun guy I am. no school shootings fo far gee, I wonder why?
http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article1948234.ece
Armed for first day of schoolHundreds of thousands of students had their first day of school on Monday. Some of them had to learn to carry guns and be prepared to shoot -- polar bears.
Helga Therese Tilley Tajet (from left) Eliza Harris and Helene Birkelund Erlandsen started their school year with a course on weapon use and survival in the Arctic.
PHOTO: OLE MAGNUS RAPP
Reindeer can also be encountered on Svalbard, like here at the Norwegian Polar Institute's research station in Ny-Ålesund, which got a dusting of new snow over the weekend.
Students on the Arctic archipelago of Svalbard aren't allowed to leave their village without a shotgun and ammunition. That's because hungry polar bears can be behind every swing on the island.
Although no one wants to shoot a polar bear, and they're indeed protected by national law, the huge white animals can quickly outrun a human. And humans don't have a chance if confronted by an aggressive bear.
So everyone on Svalbard needs to be able to defend him- or herself, and students undergo weapons training every year.
"We feel more secure and look forward to learn a lot more," said Helga Therese Tilley Tajet of Moelv. She's studying meteorology at the University of Oslo and will concentrate on the Arctic marine climate for the next six months at the university on Svalbard, UNIS.
The students are also trained in Arctic survival techniques in addition to how to use a weapon. "It's absolutely necessary," said UNIS director Gunnar Sand. Much of the course work involved is carried out in the field, and the students also go trekking in their free time.
The school lends out weapons, ammunition, tents, sleeping bags, survival suits, snow scooters and other equipment that's essential in the Arctic landscape.
"Polar bears are one thing," Sand noted. "Even more dangerous is the extreme cold, and the winds. There also are dangerous glaciers, steep cliffs, and it's a long way between settlements."
B-52
Recently came accross some info about the B-52 bomber. Pretty impressive when looked at from 55 years of service
Monday, October 1, 2007
Hajii power play
Check this.
Can I stop serving fat folks 'cuse I'm fit? How about if I'm a cowboy and refuse to touch vegetables??
How about I go 17th century and stop interacting with folks who aren't Prod'(istants). Maybe pull a Lutheran or Catholic card and not ring up the cash register for those pig breathed moslems??
They try to get away with it because they know they can!
Muslim checkout staff get an alcohol opt-out clause [Tom Gross]
From The Sunday Times (of London):
MUSLIM supermarket checkout staff [in Britain] who refuse to sell alcohol are being allowed to opt out of handling customers’ bottles and cans of drink.
Islamic workers at Sainsbury’s [one of the UK’s biggest supermarket chains] who object to alcohol on religious grounds are told to raise their hands when encountering any drink at their till so that a colleague can temporarily take their place or scan items for them.
Other staff have refused to work stacking shelves with wine, beer and spirits and have been found alternative roles in the company.
As a Times reader wrote: “Are vegetarian staff at Sainsbury permitted to refuse to sell meat? Are teetotalers also allowed to refuse to sell alcohol?”
Can I stop serving fat folks 'cuse I'm fit? How about if I'm a cowboy and refuse to touch vegetables??
How about I go 17th century and stop interacting with folks who aren't Prod'(istants). Maybe pull a Lutheran or Catholic card and not ring up the cash register for those pig breathed moslems??
They try to get away with it because they know they can!
Muslim checkout staff get an alcohol opt-out clause [Tom Gross]
From The Sunday Times (of London):
MUSLIM supermarket checkout staff [in Britain] who refuse to sell alcohol are being allowed to opt out of handling customers’ bottles and cans of drink.
Islamic workers at Sainsbury’s [one of the UK’s biggest supermarket chains] who object to alcohol on religious grounds are told to raise their hands when encountering any drink at their till so that a colleague can temporarily take their place or scan items for them.
Other staff have refused to work stacking shelves with wine, beer and spirits and have been found alternative roles in the company.
As a Times reader wrote: “Are vegetarian staff at Sainsbury permitted to refuse to sell meat? Are teetotalers also allowed to refuse to sell alcohol?”
Sticks and Stones Bitch!?
YO! British fob f&ckers.
So I grew up with "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me"
Apparently hitting someone in the head with a pipe is the same as "dialog"
What kind of 35 year old smacks a 10 y.o.kid with a pipe over that??
Britain=liberalism(modern) gone mad.
england(non capitalised, when they get their nads back maybe I'll capitalize the E) ruled the world, now they get hit in the face by immigrants
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=483974&in_page_id=1770
Boy 'who was attacked' by Slovakian woman may face racism chargeBy NEIL SEARS - More by this author » Last updated at 22:24pm on 26th September 2007
Jake Stedman: Claims he was beaten by immigrant with a pipe
A boy of ten who claims to have been attacked by a Slovakian woman with an iron bar could be charged with inciting racial hatred, it emerged last night.
Jake Stedman admitted that the woman hit him after he threw a berry at her and told her to 'go back to her own country'.
As a result, the boy - who was left with two black eyes - could become the youngest person in the country ever to be charged with the offence.
A police source said: "There have been allegations that he used racist language and it is necessary for us to investigate the claims."
The Slovakian woman involved, 35, was arrested and could face assault charges.
Jake, a white English pupil, attends Luton Junior School in Chatham, Kent. The school is so riven by racial tension after an influx of Slovakian and other eastern-European children that four police patrol the gates every day.
On Saturday, one week after the alleged assault, two teenage girls were arrested for throwing stones at and abusing a Slovakian man just yards from the school.
Locals believe it may have been a revenge attack.
Police said there had been 13 race-related incidents in the area in six months.
One resident, English mother Candice Smith, 30, claimed her son William had twice been chased and threatened by Slovakian children and their parents.
But Slovakian father David Feri, 24, said English parents were teaching their children racism.
Jake Stedman was found in a pool of blood after insulting the woman in her 20s, who is believed to have a child at the same primary school.
He says she chased him down an alleyway before repeatedly striking him on the head and back with the 2ft pipe as he cowered on the floor, leaving him with two black eyes.
His mother, Amanda Stedman, 29, from Chatham, Kent, said: "I came running out the house and saw him lying in a pool of blood crying.
"He was completely in shock - he's just a little boy.
"I know he can misbehave and he's easily led but for this to happen is outrageous."
Police were standing guard at Luton Junior School in Chatham at leaving time last night in an attempt to prevent racial tensions in the area rising further.
Parents angrily confronted four officers outside the school gates over the incident, which took place a week last Saturday.
A number said an increasing number of Slovak families in the area had led to friction with British parents.
About a third of around 400 pupils at the school are believed to be Slovakian-born.
British children had complained of being bullied by the Slovakian pupils, who they said had told them: "We only play with our own kind."
One parent at the school, who did not wish to be named, said: "When the parents come and collect their children, the Slovakians stand on one side of the playground and we stand on the other.
"It is a bit like a stand-off."
'Outrageous': Amanda Stedman expresses shock to police
Another, mother- of-three Carla Spanton, said parents are already pulling their children out of the school following a large intake of Slovakian pupils over the summer.
"There's been trouble ever since," she said. "Our kids are being threatened with having their throats slit.
"It's happening every day but no one is taking any notice.
"This used to be a good school but it's not any more." Father-of-one Shane Treeby added: "The trouble is going to spill over and it's going to happen soon.
"There's been a load of attacks recently in and around the school with gangs of Slovakians going round beating up the local kids.
"That boy getting hit was just one example, but there's stabbings and all sorts round here which is not getting reported." Police last night confirmed they had made an arrest in connection with the alleged pipe attack.
Chief Inspector Peter Wedlake, of Medway Police, said officers would remain on duty outside the school.
He added: "We won't tolerate racially-motivated offences, whoever they are committed by."
A statement issued by Medway Council on behalf of the school said: "Community cohesion is a shared responsibility for us all.
"Medway schools are typically happy and calm places where children from different backgrounds learn together and get on well.
"We work closely with the police, community support officers and the wider community to play our part in providing good race relations among pupils, parents and the wider community."
The incident comes after last week's admission by police that the influx of immigrants to Britain is placing a huge strain on resources.
Leading the warnings was Cambridgeshire's chief constable Julie Spence.
She said the surge in arrivals from Eastern Europe has meant an increasing bill for translation services for victims, witnesses and criminals who often speak little or no English.
Shadow Home Secretary David Davis backed the calls for tighter immigration procedures, saying
Labour's 'opendoor approach' is to blame for the problems.
So I grew up with "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me"
Apparently hitting someone in the head with a pipe is the same as "dialog"
What kind of 35 year old smacks a 10 y.o.kid with a pipe over that??
Britain=liberalism(modern) gone mad.
england(non capitalised, when they get their nads back maybe I'll capitalize the E) ruled the world, now they get hit in the face by immigrants
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=483974&in_page_id=1770
Boy 'who was attacked' by Slovakian woman may face racism chargeBy NEIL SEARS - More by this author » Last updated at 22:24pm on 26th September 2007
Jake Stedman: Claims he was beaten by immigrant with a pipe
A boy of ten who claims to have been attacked by a Slovakian woman with an iron bar could be charged with inciting racial hatred, it emerged last night.
Jake Stedman admitted that the woman hit him after he threw a berry at her and told her to 'go back to her own country'.
As a result, the boy - who was left with two black eyes - could become the youngest person in the country ever to be charged with the offence.
A police source said: "There have been allegations that he used racist language and it is necessary for us to investigate the claims."
The Slovakian woman involved, 35, was arrested and could face assault charges.
Jake, a white English pupil, attends Luton Junior School in Chatham, Kent. The school is so riven by racial tension after an influx of Slovakian and other eastern-European children that four police patrol the gates every day.
On Saturday, one week after the alleged assault, two teenage girls were arrested for throwing stones at and abusing a Slovakian man just yards from the school.
Locals believe it may have been a revenge attack.
Police said there had been 13 race-related incidents in the area in six months.
One resident, English mother Candice Smith, 30, claimed her son William had twice been chased and threatened by Slovakian children and their parents.
But Slovakian father David Feri, 24, said English parents were teaching their children racism.
Jake Stedman was found in a pool of blood after insulting the woman in her 20s, who is believed to have a child at the same primary school.
He says she chased him down an alleyway before repeatedly striking him on the head and back with the 2ft pipe as he cowered on the floor, leaving him with two black eyes.
His mother, Amanda Stedman, 29, from Chatham, Kent, said: "I came running out the house and saw him lying in a pool of blood crying.
"He was completely in shock - he's just a little boy.
"I know he can misbehave and he's easily led but for this to happen is outrageous."
Police were standing guard at Luton Junior School in Chatham at leaving time last night in an attempt to prevent racial tensions in the area rising further.
Parents angrily confronted four officers outside the school gates over the incident, which took place a week last Saturday.
A number said an increasing number of Slovak families in the area had led to friction with British parents.
About a third of around 400 pupils at the school are believed to be Slovakian-born.
British children had complained of being bullied by the Slovakian pupils, who they said had told them: "We only play with our own kind."
One parent at the school, who did not wish to be named, said: "When the parents come and collect their children, the Slovakians stand on one side of the playground and we stand on the other.
"It is a bit like a stand-off."
'Outrageous': Amanda Stedman expresses shock to police
Another, mother- of-three Carla Spanton, said parents are already pulling their children out of the school following a large intake of Slovakian pupils over the summer.
"There's been trouble ever since," she said. "Our kids are being threatened with having their throats slit.
"It's happening every day but no one is taking any notice.
"This used to be a good school but it's not any more." Father-of-one Shane Treeby added: "The trouble is going to spill over and it's going to happen soon.
"There's been a load of attacks recently in and around the school with gangs of Slovakians going round beating up the local kids.
"That boy getting hit was just one example, but there's stabbings and all sorts round here which is not getting reported." Police last night confirmed they had made an arrest in connection with the alleged pipe attack.
Chief Inspector Peter Wedlake, of Medway Police, said officers would remain on duty outside the school.
He added: "We won't tolerate racially-motivated offences, whoever they are committed by."
A statement issued by Medway Council on behalf of the school said: "Community cohesion is a shared responsibility for us all.
"Medway schools are typically happy and calm places where children from different backgrounds learn together and get on well.
"We work closely with the police, community support officers and the wider community to play our part in providing good race relations among pupils, parents and the wider community."
The incident comes after last week's admission by police that the influx of immigrants to Britain is placing a huge strain on resources.
Leading the warnings was Cambridgeshire's chief constable Julie Spence.
She said the surge in arrivals from Eastern Europe has meant an increasing bill for translation services for victims, witnesses and criminals who often speak little or no English.
Shadow Home Secretary David Davis backed the calls for tighter immigration procedures, saying
Labour's 'opendoor approach' is to blame for the problems.
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Ban Hajii scarves in Sweden
Really?? Westerners don't like it when women wear head scarves post 1960.
I'm guessing in the USA the population wanting to ban the hajii scarf is 85%, based in English as the prefered oficial language of 77%
http://www.thelocal.se/8608/20070926/
Ban headscarves' say half of Swedes
Published: 26th September 2007 08:44 CETOnline: http://www.thelocal.se/8608/
Islamic headscarves ought to be banned at workplaces and in schools - that's the view of half the people surveyed in a new Swedish poll.The poll, the third of its kind taken by Uppsala University to measure Swedes' views of diversity, shows a rising number of people supporting a headscarf ban.
Related Articles
Failed asylum seekers to be paid to go home25th September 2007
In 2005, 43 percent wanted a ban on Islamic female head coverings. This year, 49.8 percent of the 1,065 people asked supported a ban.
The results the poll are open to some interpretation. The questionnaire asked people for their view on the banning of the 'slöja' or veil, indicating a garment covering the face as well as the top of the head, such as a burqa or a niqab. However, in common parlance, the word 'slöja' is often used to describe all sorts of female Islamic head coverings, including those that just cover the hair.
Hardening attitudes on the headscarf question were not the only sign of deteriorating race relations. More than one in three of those asked said they agreed with the statement that "many foreigners come to Sweden simply to take advantage of our social welfare."
On a more positive note, 80 percent of people said they had good experiences of contact with people of foreign origins. According to the study's authors only 5 percent have "extremely negative views" of immigrants - around the same percentage as last year, but higher than in 2005.
"There could be a link to how well the Sweden Democrats did in the last election - there are such tendencies in Sweden today," said Dr. Irving Palm, one of those behind the survey, to Svenska Dagbladet.
I'm guessing in the USA the population wanting to ban the hajii scarf is 85%, based in English as the prefered oficial language of 77%
http://www.thelocal.se/8608/20070926/
Ban headscarves' say half of Swedes
Published: 26th September 2007 08:44 CETOnline: http://www.thelocal.se/8608/
Islamic headscarves ought to be banned at workplaces and in schools - that's the view of half the people surveyed in a new Swedish poll.The poll, the third of its kind taken by Uppsala University to measure Swedes' views of diversity, shows a rising number of people supporting a headscarf ban.
Related Articles
Failed asylum seekers to be paid to go home25th September 2007
In 2005, 43 percent wanted a ban on Islamic female head coverings. This year, 49.8 percent of the 1,065 people asked supported a ban.
The results the poll are open to some interpretation. The questionnaire asked people for their view on the banning of the 'slöja' or veil, indicating a garment covering the face as well as the top of the head, such as a burqa or a niqab. However, in common parlance, the word 'slöja' is often used to describe all sorts of female Islamic head coverings, including those that just cover the hair.
Hardening attitudes on the headscarf question were not the only sign of deteriorating race relations. More than one in three of those asked said they agreed with the statement that "many foreigners come to Sweden simply to take advantage of our social welfare."
On a more positive note, 80 percent of people said they had good experiences of contact with people of foreign origins. According to the study's authors only 5 percent have "extremely negative views" of immigrants - around the same percentage as last year, but higher than in 2005.
"There could be a link to how well the Sweden Democrats did in the last election - there are such tendencies in Sweden today," said Dr. Irving Palm, one of those behind the survey, to Svenska Dagbladet.
Monday, September 24, 2007
Iran, barbarians
An Iranian woman being buried prior to stoning.
EDIT: apparently this photo is from a film not a real stoning, does not matter, they still sone people.
Some people have been stoned FOR AN HOUR.
Now I'm all for the death penalty for murder or gruesome rapes or torture, (not adultery, derr) but stoning someone is cruel and unusual even for that.
A firing squad is the minimum
furking barbarians!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoning
http://www.iran-e-azad.org/stoning/index.html
http://www.iran-e-azad.org/stoning/women.html
Hajji Bitch on her Knees
Even though this is way I'd like to see the hajii's, on their knees, this is insane on so many levels.
First why is a white senior citizen lady getting extra screening?
Second why the scrutiny on a senior citizen nun? (guessing a nun)
Why is a hajji working for TSA? Hajji's are the enemy.
Why can hajji chick wear the napkin on her head while working for the US government?
Who was in the wheelchair in the foreground?
This is why regular people think the government is wack.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Canadian Crime Wave
Wow, back to back
Good thing I'm a Yank! Liberalsm is wickedness!
Pitiful Pieties
http://westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=2681&start=0
Politically-correct immigration policies are keeping western democracies in danger
Mark Steyn - September 17, 2007
You know the bit in the movie thrillers where the fourth or fifth killing has taken place and the police are sifting through the evidence to see what patterns they can identify?
Ha! That's fine for Hollywood fantasyland, but, in the real world, law enforcement know better than to go down that route. Let's say you arrest a bunch of guys plotting to blow up Parliament and behead the Prime Minister. Wow! Who would do such a thing? Who are these guys?
"They're all residents of Canada and for the most part, they're all citizens," said Mitch McDonell, assistant commissioner of the RCMP.
So all these people plotting to wreak havoc on Canada's Parliament were living in Canada? Anything else that might narrow it down a little more?
Assistant Commissioner McDonnell didn't think so: "They represent the broad strata of our community," he continued. "Some are students, some are employed, some are unemployed."
A remarkable case. The more you look at these guys - Mohammed Dirie, Amin Mohamed Durrani, Yasim Abdi Mohamed, etc - the less they seem to have in common. Some are students, some are employed, some are unemployed, some spell "Mohammed" with two "m"s, some with one, some have it as a first name, some have it as a last name, some have it as a middle name. The strata don't come any broader than that.
And as the jihad goes, so goes the Toronto crime scene. When nine citizens die in a single weekend in July, heaven forbid we should suggest these killings are connected to anything more specific than the very broadest of broad strata. Surveying the corpse count, Michael Bryant, Attorney General of Ontario, immediately demanded that the federal government tighten up the gun registry and make the all but total handgun ban even more totally total. Is Mr. Bryant some sort of crude animatronic prototype? The political equivalent of the talking Ken doll, capable of only a handful of robotically droned generalities? Instead of "Come on, Barbie, let's go party", the
Attorney-General squeaks his new catchphrase: "No gun, no funeral."
Really? One day in the not too distant future, there will be one surviving legal gun owner in Canada - an octogenarian Newfoundland farmer who still has his grandfather's shotgun. But doubtless Mr. Bryant will be blaming him for the 20 gun deaths in TO that weekend. Despite the reflex pandering of lazy politicians, there remains no connection between legal gun ownership and murder rates. Actually, that's not true. If you look at the Top Ten countries with the lowest homicide rates, at least half of them have some of the highest gun-ownership rates in the world: Switzerland, Norway and Finland have more guns than Canada but lower crime rates.
More nuanced types recognize that neither Canadian long guns nor the modest number of legally registered Canadian handguns have anything to do with Toronto gang crime, and suggest instead that we need to crack down on guns coming in from the lawless cowboy country to the south. Well, we could try, I suppose. What level of scrutiny do you reckon would be necessary to secure a porous border strung out across thousands of miles on which 90 per cent of the Canadian economy depends? Canucks are already complaining about increased inspection times on shopping trips south, but if you want to install a huge Maple Curtain along the 49th parallel, go ahead.
And, when you've run the numbers for that project, maybe it's worth asking the Mayor of Toronto and the Attorney-General of Ontario why they cannot do the citizens of a mature democracy the courtesy of addressing the question honestly. There is no "Canadian" murder epidemic or "Ontario" murder epidemic. There is a problem within one very narrow stratum of Toronto society (as no RCMP assistant commissioner is ever likely to say). Innocent Madowo, "a former Zimbabwean journalist living in Toronto", wrote a column the other day headlined "Our Community's Scourge" - "our" meaning "black". But he does his community an injustice. It would be truer to say violent crime is the West Indian community's scourge, and truer still to say it's the Jamaican community's. In contrast to gun-infested Switzerland and Norway, Jamaica has one of the highest murder rates on the planet, and it exports its pathologies to wherever the Jamaican diaspora settles. In Britain, as in Toronto, gun crime is largely a Jamaican gang problem--"Yardies", as they call them. The only difference is that the United Kingdom has implemented to the nth degree all the policies Michael Bryant wants enacted here, and with the predictable result that the coppers would rather hassle the cranky farmer with the unlicensed shotgun than take on the rather more demanding task of going after Yardies with Uzis.
In The Toronto Sun the other day, Michael Coren mentioned some of the particular characteristics of Jamaican society: "The levels of fatherless families in the country's urban centres are staggering. This culture has been transferred to Canada," he wrote, noting that, in return for pointing out the obvious, he would be damned as "racist". In fact, there is nothing about being born with a particular skin colour that mandates a dysfunctional culture in which male role models are either absent, criminal or more benignly feckless. Race is immutable, but culture isn't. Not long before my first child was born, I asked a young Jamaican lady who worked for me in London whether her father had been present at her birth. She gave a huge laugh. "Are you joking?" she said. "He wasn't present ten minutes after conception." These were certainly not the qualities Colin Powell, a child of Jamaican immigrants, associated with his community. "American blacks sometimes regard Americans of West Indian origin as uppity and arrogant," he wrote in his autobiography. "The feeling, I imagine, grows out of an impressive record of accomplishment by West Indians. What explains that success? For one thing, the British ended slavery in the Caribbean in 1833, well over a generation before America did... They told my ancestors that they were now British citizens with all the rights of any subject of the Crown. That was an exaggeration: still, the British did establish good schools and made attendance mandatory. They filled the lower ranks of the civil service with blacks. Consequently, West Indians had an opportunity to develop attitudes of independence, self-responsibility and self-worth."
Today, "self-worth" is valued, but entirely detached from "self-responsibility". At a London club last month, a former British heavyweight boxing champion politely asked three young men if they would respect the no-smoking ban. They shot him in the face at point-blank range. He had "disrespected" them. As in Toronto, the perpetrators were black and so were the victims. It's easy for Canadian media sob-sisters to indulge, as Michael Coren says, in sentimentalized blather about the four-year olds caught in the crossfire. But what are you going to do about it? In practical terms, the guilt-ridden white liberal would rather go on blaming rural white gun-owners and implicitly accept random intra-Jamaican gun-death as just another feature of the heartwarming multicultural mosaic, in the same way that we accept gas-sniffing as a time-honoured native tradition practiced on the tundra ever since the first Innu popped the tank of the first Honda Civic back in 1478. In neither case does liberal "compassion" or multicultural squeamishness seem to be doing anything for the designated victim class.
As for those on the hard-hearted right, no-one is proposing to limit or constrain immigration from Jamaica. Even typing that sentence feels vaguely ridiculous in an advanced western democracy. But let's suppose the Mayor and everyone else is right and all the guns used in Jamaican gun crime are smuggled in from the United States. What's easier to quarantine? A vast neighbour with whom we share a land border running across a continental land mass? Or a tiny island surrounded by water? In neither Canada nor Britain nor anywhere else is it politically feasible to propose that perhaps Jamaicans should be subjected to special immigration scrutiny. Forty years ago, it was accepted in Canada, the United States and Australia that sovereign nations had the right to operate discretionary immigration policies - that's to say, being under no obligation to admit anyone, they could pick and choose whom they did. Today, it's equally widely accepted that discretionary immigration policies are discriminatory and indefensible: if you're going to let people in, then all 200 or so nations on the face of the earth are equally valid--Slovenes and Saudis, Japanese and Jamaicans. To orient immigration policy to favour certain sources would be racist.
I wonder how long these pieties can endure. A recent study of terrorist suspects arrested in Britain between 2001 and 2005 revealed that one in four of them was admitted to the country as an asylum seeker. They included, for example, Muktar Said Ibrahim, one of the four men who attempted unsuccessfully to self-detonate on the London Tube two weeks after the July 7th slaughter. In other words, young men taken in and given sanctuary by Britain thank their hosts by trying to kill them. Will any changes be made to immigration procedures? Or will the British simply accept that a one-in-four terrorist/refugee ratio is simply part of the privilege of being a progressive social-democratic society? Just as we accept that allowing parts of Toronto to, in effect, assimilate with Kingston, Jamaica is the price we pay for being able to congratulate ourselves on our boundless, boundless tolerance.
Good thing I'm a Yank! Liberalsm is wickedness!
Pitiful Pieties
http://westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=2681&start=0
Politically-correct immigration policies are keeping western democracies in danger
Mark Steyn - September 17, 2007
You know the bit in the movie thrillers where the fourth or fifth killing has taken place and the police are sifting through the evidence to see what patterns they can identify?
Ha! That's fine for Hollywood fantasyland, but, in the real world, law enforcement know better than to go down that route. Let's say you arrest a bunch of guys plotting to blow up Parliament and behead the Prime Minister. Wow! Who would do such a thing? Who are these guys?
"They're all residents of Canada and for the most part, they're all citizens," said Mitch McDonell, assistant commissioner of the RCMP.
So all these people plotting to wreak havoc on Canada's Parliament were living in Canada? Anything else that might narrow it down a little more?
Assistant Commissioner McDonnell didn't think so: "They represent the broad strata of our community," he continued. "Some are students, some are employed, some are unemployed."
A remarkable case. The more you look at these guys - Mohammed Dirie, Amin Mohamed Durrani, Yasim Abdi Mohamed, etc - the less they seem to have in common. Some are students, some are employed, some are unemployed, some spell "Mohammed" with two "m"s, some with one, some have it as a first name, some have it as a last name, some have it as a middle name. The strata don't come any broader than that.
And as the jihad goes, so goes the Toronto crime scene. When nine citizens die in a single weekend in July, heaven forbid we should suggest these killings are connected to anything more specific than the very broadest of broad strata. Surveying the corpse count, Michael Bryant, Attorney General of Ontario, immediately demanded that the federal government tighten up the gun registry and make the all but total handgun ban even more totally total. Is Mr. Bryant some sort of crude animatronic prototype? The political equivalent of the talking Ken doll, capable of only a handful of robotically droned generalities? Instead of "Come on, Barbie, let's go party", the
Attorney-General squeaks his new catchphrase: "No gun, no funeral."
Really? One day in the not too distant future, there will be one surviving legal gun owner in Canada - an octogenarian Newfoundland farmer who still has his grandfather's shotgun. But doubtless Mr. Bryant will be blaming him for the 20 gun deaths in TO that weekend. Despite the reflex pandering of lazy politicians, there remains no connection between legal gun ownership and murder rates. Actually, that's not true. If you look at the Top Ten countries with the lowest homicide rates, at least half of them have some of the highest gun-ownership rates in the world: Switzerland, Norway and Finland have more guns than Canada but lower crime rates.
More nuanced types recognize that neither Canadian long guns nor the modest number of legally registered Canadian handguns have anything to do with Toronto gang crime, and suggest instead that we need to crack down on guns coming in from the lawless cowboy country to the south. Well, we could try, I suppose. What level of scrutiny do you reckon would be necessary to secure a porous border strung out across thousands of miles on which 90 per cent of the Canadian economy depends? Canucks are already complaining about increased inspection times on shopping trips south, but if you want to install a huge Maple Curtain along the 49th parallel, go ahead.
And, when you've run the numbers for that project, maybe it's worth asking the Mayor of Toronto and the Attorney-General of Ontario why they cannot do the citizens of a mature democracy the courtesy of addressing the question honestly. There is no "Canadian" murder epidemic or "Ontario" murder epidemic. There is a problem within one very narrow stratum of Toronto society (as no RCMP assistant commissioner is ever likely to say). Innocent Madowo, "a former Zimbabwean journalist living in Toronto", wrote a column the other day headlined "Our Community's Scourge" - "our" meaning "black". But he does his community an injustice. It would be truer to say violent crime is the West Indian community's scourge, and truer still to say it's the Jamaican community's. In contrast to gun-infested Switzerland and Norway, Jamaica has one of the highest murder rates on the planet, and it exports its pathologies to wherever the Jamaican diaspora settles. In Britain, as in Toronto, gun crime is largely a Jamaican gang problem--"Yardies", as they call them. The only difference is that the United Kingdom has implemented to the nth degree all the policies Michael Bryant wants enacted here, and with the predictable result that the coppers would rather hassle the cranky farmer with the unlicensed shotgun than take on the rather more demanding task of going after Yardies with Uzis.
In The Toronto Sun the other day, Michael Coren mentioned some of the particular characteristics of Jamaican society: "The levels of fatherless families in the country's urban centres are staggering. This culture has been transferred to Canada," he wrote, noting that, in return for pointing out the obvious, he would be damned as "racist". In fact, there is nothing about being born with a particular skin colour that mandates a dysfunctional culture in which male role models are either absent, criminal or more benignly feckless. Race is immutable, but culture isn't. Not long before my first child was born, I asked a young Jamaican lady who worked for me in London whether her father had been present at her birth. She gave a huge laugh. "Are you joking?" she said. "He wasn't present ten minutes after conception." These were certainly not the qualities Colin Powell, a child of Jamaican immigrants, associated with his community. "American blacks sometimes regard Americans of West Indian origin as uppity and arrogant," he wrote in his autobiography. "The feeling, I imagine, grows out of an impressive record of accomplishment by West Indians. What explains that success? For one thing, the British ended slavery in the Caribbean in 1833, well over a generation before America did... They told my ancestors that they were now British citizens with all the rights of any subject of the Crown. That was an exaggeration: still, the British did establish good schools and made attendance mandatory. They filled the lower ranks of the civil service with blacks. Consequently, West Indians had an opportunity to develop attitudes of independence, self-responsibility and self-worth."
Today, "self-worth" is valued, but entirely detached from "self-responsibility". At a London club last month, a former British heavyweight boxing champion politely asked three young men if they would respect the no-smoking ban. They shot him in the face at point-blank range. He had "disrespected" them. As in Toronto, the perpetrators were black and so were the victims. It's easy for Canadian media sob-sisters to indulge, as Michael Coren says, in sentimentalized blather about the four-year olds caught in the crossfire. But what are you going to do about it? In practical terms, the guilt-ridden white liberal would rather go on blaming rural white gun-owners and implicitly accept random intra-Jamaican gun-death as just another feature of the heartwarming multicultural mosaic, in the same way that we accept gas-sniffing as a time-honoured native tradition practiced on the tundra ever since the first Innu popped the tank of the first Honda Civic back in 1478. In neither case does liberal "compassion" or multicultural squeamishness seem to be doing anything for the designated victim class.
As for those on the hard-hearted right, no-one is proposing to limit or constrain immigration from Jamaica. Even typing that sentence feels vaguely ridiculous in an advanced western democracy. But let's suppose the Mayor and everyone else is right and all the guns used in Jamaican gun crime are smuggled in from the United States. What's easier to quarantine? A vast neighbour with whom we share a land border running across a continental land mass? Or a tiny island surrounded by water? In neither Canada nor Britain nor anywhere else is it politically feasible to propose that perhaps Jamaicans should be subjected to special immigration scrutiny. Forty years ago, it was accepted in Canada, the United States and Australia that sovereign nations had the right to operate discretionary immigration policies - that's to say, being under no obligation to admit anyone, they could pick and choose whom they did. Today, it's equally widely accepted that discretionary immigration policies are discriminatory and indefensible: if you're going to let people in, then all 200 or so nations on the face of the earth are equally valid--Slovenes and Saudis, Japanese and Jamaicans. To orient immigration policy to favour certain sources would be racist.
I wonder how long these pieties can endure. A recent study of terrorist suspects arrested in Britain between 2001 and 2005 revealed that one in four of them was admitted to the country as an asylum seeker. They included, for example, Muktar Said Ibrahim, one of the four men who attempted unsuccessfully to self-detonate on the London Tube two weeks after the July 7th slaughter. In other words, young men taken in and given sanctuary by Britain thank their hosts by trying to kill them. Will any changes be made to immigration procedures? Or will the British simply accept that a one-in-four terrorist/refugee ratio is simply part of the privilege of being a progressive social-democratic society? Just as we accept that allowing parts of Toronto to, in effect, assimilate with Kingston, Jamaica is the price we pay for being able to congratulate ourselves on our boundless, boundless tolerance.
F*CK! there is crime in Canada?
See criminals commit crime.....
http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=2652&start=0
Crimes and misconceptions
From the amount of violence on our streets, to who or what's to blame for it, Canadians have got the wrong idea
Jordan Michael Smith - July 30, 2007
In the dead of night this past June 6, David Lucio's van careened down Picton Street in downtown London, Ont., with the retired police superintendent dead at the wheel--shot in the head by a .40-calibre Glock pistol. The killer, police inspector Kelly Johnson, Lucio's mistress until their split the day before, sat in the passenger seat and followed up her grisly crime by turning the gun on herself as the van smashed into her condo building.
The violent drama quickly filled headlines, but what might seem like a clear case of cold-blooded murder was portrayed by police brass and the media as simply two deaths of equally tragic proportions. "They were both good people," said Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Julian Fantino, carefully adding that "[Johnson] had the respect of a lot of people." Another retired superintendent, Rick Gillespie, said he was sad "for what happened to the two of them."
But Lucio's father, Doug, is furious at the depiction of his son's killer as a victim, and he contacted London newspapers to make his voice heard, despite his desire for privacy. "She killed him," he raged. "She murdered him--premeditated. Nobody's discussing that." Normally, a killer doesn't receive the type of sympathy Johnson has gotten, says Heidi Illingworth, executive director of the Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime. "Maybe people think women can't do that sort of thing. We certainly see where [Lucio's] family is coming from," she says.
In the wake of Johnson's murder-suicide, the search for answers began with her job. A London Free Press news article held that police officers were ready culprits to commit suicide or violence, calling law enforcement a "high-pressure job that demands complete control." Dan Newman, a retired officer and mental health counsellor was quoted as saying, "If you write down the . . . characteristics that go with policing . . . it's not that illogical that there'd be suicide-homicides."
But data shows that police officers are actually less likely to commit suicide than civilians. Robert Loo, a retired clinical psychologist with the University of Lethbridge, found the number of suicides in the RCMP over 23 years to be less than half the average for civilian males. Similarly, "The Toronto Police Service has not had a suicide in more than 15 years," says Roger Dodson, manager of the Toronto Police Association's Employee and Family Assistance Program, despite facing the highest levels of gang activity in the country.
Richard Dolman, a researcher who has consulted with police forces in British Columbia, points out that suicides among officers are lower since "they have support systems for post-traumatic stresses," a factor Dodson agrees has made the difference in driving down suicides among Toronto police officers. Johnson had access to several different counselling services, and as a high-ranking officer, she undoubtedly knew about them, says Amanda Pfeffer, spokesperson for the London force. "We have a 24/7 critical stress management system--access to counselling services outside the force, totally paid for," she says. Still, the London Free Press instinctively called for counselling services to be improved alongside tougher psychological testing.
Inevitably, Johnson's weapon also faced public scrutiny. She wasn't supposed to be in possession of her gun when she shot Lucio, a fact that was highlighted repeatedly. "Johnson's police pistol, which she wasn't authorized to have, was found in the van," one story read. Another mentioned that the London police rely on the honour system with officers and their guns, implying that Johnson's crime could have been avoided had the force enacted stricter gun controls. In response to Lucio's family's demand for an inquest, London police Chief Murray Faulkner resorted to scapegoating the weapon, and is letting an outside agency examine department procedure regarding off-duty access to guns.
However, statistics suggest that any gun control measures are unlikely to make any serious dents in crime. Guns, for starters, are not the weapons of choice for a majority of murderers. "While a third of the homicides in 2005 were by use of a firearm, 30 per cent of homicide victims were stabbed to death, 22 per cent were beaten, and 7 per cent were strangled or suffocated," reports Statistics Canada's Homicide in Canada, 2005 survey. With Johnson determined to execute her ex-lover, and with plenty of options to choose from aside from her service sidearm, the availability of a firearm likely was not the determining factor in her decision to carry out her plan.
Gun crimes, however, capture the attention of the public in ways other attacks do not. In Vancouver in late May, for instance, 13-year-old Chris Poeun was stabbed to death in a brawl with other youngsters outside a science museum. The case attracted little attention, but the May 23 shooting of 15-year-old Jordan Manners at his high school, C.W. Jefferys Collegiate Institute in Toronto, filled headlines across the country, attracted thousands of mourners, and led to politicking by Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, NDP Leader Jack Layton and Toronto Mayor David Miller as they capitalized on the public's fear and called for stricter gun control laws. "Let's call on governments to pass the laws to stop the guns from coming across the borders," Layton said, ignoring the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act, which already outlaw gun smuggling.
Experts say that while it may be understandable for people to want to take action when a tragedy occurs, basing laws on isolated incidents is ultimately futile. At Montreal's Dawson College last year, for instance, Kimveer Gill wounded 19 individuals and killed 18-year- old Anastasia DeSousa during his September rampage. This past June 15, alongside DeSousa's parents, Quebec Premier Jean Charest introduced legislation dubbed "Anastasia's Law," banning firearms on public transport and in educational institutions--despite current laws mandating that firearms be kept in the dwelling of the owner.
"I think all of us who experienced the events of this tragedy close to a year ago, in the aftermath thought that there must be something positive that comes of this," Mr. Charest said. Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant was also on hand and simplistically quipped, "No gun, no gun crime; no gun, no tragedy."
But since very few killings actually take place at schools, restrictions on guns at educational institutions are more symbolic than substantive. Just two per cent of homicides in 2005 occurred in public institutions of any type, including high schools, hospitals and even prisons. In the words of Statistics Canada's 2005 homicide survey: "Similar to previous years, almost two-thirds (61 per cent) of homicide incidents in 2005 occurred in a private residence."
The primary culprits responsible for the public's heightened fear of shootings are the local media, says Barry Glassner, author of Culture of Fear: Why Americans are Afraid of the Wrong Things. "They have this motto: 'If it bleeds, it leads.' So people have this perception that crime is going on all around them," says Glassner, a sociology professor at the University of Southern California. He also points to politicians who exploit fear of crime as an election issue, and to marketing agencies and companies that sell home and car alarms to the fearful.
If citizens feel unsafe, says criminology professor Gary Mauser of Simon Fraser University, it is wise to look at patterns among criminals themselves rather than only the weapons and methods they are using. "It's young men who are committing these crimes, groups of them," he says. By all accounts, the greatest trend in criminality has been the rise of gangs. In 1995, just 3.6 per cent of homicides were gang-related. In 2005, that number had multiplied to 16.3 per cent. Moreover, these were not accidents or crimes of passion but the "settling of accounts."
Additionally, random acts of violence in which normally law-abiding individuals, such as Johnson, just snap, are exceptionally rare. In 2005, for instance, almost two-thirds of adults accused of homicide had a previous Canadian criminal record. Among those adults with a criminal history, 62 per cent had a prior conviction for a violent offence, leading critics to suggest we need to return to a more traditional model of blame rooted in individual accountability.
Cultural patterns have also proven valuable in predicting violent crime. The 2006 Criminal Intelligence Service Canada annual report says that in Alberta, for example, "Most street gangs obtain illicit drugs from Asian criminal groups and outlaw motorcycle gangs." About Quebec it says, "There are approximately 50 established and emerging street gangs identified, most of which are ethnically homogenous, such as those of Caribbean or Hispanic composition."
According to Michael Chettleburgh, author of Young Thugs: Inside the Dangerous World of Canadian Street Gangs, 80 per cent of gangs in Canada are comprised of minority cultures. "Canada's immigration levels went from about 100,000 to 250,000 under Brian Mulroney, but we didn't have new social services to help the immigrants," says Chettleburgh, who wrote the 2002 Canadian Police Survey on Youth Gangs for the federal government. He says when immigrants are unable to integrate into Canadian society, their sons disproportionately choose to become involved in gangs. But when individuals publicly address concerns about cultural patterns among criminals, they are subjected to a torrent of abuse from the enforcers of political correctness. Gwyn Morgan, former president and CEO of EnCana, was rejected as head of a new review board for public appointments in June 2006 by the House of Commons government operations and estimates standing committee. NDP MP Peggy Nash moved to veto Morgan and justified it using a December 2005 speech Morgan had made that "raised highly controversial comments as he singled out the Jamaican and Chinese communities for [the] major increase in crime and gun violence in Toronto and Calgary."
In the speech, Morgan said "runaway violence [was] driven mainly by Jamaican immigrants in Toronto, or the all-too-frequent violence between Asian and other ethnic gangs right here in Calgary." But despite the data from the CISC affirming Morgan's statements, his concerns were brushed aside and labelled racist.
Morgan is blunt about the matter now. "Political correctness is a disease, and until we tackle that, we won't be able to tackle our other problems," he says. He adds that our sound-bite culture avoids any in-depth analysis of issues and leads to the pursuit of quick-fix solutions, instead of finding the roots of the problem: the choices of individuals.
Personal accountability, however, is unlikely to garner many headlines for politicians promoting a new law. And despite evidence identifying individual choices and actions as the true culprits in violent crime, it remains popular to fault circumstances, inanimate objects or inadequate laws. But one thing
^is clear: Kelly Johnson wasn't deterred by current laws when she chose to shoot David Lucio. More laws are unlikely to deter others like her.
http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=2652&start=0
Crimes and misconceptions
From the amount of violence on our streets, to who or what's to blame for it, Canadians have got the wrong idea
Jordan Michael Smith - July 30, 2007
In the dead of night this past June 6, David Lucio's van careened down Picton Street in downtown London, Ont., with the retired police superintendent dead at the wheel--shot in the head by a .40-calibre Glock pistol. The killer, police inspector Kelly Johnson, Lucio's mistress until their split the day before, sat in the passenger seat and followed up her grisly crime by turning the gun on herself as the van smashed into her condo building.
The violent drama quickly filled headlines, but what might seem like a clear case of cold-blooded murder was portrayed by police brass and the media as simply two deaths of equally tragic proportions. "They were both good people," said Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Julian Fantino, carefully adding that "[Johnson] had the respect of a lot of people." Another retired superintendent, Rick Gillespie, said he was sad "for what happened to the two of them."
But Lucio's father, Doug, is furious at the depiction of his son's killer as a victim, and he contacted London newspapers to make his voice heard, despite his desire for privacy. "She killed him," he raged. "She murdered him--premeditated. Nobody's discussing that." Normally, a killer doesn't receive the type of sympathy Johnson has gotten, says Heidi Illingworth, executive director of the Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime. "Maybe people think women can't do that sort of thing. We certainly see where [Lucio's] family is coming from," she says.
In the wake of Johnson's murder-suicide, the search for answers began with her job. A London Free Press news article held that police officers were ready culprits to commit suicide or violence, calling law enforcement a "high-pressure job that demands complete control." Dan Newman, a retired officer and mental health counsellor was quoted as saying, "If you write down the . . . characteristics that go with policing . . . it's not that illogical that there'd be suicide-homicides."
But data shows that police officers are actually less likely to commit suicide than civilians. Robert Loo, a retired clinical psychologist with the University of Lethbridge, found the number of suicides in the RCMP over 23 years to be less than half the average for civilian males. Similarly, "The Toronto Police Service has not had a suicide in more than 15 years," says Roger Dodson, manager of the Toronto Police Association's Employee and Family Assistance Program, despite facing the highest levels of gang activity in the country.
Richard Dolman, a researcher who has consulted with police forces in British Columbia, points out that suicides among officers are lower since "they have support systems for post-traumatic stresses," a factor Dodson agrees has made the difference in driving down suicides among Toronto police officers. Johnson had access to several different counselling services, and as a high-ranking officer, she undoubtedly knew about them, says Amanda Pfeffer, spokesperson for the London force. "We have a 24/7 critical stress management system--access to counselling services outside the force, totally paid for," she says. Still, the London Free Press instinctively called for counselling services to be improved alongside tougher psychological testing.
Inevitably, Johnson's weapon also faced public scrutiny. She wasn't supposed to be in possession of her gun when she shot Lucio, a fact that was highlighted repeatedly. "Johnson's police pistol, which she wasn't authorized to have, was found in the van," one story read. Another mentioned that the London police rely on the honour system with officers and their guns, implying that Johnson's crime could have been avoided had the force enacted stricter gun controls. In response to Lucio's family's demand for an inquest, London police Chief Murray Faulkner resorted to scapegoating the weapon, and is letting an outside agency examine department procedure regarding off-duty access to guns.
However, statistics suggest that any gun control measures are unlikely to make any serious dents in crime. Guns, for starters, are not the weapons of choice for a majority of murderers. "While a third of the homicides in 2005 were by use of a firearm, 30 per cent of homicide victims were stabbed to death, 22 per cent were beaten, and 7 per cent were strangled or suffocated," reports Statistics Canada's Homicide in Canada, 2005 survey. With Johnson determined to execute her ex-lover, and with plenty of options to choose from aside from her service sidearm, the availability of a firearm likely was not the determining factor in her decision to carry out her plan.
Gun crimes, however, capture the attention of the public in ways other attacks do not. In Vancouver in late May, for instance, 13-year-old Chris Poeun was stabbed to death in a brawl with other youngsters outside a science museum. The case attracted little attention, but the May 23 shooting of 15-year-old Jordan Manners at his high school, C.W. Jefferys Collegiate Institute in Toronto, filled headlines across the country, attracted thousands of mourners, and led to politicking by Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, NDP Leader Jack Layton and Toronto Mayor David Miller as they capitalized on the public's fear and called for stricter gun control laws. "Let's call on governments to pass the laws to stop the guns from coming across the borders," Layton said, ignoring the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act, which already outlaw gun smuggling.
Experts say that while it may be understandable for people to want to take action when a tragedy occurs, basing laws on isolated incidents is ultimately futile. At Montreal's Dawson College last year, for instance, Kimveer Gill wounded 19 individuals and killed 18-year- old Anastasia DeSousa during his September rampage. This past June 15, alongside DeSousa's parents, Quebec Premier Jean Charest introduced legislation dubbed "Anastasia's Law," banning firearms on public transport and in educational institutions--despite current laws mandating that firearms be kept in the dwelling of the owner.
"I think all of us who experienced the events of this tragedy close to a year ago, in the aftermath thought that there must be something positive that comes of this," Mr. Charest said. Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant was also on hand and simplistically quipped, "No gun, no gun crime; no gun, no tragedy."
But since very few killings actually take place at schools, restrictions on guns at educational institutions are more symbolic than substantive. Just two per cent of homicides in 2005 occurred in public institutions of any type, including high schools, hospitals and even prisons. In the words of Statistics Canada's 2005 homicide survey: "Similar to previous years, almost two-thirds (61 per cent) of homicide incidents in 2005 occurred in a private residence."
The primary culprits responsible for the public's heightened fear of shootings are the local media, says Barry Glassner, author of Culture of Fear: Why Americans are Afraid of the Wrong Things. "They have this motto: 'If it bleeds, it leads.' So people have this perception that crime is going on all around them," says Glassner, a sociology professor at the University of Southern California. He also points to politicians who exploit fear of crime as an election issue, and to marketing agencies and companies that sell home and car alarms to the fearful.
If citizens feel unsafe, says criminology professor Gary Mauser of Simon Fraser University, it is wise to look at patterns among criminals themselves rather than only the weapons and methods they are using. "It's young men who are committing these crimes, groups of them," he says. By all accounts, the greatest trend in criminality has been the rise of gangs. In 1995, just 3.6 per cent of homicides were gang-related. In 2005, that number had multiplied to 16.3 per cent. Moreover, these were not accidents or crimes of passion but the "settling of accounts."
Additionally, random acts of violence in which normally law-abiding individuals, such as Johnson, just snap, are exceptionally rare. In 2005, for instance, almost two-thirds of adults accused of homicide had a previous Canadian criminal record. Among those adults with a criminal history, 62 per cent had a prior conviction for a violent offence, leading critics to suggest we need to return to a more traditional model of blame rooted in individual accountability.
Cultural patterns have also proven valuable in predicting violent crime. The 2006 Criminal Intelligence Service Canada annual report says that in Alberta, for example, "Most street gangs obtain illicit drugs from Asian criminal groups and outlaw motorcycle gangs." About Quebec it says, "There are approximately 50 established and emerging street gangs identified, most of which are ethnically homogenous, such as those of Caribbean or Hispanic composition."
According to Michael Chettleburgh, author of Young Thugs: Inside the Dangerous World of Canadian Street Gangs, 80 per cent of gangs in Canada are comprised of minority cultures. "Canada's immigration levels went from about 100,000 to 250,000 under Brian Mulroney, but we didn't have new social services to help the immigrants," says Chettleburgh, who wrote the 2002 Canadian Police Survey on Youth Gangs for the federal government. He says when immigrants are unable to integrate into Canadian society, their sons disproportionately choose to become involved in gangs. But when individuals publicly address concerns about cultural patterns among criminals, they are subjected to a torrent of abuse from the enforcers of political correctness. Gwyn Morgan, former president and CEO of EnCana, was rejected as head of a new review board for public appointments in June 2006 by the House of Commons government operations and estimates standing committee. NDP MP Peggy Nash moved to veto Morgan and justified it using a December 2005 speech Morgan had made that "raised highly controversial comments as he singled out the Jamaican and Chinese communities for [the] major increase in crime and gun violence in Toronto and Calgary."
In the speech, Morgan said "runaway violence [was] driven mainly by Jamaican immigrants in Toronto, or the all-too-frequent violence between Asian and other ethnic gangs right here in Calgary." But despite the data from the CISC affirming Morgan's statements, his concerns were brushed aside and labelled racist.
Morgan is blunt about the matter now. "Political correctness is a disease, and until we tackle that, we won't be able to tackle our other problems," he says. He adds that our sound-bite culture avoids any in-depth analysis of issues and leads to the pursuit of quick-fix solutions, instead of finding the roots of the problem: the choices of individuals.
Personal accountability, however, is unlikely to garner many headlines for politicians promoting a new law. And despite evidence identifying individual choices and actions as the true culprits in violent crime, it remains popular to fault circumstances, inanimate objects or inadequate laws. But one thing
^is clear: Kelly Johnson wasn't deterred by current laws when she chose to shoot David Lucio. More laws are unlikely to deter others like her.
Moslems and Criminals
Two posts to ping off from BJ.
Weakness only inspires your enemy or criminals.
Playing 'nice' does not prevent anything. See below.
Also the uproar over the number of people in US prisons is short sighted. Only a distinct group of any society are criminals. When they are no longer circulating in a given society, crime will fall. It takes criminals to commit crime.
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2490
Sweden Learns That Appeasement Doesn’t Pay
From the desk of Fjordman on Wed, 2007-09-19 23:22
While the largest political party in Sweden, the Social Democrats, are launching a formal cooperation with the Muslim Brotherhood for the mutual benefit of both (Muslims predominantly vote for Leftist parties) Muslims are openly threatening the life of cartoonist Lars Vilks ("Let his destiny be a lesson to others," as one Muslim preacher warned during a free speech seminar in Stockholm organized by humanists and ex-Muslims).
Islamists are pushish for a boycott of Swedish firms. Websites run by militant Islamists have listed the names of over 100 Swedish companies as possible targets in the ongoing row surrounding the publication in Swedish newspapers of Vilks’ caricatures of the Muslim prophet Muhammad. Detailing the addresses, maps and logos of Swedish businesses, the websites called for their readers to boycott these firms and "take revenge" on Sweden for the publication of the controversial cartoon.
It should be mentioned here that when Britain, Israel, the United States or any other country gets attacked by Muslims, this is always blamed by the media on past colonial history, occupation, aggressive foreign policy etc. Well, Sweden doesn't have a colonial history, its political establishment is among the most anti-Israeli in Europe and Swedish media have always been critical of US policies. Muslim immigration to the country has created the worst rape wave in Scandinavian history (which was indirectly blamed on global warming by the nation's largest newspaper some weeks ago), and the authorities have more or less abandoned their third largest city, Malmö, to Muslim gangs.
In short: It is hardly humanly possible to appease and grovel for Muslims more than Sweden has done, yet for some strange reason, Muslims don't get less aggressive because of this. On the contrary. Maybe there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere?
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2487
Crime Rates Up in Britain, Down in Romania
From the desk of The Brussels Journal on Wed, 2007-09-19 19:48
A quote from The Daily Mail, 19 September 2007
The influx of Romanian migrants has led to an explosion in crime in this country, it emerged last night. As recent members of the EU, Romanians have had free access to Britain only since January 1. Yet in the first six months of this year, police say, they were responsible for 1,080 offences. Police believe some migrants from Romania are running organised criminal gangs. During the same period in 2006, only 135 such crimes were recorded. In an ironic twist Romanian authorities say crime there is dropping, fuelling suspicions that some offenders may have moved here. […]
Stan Bitlan, head of the police force in Ialomita County, Romania, said: “Yes there is a connection between what is happening here and the UK. What they are doing in the UK appears here in Romania in the form of luxury cars and houses.” […] Vasile Save, the mayor of Tandarei – a town that has seen 800 inhabitants leave in the first six months of this year – admits there is less crime in the area. […]
The leaked Home Office memo said an estimated 45,000 potential criminals from Romania and Bulgaria – which also joined in January this year – would travel to Britain following EU expansion. […] Previously, they could be identified and barred from entering Britain through the checks required to obtain a visa. As EU citizens, however, the only requirement is to produce a valid passport on entry – making them harder to spot.
Another quote from The Daily Mail, 19 September 2007
A Chief constable has ignited a new race debate in Britain by warning that more police officers are needed to deal with traffic offences and crimes such as prostitution caused by an influx of East European migrants. Cambridgeshire chief constable Julie Spence says the increase in migrants has left her force struggling to cope […] “We now deal with people from many different countries, speaking more than 90 different languages. While the economic benefits of growth are clear we need to maintain the basic public services infrastructure which means increasing the number of officers we have.”
“When they arrive they think they can do the same thing as in the country they have come from,” she told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme. “There were a lot of people who... because they used to carry knives for protection, they think they can carry knives here.” […] Migrants got into difficulties because they were unfamiliar with traffic laws, but police had also noticed a growth in prostitution, driven by the influx of large numbers of single men.
Weakness only inspires your enemy or criminals.
Playing 'nice' does not prevent anything. See below.
Also the uproar over the number of people in US prisons is short sighted. Only a distinct group of any society are criminals. When they are no longer circulating in a given society, crime will fall. It takes criminals to commit crime.
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2490
Sweden Learns That Appeasement Doesn’t Pay
From the desk of Fjordman on Wed, 2007-09-19 23:22
While the largest political party in Sweden, the Social Democrats, are launching a formal cooperation with the Muslim Brotherhood for the mutual benefit of both (Muslims predominantly vote for Leftist parties) Muslims are openly threatening the life of cartoonist Lars Vilks ("Let his destiny be a lesson to others," as one Muslim preacher warned during a free speech seminar in Stockholm organized by humanists and ex-Muslims).
Islamists are pushish for a boycott of Swedish firms. Websites run by militant Islamists have listed the names of over 100 Swedish companies as possible targets in the ongoing row surrounding the publication in Swedish newspapers of Vilks’ caricatures of the Muslim prophet Muhammad. Detailing the addresses, maps and logos of Swedish businesses, the websites called for their readers to boycott these firms and "take revenge" on Sweden for the publication of the controversial cartoon.
It should be mentioned here that when Britain, Israel, the United States or any other country gets attacked by Muslims, this is always blamed by the media on past colonial history, occupation, aggressive foreign policy etc. Well, Sweden doesn't have a colonial history, its political establishment is among the most anti-Israeli in Europe and Swedish media have always been critical of US policies. Muslim immigration to the country has created the worst rape wave in Scandinavian history (which was indirectly blamed on global warming by the nation's largest newspaper some weeks ago), and the authorities have more or less abandoned their third largest city, Malmö, to Muslim gangs.
In short: It is hardly humanly possible to appease and grovel for Muslims more than Sweden has done, yet for some strange reason, Muslims don't get less aggressive because of this. On the contrary. Maybe there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere?
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2487
Crime Rates Up in Britain, Down in Romania
From the desk of The Brussels Journal on Wed, 2007-09-19 19:48
A quote from The Daily Mail, 19 September 2007
The influx of Romanian migrants has led to an explosion in crime in this country, it emerged last night. As recent members of the EU, Romanians have had free access to Britain only since January 1. Yet in the first six months of this year, police say, they were responsible for 1,080 offences. Police believe some migrants from Romania are running organised criminal gangs. During the same period in 2006, only 135 such crimes were recorded. In an ironic twist Romanian authorities say crime there is dropping, fuelling suspicions that some offenders may have moved here. […]
Stan Bitlan, head of the police force in Ialomita County, Romania, said: “Yes there is a connection between what is happening here and the UK. What they are doing in the UK appears here in Romania in the form of luxury cars and houses.” […] Vasile Save, the mayor of Tandarei – a town that has seen 800 inhabitants leave in the first six months of this year – admits there is less crime in the area. […]
The leaked Home Office memo said an estimated 45,000 potential criminals from Romania and Bulgaria – which also joined in January this year – would travel to Britain following EU expansion. […] Previously, they could be identified and barred from entering Britain through the checks required to obtain a visa. As EU citizens, however, the only requirement is to produce a valid passport on entry – making them harder to spot.
Another quote from The Daily Mail, 19 September 2007
A Chief constable has ignited a new race debate in Britain by warning that more police officers are needed to deal with traffic offences and crimes such as prostitution caused by an influx of East European migrants. Cambridgeshire chief constable Julie Spence says the increase in migrants has left her force struggling to cope […] “We now deal with people from many different countries, speaking more than 90 different languages. While the economic benefits of growth are clear we need to maintain the basic public services infrastructure which means increasing the number of officers we have.”
“When they arrive they think they can do the same thing as in the country they have come from,” she told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme. “There were a lot of people who... because they used to carry knives for protection, they think they can carry knives here.” […] Migrants got into difficulties because they were unfamiliar with traffic laws, but police had also noticed a growth in prostitution, driven by the influx of large numbers of single men.
ADT.... Security adverts......
So everyone has seen the adverts on TV about some thug breaking onto a house, then ADT phones in to say the police have been notified while the noisy alarm scares the perp away.
Real world, maybe. The Norskcafe's are well armed, so someone breaks in and or attempts assault will be severely injured by sudden lead/copper poisoning.
more on this later.
Real world, maybe. The Norskcafe's are well armed, so someone breaks in and or attempts assault will be severely injured by sudden lead/copper poisoning.
Original Anti-War
"No-one likes WAR!, War's are expensive and your countrymen get killed"
By some former Soviet official in Georgia or somewhere in the Caucuses, not sure who. I didn't come up with it though.
Well derr, no one likes war mostly, but the choice not to war can have even worse consequences. Cowboy up, life is not fair.
By some former Soviet official in Georgia or somewhere in the Caucuses, not sure who. I didn't come up with it though.
Well derr, no one likes war mostly, but the choice not to war can have even worse consequences. Cowboy up, life is not fair.
Contrasting Western Women
Who looks more free to decide??
Everyone but is a female except a single boy in the second photo.
Which culture treats woman better??
US Army or Climbing mag photo credits.
Everyone but is a female except a single boy in the second photo.
Which culture treats woman better??
US Army or Climbing mag photo credits.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Dixie chicks
I actually like their first CD. I think Rush is to be credited for this. They aparently hated the "Sadam's Angles" part.
Tolerance and Diversity
Sure they are lofty goals(tolerance and diversity).
It works well within the same culture, but does not work well across cultures or religions either.
The barbaric culture stuck in the past that still practices "honor" killings" sees "T and D" as a weakness.
Pinging off a comment of Ralph Peters (I think it was he).....
Europe has only been peaceful for the past 60 years( largely by the presence of the finest fighting force in history, of the finest country in history) they can certainly revert back to their pre 1945 ways.
Europe will start by a spark, like the assassination of Frans Ferdinand. We'll see how it goes from there.
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2475
Norway: The Country of Peace Meets the Religion of Peace
From the desk of Fjordman on Tue, 2007-09-18 11:55
Norwegian police have discovered that a large number of Pakistani taxi drivers, many of whom have already been charged with tax evasion in one of the worst cases of welfare fraud in the nation's history, have close contact with Pakistani gangs and operate as couriers of arms and drugs. In the city of Oslo it is documented that criminal Pakistani gangs also have close ties to Jihadist groups at home and abroad. This despite the fact that Norway, a nation of peace and home to the Nobel Peace Prize, should presumably get along just fine with Islam, which is, as we all know, a religion of peace.
Minister Bjarne Håkon Hanssen from the Labour Party has called for increased immigration from Pakistan because this would be good for the economy. The majority of Muslims voted for the Labour Party in the 2005 elections, which the left-wing coalition won by a very slim margin. Eighty-three percent of Muslims voted for Leftist parties, just as all over Western Europe. Kristin Halvorsen, the leader of the Socialist Left Party, began her election campaign in 2005 in the Pakistani countryside, praising all the "blood, sweat and tears Pakistanis in Norway have spent on building the country." She is now Norway's Minister of Finance.
In 2007, Minister of Justice Knut Storberget said that the Norwegian Constitution Day, May 17th, is for "everybody," and that it's appropriate to demonstrate this by displaying a multitude of flags and cultures. It is now permitted to celebrate it by waving the flag of the United Nations. The editor of a Multicultural newspaper has suggested that the Norwegian national anthem should be translated to Urdu because this would be good for integration. Norwegians are supposed to celebrate their independence by singing their national anthem in Urdu, by wearing the national costume of Ghana and by waving the flag of the UN, an organization that is actively trying to curtail their freedoms and subvert their independence. This would be the equivalent of Americans celebrating the Fourth of July by waving the UN flag and by singing the Star-Spangled Banner in Arabic.
Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre from the Labour Party participated in a conference with participants from dozens of countries and media outlets on how to "report diversity" in a non-offensive manner, with Arab News from Saudi Arabia as a moderator. The Cartoon Jihad the year before had prompted Indonesia and Norway to join forces and promote a Global Inter-Media Dialogue. In June 2007 this was held in Oslo.
The UN Special Envoy for monitoring of racism and xenophobia, Doudou Diène, started the conference by asking the press to actively help to create a Multicultural society. He expressed concern that democratic processes can lead to immigration-limiting political parties coming to power. He claimed that it marked a dangerous trend that still more intellectuals and academicians in the western world thinks that some cultures or religions are better than others, and stated that "The media must transform diversity, which is a fact of life, into pluralism, which is a set of values." Getting diversity accepted is the role of the education system, and acceptance is the role of the law, Doudou Diène said. "Promoting and defending diversity is the task of the media." Societies must recognize, accept and then defend and promote diversity, which always seems to mean sharia. Mr. Diène represents Senegal, a predominantly Muslim country which is a member of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the largest voting bloc at the United Nations.
According to journalist Ole Jørgen Anfindsen, this conference is yet another sign that Europe is moving in the direction of totalitarianism. Anfindsen thinks "there are already clear signs that large portions of mainstream media in Norway have been working according to UN instructions" long before his conference. In Britain, leading figures of the BBC have proudly announced that they actively promote Multiculturalism. They don't even need the UN to tell them that. Bruce Bawer, author of the book While Europe Slept, devotes much space to the bias of European media, and justifiably so. Norwegian PM from the Labor Party Jens Stoltenberg has stated that journalistic diversity is too important to be left up to the marketplace.
One Muslim in Norway stated that: "I worked in a Pakistani shop, but all of the work there is 'unofficial.' Neither the boss nor I pay taxes to Norwegian authorities. In addition to this, I receive 100% disability benefits and welfare. I have to be cunning to make as much money as possible, since this is my only objective with being in Norway." Undoubtedly, many Muslims view welfare money from the infidels as Jizya, the poll-tax non-Muslims according to the Koran are supposed to pay to Muslims as tribute and a sign of their inferior status and submission to Islamic rule. According to Statistics Norway, immigrants generally have a three times higher unemployment rate than native Norwegians. It should be noted that non-Muslim Asians are much more successful, which means that the unemployment rate among Muslims is even higher than 300 % that of the natives. The number of Muslims in Norway has quadrupled over the past 15 years. The number of immigrants in Oslo increased by 40 percent in just five years, from 2002 to 2007. With current trends remaining unchanged, native Norwegians will be a minority in their own country within a few decades.
The number of rapes in the Norwegian capital is six times as high per capita as in New York City, and it is well documented that certain immigrant groups are grossly overrepresented on the statistics. Two out of three charged with rape in Norway's capital are immigrants with a non-western background according to a police study. Unni Wikan, a professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo, has said that "Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for these rapes" because Muslim men found their manner of dress provocative. The professor's conclusion was not that Muslim men living in the West needed to adjust to Western norms, but the exact opposite: "Norwegian women must realize that we live in a Multicultural society and adapt themselves to it." The number of rapes has continued to rise year by year, as it has in neighboring Sweden, but according to Trond Giske, Minister of Culture and Church Affairs from the Labour Party, 2008 will be an official Diversity Year (which it also will be throughout the EU), dedicated to celebrating Multiculturalism and "cultural diversity" in all sectors of society, so hopefully this will change.
Thomas Hylland Eriksen, professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo, heads a multi-million project sponsored by the Norwegian state trying to envision how the new Multicultural society will work. He lives, according to himself, in a boring, monocultural part of the city, insulated from the effects of cultural diversity. Zorica Mitic, a Serbian doctor from the former Yugoslavia where a Multicultural society recently collapsed in a horrific civil war, warned against the effects of unchecked mass immigration. Mr. Eriksen, a career Multiculturalist and intellectual celebrity in his country, responded by chastising her for her "lack of visions."
A shoot-out between two Pakistani gangs one crowded Sunday evening at Oslo's popular waterfront complex Aker Brygge left two men wounded. Newspaper VG reported that a policeman had to run for his life from an angry crowd of Pakistanis. The plainclothes policeman was hit in the face and told to leave the Furuset shopping center. He was told that it was none of his business being in this area, and that a gang of young men had basically defined Furuset as their turf and didn't accept "intruders." Norwegian authorities have thus already lost control over significant chunks of their own capital city. Peaceful rallies denouncing Islamic terrorism or supporting Israel have repeatedly been physically attacked by groups of Muslim immigrants. Bruce Bawer, author of the book While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within, describes how there are now more direct flights from Norway to Pakistan than from Norway to the USA.
Thorbjørn Jagland is a former Prime Minister of Norway from the Labour Party, currently President of the Storting, the Norwegian Parliament. In April 2006, Jagland wrote an essay warning against the dangers of Islamophobia. According to him, paraphrasing the Communist Manifesto, a specter is haunting Europe – the spectre of Islamophobia. He fears that this could give rise to a new form of Fascism. Curiously, at almost the same time as Mr. Jagland warned against rising "Islamophobia," an article in Aftenposten newspaper warned that "youths" are in the process of destroying Norway's capital city, Oslo. Young girls are raped, schoolchildren are threatened with death, robbed and assaulted. The police warned against "an alarming rise in street violence" in urban areas across the country.
The response of the authorities has been to increase crackdowns on "racism" by the natives. In 2005 the Norwegian parliament – with the support of 85% of MPs – passed a new Discrimination Act, prepared by then Minister of Integration from the Conservative Party, Erna Solberg, who had earlier called for the establishment of a sharia council in Norway. A spokesman for the right-wing Progress Party, Per Sandberg, feared that the law would jeopardize the rights of law-abiding citizens. Reverse burden of proof is combined with liability to pay compensation, which means that innocent persons risk having to pay huge sums for things they didn't do. If a Muslim immigrant claims that a native has somehow discriminated against him or made a discriminatory remark, the native non-Muslim has to mount proof of his own innocence. I have later discovered that similar laws have been passed across much of Western Europe, encouraged by the EU.
There was absolutely no public debate about this law, which was passed in relative silence before the national elections that year. I was the first one to criticize it at my blog. The only journalist to criticize it was an American ex-pat, Bruce Bawer, and Hans Rustad at Document.no, the country's largest independent weblog. Not a single Norwegian journalist criticized the proposed law, and most barely mentioned it at all before it was passed.
The Equality and Anti-discrimination Ombud Beate Gangås, a white, lesbian feminist, before the municipal elections in 2007 warned all political parties against making "discriminatory" remarks about immigration policies, but also called for actively reducing the number of white, heterosexual men in politics. There was little real debate about immigration in the heavily left-leaning media that year, but an all the more passionate with hunt looking for racists, and by that I mean whites only. The left-wing coalition government, after a meeting with immigrant organizations, announced that racists, apparently meaning white natives only, should be "smoked out" of all public sector jobs.
Following the release of a UN population report which indicated a global population increase of several billion people over the coming decades, Marie Simonsen, the political editor of Norwegian left-wing newspaper Dagbladet, wrote that it should be considered a universal human right for people everywhere to migrate wherever they want to. This would mean virtually certain annihilation for a tiny, wealthy and naive Scandinavian nation. Ms. Simonsen thus endorsed the gradual enslavement and eventual eradication of her own people, no doubt congratulating herself for her own tolerance. Not a single word of protest was voiced by any other journalist to this statement. Human rights was a concept originally intended to ensure liberty. Now it's used to eradicate an entire people, or a large number of peoples across Europe, in the name of tolerance and diversity, and the natives are specifically banned from protesting against this.
It works well within the same culture, but does not work well across cultures or religions either.
The barbaric culture stuck in the past that still practices "honor" killings" sees "T and D" as a weakness.
Pinging off a comment of Ralph Peters (I think it was he).....
Europe has only been peaceful for the past 60 years( largely by the presence of the finest fighting force in history, of the finest country in history) they can certainly revert back to their pre 1945 ways.
Europe will start by a spark, like the assassination of Frans Ferdinand. We'll see how it goes from there.
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2475
Norway: The Country of Peace Meets the Religion of Peace
From the desk of Fjordman on Tue, 2007-09-18 11:55
Norwegian police have discovered that a large number of Pakistani taxi drivers, many of whom have already been charged with tax evasion in one of the worst cases of welfare fraud in the nation's history, have close contact with Pakistani gangs and operate as couriers of arms and drugs. In the city of Oslo it is documented that criminal Pakistani gangs also have close ties to Jihadist groups at home and abroad. This despite the fact that Norway, a nation of peace and home to the Nobel Peace Prize, should presumably get along just fine with Islam, which is, as we all know, a religion of peace.
Minister Bjarne Håkon Hanssen from the Labour Party has called for increased immigration from Pakistan because this would be good for the economy. The majority of Muslims voted for the Labour Party in the 2005 elections, which the left-wing coalition won by a very slim margin. Eighty-three percent of Muslims voted for Leftist parties, just as all over Western Europe. Kristin Halvorsen, the leader of the Socialist Left Party, began her election campaign in 2005 in the Pakistani countryside, praising all the "blood, sweat and tears Pakistanis in Norway have spent on building the country." She is now Norway's Minister of Finance.
In 2007, Minister of Justice Knut Storberget said that the Norwegian Constitution Day, May 17th, is for "everybody," and that it's appropriate to demonstrate this by displaying a multitude of flags and cultures. It is now permitted to celebrate it by waving the flag of the United Nations. The editor of a Multicultural newspaper has suggested that the Norwegian national anthem should be translated to Urdu because this would be good for integration. Norwegians are supposed to celebrate their independence by singing their national anthem in Urdu, by wearing the national costume of Ghana and by waving the flag of the UN, an organization that is actively trying to curtail their freedoms and subvert their independence. This would be the equivalent of Americans celebrating the Fourth of July by waving the UN flag and by singing the Star-Spangled Banner in Arabic.
Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre from the Labour Party participated in a conference with participants from dozens of countries and media outlets on how to "report diversity" in a non-offensive manner, with Arab News from Saudi Arabia as a moderator. The Cartoon Jihad the year before had prompted Indonesia and Norway to join forces and promote a Global Inter-Media Dialogue. In June 2007 this was held in Oslo.
The UN Special Envoy for monitoring of racism and xenophobia, Doudou Diène, started the conference by asking the press to actively help to create a Multicultural society. He expressed concern that democratic processes can lead to immigration-limiting political parties coming to power. He claimed that it marked a dangerous trend that still more intellectuals and academicians in the western world thinks that some cultures or religions are better than others, and stated that "The media must transform diversity, which is a fact of life, into pluralism, which is a set of values." Getting diversity accepted is the role of the education system, and acceptance is the role of the law, Doudou Diène said. "Promoting and defending diversity is the task of the media." Societies must recognize, accept and then defend and promote diversity, which always seems to mean sharia. Mr. Diène represents Senegal, a predominantly Muslim country which is a member of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the largest voting bloc at the United Nations.
According to journalist Ole Jørgen Anfindsen, this conference is yet another sign that Europe is moving in the direction of totalitarianism. Anfindsen thinks "there are already clear signs that large portions of mainstream media in Norway have been working according to UN instructions" long before his conference. In Britain, leading figures of the BBC have proudly announced that they actively promote Multiculturalism. They don't even need the UN to tell them that. Bruce Bawer, author of the book While Europe Slept, devotes much space to the bias of European media, and justifiably so. Norwegian PM from the Labor Party Jens Stoltenberg has stated that journalistic diversity is too important to be left up to the marketplace.
One Muslim in Norway stated that: "I worked in a Pakistani shop, but all of the work there is 'unofficial.' Neither the boss nor I pay taxes to Norwegian authorities. In addition to this, I receive 100% disability benefits and welfare. I have to be cunning to make as much money as possible, since this is my only objective with being in Norway." Undoubtedly, many Muslims view welfare money from the infidels as Jizya, the poll-tax non-Muslims according to the Koran are supposed to pay to Muslims as tribute and a sign of their inferior status and submission to Islamic rule. According to Statistics Norway, immigrants generally have a three times higher unemployment rate than native Norwegians. It should be noted that non-Muslim Asians are much more successful, which means that the unemployment rate among Muslims is even higher than 300 % that of the natives. The number of Muslims in Norway has quadrupled over the past 15 years. The number of immigrants in Oslo increased by 40 percent in just five years, from 2002 to 2007. With current trends remaining unchanged, native Norwegians will be a minority in their own country within a few decades.
The number of rapes in the Norwegian capital is six times as high per capita as in New York City, and it is well documented that certain immigrant groups are grossly overrepresented on the statistics. Two out of three charged with rape in Norway's capital are immigrants with a non-western background according to a police study. Unni Wikan, a professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo, has said that "Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for these rapes" because Muslim men found their manner of dress provocative. The professor's conclusion was not that Muslim men living in the West needed to adjust to Western norms, but the exact opposite: "Norwegian women must realize that we live in a Multicultural society and adapt themselves to it." The number of rapes has continued to rise year by year, as it has in neighboring Sweden, but according to Trond Giske, Minister of Culture and Church Affairs from the Labour Party, 2008 will be an official Diversity Year (which it also will be throughout the EU), dedicated to celebrating Multiculturalism and "cultural diversity" in all sectors of society, so hopefully this will change.
Thomas Hylland Eriksen, professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo, heads a multi-million project sponsored by the Norwegian state trying to envision how the new Multicultural society will work. He lives, according to himself, in a boring, monocultural part of the city, insulated from the effects of cultural diversity. Zorica Mitic, a Serbian doctor from the former Yugoslavia where a Multicultural society recently collapsed in a horrific civil war, warned against the effects of unchecked mass immigration. Mr. Eriksen, a career Multiculturalist and intellectual celebrity in his country, responded by chastising her for her "lack of visions."
A shoot-out between two Pakistani gangs one crowded Sunday evening at Oslo's popular waterfront complex Aker Brygge left two men wounded. Newspaper VG reported that a policeman had to run for his life from an angry crowd of Pakistanis. The plainclothes policeman was hit in the face and told to leave the Furuset shopping center. He was told that it was none of his business being in this area, and that a gang of young men had basically defined Furuset as their turf and didn't accept "intruders." Norwegian authorities have thus already lost control over significant chunks of their own capital city. Peaceful rallies denouncing Islamic terrorism or supporting Israel have repeatedly been physically attacked by groups of Muslim immigrants. Bruce Bawer, author of the book While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within, describes how there are now more direct flights from Norway to Pakistan than from Norway to the USA.
Thorbjørn Jagland is a former Prime Minister of Norway from the Labour Party, currently President of the Storting, the Norwegian Parliament. In April 2006, Jagland wrote an essay warning against the dangers of Islamophobia. According to him, paraphrasing the Communist Manifesto, a specter is haunting Europe – the spectre of Islamophobia. He fears that this could give rise to a new form of Fascism. Curiously, at almost the same time as Mr. Jagland warned against rising "Islamophobia," an article in Aftenposten newspaper warned that "youths" are in the process of destroying Norway's capital city, Oslo. Young girls are raped, schoolchildren are threatened with death, robbed and assaulted. The police warned against "an alarming rise in street violence" in urban areas across the country.
The response of the authorities has been to increase crackdowns on "racism" by the natives. In 2005 the Norwegian parliament – with the support of 85% of MPs – passed a new Discrimination Act, prepared by then Minister of Integration from the Conservative Party, Erna Solberg, who had earlier called for the establishment of a sharia council in Norway. A spokesman for the right-wing Progress Party, Per Sandberg, feared that the law would jeopardize the rights of law-abiding citizens. Reverse burden of proof is combined with liability to pay compensation, which means that innocent persons risk having to pay huge sums for things they didn't do. If a Muslim immigrant claims that a native has somehow discriminated against him or made a discriminatory remark, the native non-Muslim has to mount proof of his own innocence. I have later discovered that similar laws have been passed across much of Western Europe, encouraged by the EU.
There was absolutely no public debate about this law, which was passed in relative silence before the national elections that year. I was the first one to criticize it at my blog. The only journalist to criticize it was an American ex-pat, Bruce Bawer, and Hans Rustad at Document.no, the country's largest independent weblog. Not a single Norwegian journalist criticized the proposed law, and most barely mentioned it at all before it was passed.
The Equality and Anti-discrimination Ombud Beate Gangås, a white, lesbian feminist, before the municipal elections in 2007 warned all political parties against making "discriminatory" remarks about immigration policies, but also called for actively reducing the number of white, heterosexual men in politics. There was little real debate about immigration in the heavily left-leaning media that year, but an all the more passionate with hunt looking for racists, and by that I mean whites only. The left-wing coalition government, after a meeting with immigrant organizations, announced that racists, apparently meaning white natives only, should be "smoked out" of all public sector jobs.
Following the release of a UN population report which indicated a global population increase of several billion people over the coming decades, Marie Simonsen, the political editor of Norwegian left-wing newspaper Dagbladet, wrote that it should be considered a universal human right for people everywhere to migrate wherever they want to. This would mean virtually certain annihilation for a tiny, wealthy and naive Scandinavian nation. Ms. Simonsen thus endorsed the gradual enslavement and eventual eradication of her own people, no doubt congratulating herself for her own tolerance. Not a single word of protest was voiced by any other journalist to this statement. Human rights was a concept originally intended to ensure liberty. Now it's used to eradicate an entire people, or a large number of peoples across Europe, in the name of tolerance and diversity, and the natives are specifically banned from protesting against this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)