Bin Laden warns against Iraq unity gov't (AP Report)

Well the Democrats and the rest of the Left were right; Bin Laden confirms it: We are in Iraq for the oil.

One has to wonder if the Democrats will have the courage and honesty to cite Bin Laden as a knowledgeable source, in confirmation of their opposition to the war. Naaah.

As for his assertion that we want to control Iraq and take the oil, if it were only so. Unfortunately, we went in and are still there with the best of intentions, to bring "democracy" and "freedom" to these benighted people.

Muslim Democracy In Action

Pakistan is again demonstrating the style of democracy and "free elections" we can expect in Muslim countries. The death of Benazir Bhutto fits right in with what we can expect from Muslims. If you disagree with a politician or political idea, kill her and the idea. No waiting for the election results in Islam. No problems with hanging chads or malfunctioning machines for them. It makes it so much easier to get consensus, doesn't it? And it is all sanctioned by the Koran and a fatwa.

The idea of bringing democracy to the Muslim world would be laughable, if it had not been so tragic for us in Iraq. A friendly (to us and our interests) military dictatorship or autocratic monarch is the best we can hope for from these countries. These are the modern successors to Caliphs and Sultans - and all that the Muslim mind can be expected to accept.

And... we are letting Muslims into our countries in droves. What insanity on our part. Suicide by immigration and asylum is what we are setting ourselves for.... and LOVING IT. It makes us feel so good, so righteous, to let this vermin into our countries. The papers and TV news positively glow when they talk about the Sudanese, Somalis, Algerians and Iraqis we are bringing in and helping to settle into backwater places in Georgia, Vermont or wherever - all that wonderful DIVERSITY. So what if they contribute to charities that support terrorists? So what if they want to go back to their God-forsaken countries to study Islam more authentically? Woe betide anyone who dares to say a discouraging word. Instant branding as a bigot; a RACIST.

What a hassle for poor Bush that he isn't allowing more Iraqis (and Darfuris and anyone else) in, faster. No need for vetting; they are VICTIMS, after all.

And to make Muslims feel comfortable with America? Sultan Barack Hussein Obama, anyone?

Clintonism

Now that Lurleen …errr... Hillary… Rodham Clinton is running for president, all the old discussions about what exactly the Clintons stood for have resurfaced, with a vengeance. Are they: Ex-lefties who became true moderates of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) ilk, who led the Democratic Party away from its left-liberal suicidal tendencies? Left-liberals to the core (flower-in-her-hair Hillary and a draft-dodging pothead), pretending to be moderates to get elected? Ambitious frauds that will say and do anything ("triangulation") to advance themselves and their beliefs? All of the above?

One thing for sure, they and their followers have been great masters at manipulating the national conversation, able to turn previously contentious ideas into the mundane - the new "conventional wisdom" - with appropriate catch phrases that have become a part of the lexicon of this country. They have been so successful at it, that these ideas have become mainstream thinking to a large swathe of the country, including so-called conservatives like George W. Bush. Among the more successful of these ideas that have been burrowed into the national conscience are:

· "It's all about the children" ("we are not really rewarding lazy, promiscuous, irresponsible women; we are taking care of the innocent kids"), which was originally used to justify extensions of the welfare system in the early Clinton years. It has been so successful at tugging at the conscience of the American people that it is still doing splendid service to this day: Think of S-CHIP and its proposed extension to adults "who care for the children"; all kinds of welfare and educational benefits for illegal immigrants and (by extension) to their parents; and - last but not least - "no child left behind". In fact this trope has been so successful, it has been "franchised". The most notable current application is "It's all about the troops", used as the smokescreen by "respectable" liberals who wish to see Bush (and America) defeated and humiliated in the Middle East. To the left, it is unacceptable that America's interests can be successfully asserted and defended by force.

· "Don't ask, don't tell" as a means to begin the process of getting respectability for homosexuality in this country, starting at "the top of the masculinity chain", so to speak. This phrase, hated and derided by the true believers on the left, was the starting point for the left-liberal agenda to make homosexuality respectable and acceptable as an "alternate life style". Conservatives are so much on the defensive that they are fighting to hold the line at this idiotic idea, to prevent further destruction of our national character and culture.

· “Diversity” is by far the most pervasive and most profound of all the “new paradigms” of Clintonism. It changed the entire cultural argument about who we are as Americans. The Clintonites used it to short-circuit all the then-prevailing arguments about multi-culturism (who hears that word now?), integration, “alternate life-styles” and what it means to be American (no more of the REAL culture war on that front now). The word has become so pervasive that we hear now about nothing but diversity in all its … DIVERSITY: bio-diversity; cultural diversity; business diversity; broadcast diversity; ethnic diversity… ad nauseum (googling the word produced over 73 million hits before Google gave out). It is now cited by the courts as a good unto itself. No mainstream politician would dare argue against it now; George H. W. Bush was the last major party candidate to run against multi-culturism - and he lost in ’92. Junior learned the lesson and campaigned in SPANISH. No one dares to ask why it is necessary for a candidate for public office to campaign in any language other than English (or why we need multi-language ballots), since all immigrants are supposed to pass an English language test for citizenship; hence all voters are supposed to know English.

So let not liberals denigrate the LEFT-LIBERAL credentials of the Clintons; they have done more to institutionalize left-liberal ideas than any rabid leftist, in academia or out, could possibly have done.

Mutaween in Kiryas Joel

It seems we have our own religious police in the more backward communities in the US. Specifically, in Satmar Hasidic communities like Kiryas Joel NY, “vaad hatznius,” the rabbinically appointed "modesty committee" there keeps a look out for proper dress and demeanor. Of course they are not really in the same league as the Saudi or Iranian religious police, since they do not have enforcement mechanisms or the power of government to coerce. They can instigate ostracism for anyone who defies the social mores - and people belong to these communities voluntarily. Still, it is incredible that people in the USA allow themselves to be controlled and constricted in their lives in this way.

The existence of such communities is most disturbing in providing a precedent for crazier "communities" to come. How long before we have demands for Sharia Law in Brooklyn and points West?

Protecting WHAT Americans' Civil Liberties?

The Democrats are holding up the domestic intelligence bill in order to "protect Americans' civil liberties" - and also, no doubt, to provide a lucrative revenue stream for their biggest political contributors, US trial lawyers.

Exactly WHAT Americans are they talking about?

The pending bill would allow the continuation of the government effort to monitor communication of individuals in the USA with foreign connections, usually ones whose communication identities are obtained through information gathered in Afghanistan or Pakistan - both places filled, no doubt, with law abiding, America loving, individuals. To hear the liberals tell it, the government is eager to listen in on your aunt Tilly's innocent conversations with her beloved nieces and nephews. If aunt Tilly's phone number or e-mail address were to be found on a lap top in Afghanistan, then she would be liable to be monitored; the improbability of THAT happening is beyond measure. Not only would her civil rights need protecting, but the whole family would probably need extensive psychological assistance.

The fact is, that the only "Americans" that could be conceivably affected would be Muslim immigrants who have come from their various dirty Muslim countries to burden the US with their presence and who still have contacts with their home countries, the nature of which should worry every one of us, "loyal" Democrats, included.

With all the Democrats' concern about "civil rights", the current hold-up is the Administration's insistence on a measure to give immunity to telephone companies that participated in the warrantless domestic spying program. With the proclivity of our splendid Federal judiciary to break new ground in jurisprudence, denial of this immunity would be a "gimme" for the Democrats' favorite constituents, the trial lawyers - oh and of course for all the Muslims who are affected in even the remotest way by this surveillance regime; all the better to help them establish themselves more firmly in this country. Another convenience store, anyone?

Nothing for aunt Tilly, you can be sure.

Lurleen Rodham Clinton

With Obnoxious Bill prancing about as if he is running for president, one has to wonder whether Hillary is the new Lurleen Burns Wallace. Just as George Wallace used his wife as his front for another term as governor of Alabama, Bill Clinton may have his secret ambition for getting back into power (and the limelight) through his "wife". It must be a Southern red neck governor thing.

As loathsome as the thought of having the louche Clintons back in power is, the entertainment/drama value in their return to center stage would almost be worth the damage to the national image (but definitely NOT worth the damage to our national interests).

If she is elected, we could have another first: First divorce in the White House. The grounds for divorce would most likely be political/feminist. She passed up her chance for divorce on emotional/romantic/fidelity grounds a long time ago.

Islamic Values In Action

Reuters story: "Father says killed daughter in Canadian hijab case". When will we accept that Islam and Muslims are not compatible with western society and western values? The obvious retort from the multiculturalists and politically correct apologists is that this case can't be used to taint all Muslims in western countries. True. That is not the issue.

The issue is the compatibility of Muslim "social customs" and our society. The father was acting as true adherent to Islamic values. Defenders of Islam usually say that "honor killings" are not perpetrated strictly in adherence to Islam but are "Arabic" customs (the distinction must be very reassuring to Muslim girls). Well, this family was Pakistani MUSLIM and not Arab.

It will be interesting to hear what the apologists and the flaks for Islam will have to say on this (don't expect extensive coverage of this embarrassing item in the mainstream press in the US and Canada). The real trick will be how it can all be explained away by Muslim rage at western injustice and Israel's treatment of the Palestinians.

I love you Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Ayaan Hirsi Ali's op-ed piece in the NY Times today is the perfect answer to anyone still searching for "Moderate" Muslims. They do not exist. Those that claim to be in that category are just the flaks for Islam.

As she points out, the texture of violence is in the Koran itself, without any mitigation or compassion. So anyone who is a "true" Muslim and claims to be living according to Shariah law, must adhere to the harsh "word". Islam has never had a "reformation" like Christianity; or rabbinical exegesis like Judaism. It is still the religion of bloodthirsty desert raiders. In no way, shape or form does it belong in a western secular, democratic, society; as is being proven daily in Europe, Australia and America. If we would only look at and accept what we see with our eyes.

Islam is not "the religion of peace". Contrary to what the flaks tell gullible Westerners, the word "Islam" does not mean peace; "salam" is peace (like the Hebrew "shalom"). "Islam" means "surrender", as in surrender to the will of Allah and, by extension, anyone that can convince the ignorant masses of Islam (1.3 billion of them) that he speaks in Allah's name.

Guantanamo - Roach Motel

What is every one's obsession with Guantanamo and its "guests"?

It seems as if a whole industry has come into existence to "protect the rights" of this Muslim trash: lawyers and judges and the entire Democratic Party - and a few Republicans too. For the Democrats and other Bush-hating leftists, the attraction is obvious: anything to embarrass and discredit Bush and America.

The biggest hypocrites of all are the Europeans (and Aussies, regrettably) who feel compelled to fight for their "citizens"; though they really don't know what to do with them when they get them. The charade usually ends with some judge relieving the Euro government of the embarrassment by letting the vermin loose, and incidentally keeping the host county's intelligence service gainfully employed keeping track of the freed "victim of American injustice".

In the US, our energetic Judiciary (and the self-important advocacy industry) can get lots of free publicity and make themselves feel relevant by interfering in an area and a cause that is outside their jurisdiction. Our "guests" at Guantanamo were picked up on the battlefield and through "vigorous" action by our intelligence services; they are neither US civilians who are entitled to constitutional protections nor legitimate POWs from countries that fight in accordance with the Geneva Conventions. The possibility that we picked up innocent people and that any of these remain in custody is NIL. Every one of the non-Afghans that was picked up in Afghanistan claims to have been there for "study" (it seems that Afghanistan is world renowned for its educational facilities, although it was obviously a deep secret to non-Muslims) or were there to do charity work. With all these hundreds and thousands of charity givers, it would seem that Afghanistan was a welfare paradise until we invaded it; who knew? The fact is that, rules of evidence not withstanding, all these people were there to learn about, initiate and participate in atrocities against us, our friends and our interests. They deserve never to see the light of day again. EVER

Guantanamo should have been the ultimate Roach Motel; those who check in NEVER check out. Instead, it has been turned into a school for martyrs and a cause for the victimologists to "advocate" for and blather about.

The "resolution" for Guantanamo is to go into the hills of Bosnia, find Ratko Mladic; beg his forgiveness and, if he accepts our apologies, appoint him commandant of Guantanamo. He has the fortitude to deal with our "guests" as he dealt with the Muslims in Bosnia. (Radovan Karadzic should, of course, be named Minister For Islamic Affairs for the EU)

Whew............What a relief

According to today's New York Times, "Nigeria Turns From Harsher Side of Islamic Law". What a relief. This merits front page coverage, since it, presumably, shows the growth of "enlightened Islam".

It seems that, in Nigeria today, they are not fully enforcing the harshest aspects of Shariah. While, previously, the Islamic thugs (errrr.. morality police, known as the Hisbah) " ... roamed these streets in dusky blue uniforms and black berets, brandishing cudgels at prayer shirkers and dragging fornicators into Islamic courts to face sentences like death by public stoning", now they "have largely been confined to their barracks and assigned anodyne tasks like directing traffic..." Also, "New programs have sprung up to encourage parents to send their daughters to hybrid public elementary schools that offer traditional Islamic education along with math and reading, in keeping with Islamic principles (really?????) that call for the education of girls." (pictures of little girls entombed in Islamic garb, here). Of course the U.S. is so thrilled with all this, USAID is helping to fund the schooling.

The article says that " .... even before then, the feared mutilations and death sentences almost never materialized. Public floggings are quite common, and in Zamfara, the first state to adopt Shariah as the basis of its criminal code, at least one man had his hand amputated in 2000 for stealing a cow, but other sentences of mutilation have rarely been carried out." If you can settle for public floggings and the occasional amputation, things are really hunky dory now. Why, maybe in a century or so, they may reach a stage of civilization comparable with 19th century Europe.

No word on whether Muslim "clerics" are allowing kids to be vaccinated against polio, though. They think vaccination is a western plot to make Muslims sterile. If only it were so.

More I.Q. Debate

Well the predictable thought police reaction to the current (slightly open) debate about genes, race and intelligence is in full swing. Typical ploys to intimidate the advocates of any scientifically defined linkage include the usual nit-picking about details that can't possibly be satisfied at this early stage of this long-stifled field of study; the researchers have barley been able to define the parameters (including specific genes) that may be important to study or to form a coherent model, or theory, that can be proved or disproved . The reason for the nit-picking is, of course, that this subject is "too sensitive" to study. As the Times says, the fear is of "The risk of giving ammunition to racists or undercutting principles of equality". In other words, the answer must be predetermined and it must be "positive" (i.e., politically correct) before the question is allowed to be asked.

Very quickly, the poor guy who wrote an article for Slate (a liberal web site) that came to at least preliminary "wrong" conclusions was forced to write a follow-up article entitled “Regrets,” because one of the researchers whose results he relied on had a segregationist remote connection. Of course, by that logic no liberal can ever be trusted to do this kind of research, since he will be sure to reach the politically correct conclusions.

The truth, whatever it is, cannot be hidden forever; if the thought police prevent open, freewheeling, research and discussion, then the more nefarious participants with perhaps more harmful agendas will have the field all to themselves.