Biding our Time

If things seem a little uninspired lately it's because we're working on an in-depth series of posts regarding the Neo-com story. We've dug out some insightful and at times disconcerting new information on the subject, which is to be the next main political development in postmodern history.
Therefore today again assorted news items:

- Ominous news is emerging from Pakistan, a Muslim country with a strong strain of the fundamental variety, a nuclear power, a country with uninhabitable mountain areas under Taliban rule, and a military strongman as President who seems to be losing it. An interesting article from Canada's National Post.

- CNN is reporting that the Lebanese security forces are doing battle with Sunni jihadist operatives near the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp: Islamic militants, security forces battle in Lebanon. Jerusalem Post is reporting the possibility of Syrian involvement, and thinks it knows why: Analysis: Why might Syria wish to sow chaos in Lebanon now?

Not reported by the Western media:

- Israeli Army vows to operate till Hamas surrenders
- Qassam hits house in Eshkol town
- Barrage continues: 16 Qassams hit western Negev

Orwell's Press from Hell

I may be one of a dying breed: call me peculiar, but I like to form an independent opinion, based on fullness of information, on my own - thank you very much!

Considering the postmodern press is doing our thinking for us by predigesting and preselecting the news as they see fit, I might as well open up a independent press agency here and make a day-job out of screening their omissions and censoring. I fear however I am already otherwise engaged.

I do however intend to nail Orwell's Infernal Journalism to the doorpost of hell whenever the opportunity presents itself! Such posts shall be announced, thus:


Israel and the P.A., already problem areas due to the overt anti Israeli media bias displayed by amongst others Britain's 35,000 strong membership of the National Union of Journalists (btw unheard of in the history of the press!), present today's focus. Here goes ...

... what the Western press didn't say:

- 20 Qassam rockets launched at Israel on Thursday
- Qassams ignored abroad
- 3 wounded as Qassam hits Sderot home
- Hamas blames world, Israel and Arabs

And it's not just "The Lighthouse" that's peculiar in that sense: here's yesterday's post from "Barking Moonbat Early Warning System"!

While we are on the subject of eccentricity, yesterday the world saw the first reports of a new digital application: cyber warfare, of Russia against "Soviet era ally", Estonia! It takes some getting used to by NATO: at present they don't consider it an Article 5 offence, which would normally kick the Musketeer Doctrine (all for one, one for all) into gear. Russia meanwhile, is peeved, denies as yet unpronounced charges, which it qualifies as "serious", calls for substantiation.

Beliefs of Fear

Time for a few assorted news alerts with a commonality: the usefulness of fear!

Czech President and economist Vaclav Klaus today said that his new book "Blue, Not Green Planet" is to highlight the threatening and curtailing of freedom, which Klaus considers the key topic of the present era. The book is subtitled "What has been threatened: climate or freedom?". A good question.

If we follow the Roman advice: Cui Bono?, or the American: Follow the Money!, we arrive at the subsidized global fear industry that has sprung up over the last decades, and at governments that are thus able to firm their grip on people's freedoms by regulating and soft engineering; above all it provides an opportunity - and moreover, a ligitimated excuse - to 'broaden the fiscal base'.

Price tag: a personal contribution of 225 Euros per year will release you of your guilt "and can prevent the earth from warming two degrees by the year 2030", the U.N.'s I.C.P.P. has calculated! Total cost: 1700 billion Euros.

Perhaps it is this what Klaus has in mind. The book isn't available yet on Amazon. When it is, we'll let you know and add it to The Lighthouse Library.

It is astounding how environmentalism - whose animistic Gaia theory, which borders irrational earth-goddess worship - is abusing science to ridicule the skeptics: their taunting 'Flat, Not Round Earth' in this case, is reminiscent of the Darwinism versus creation myth dualism, when the unproven and highly unlikely theory of evolution is called into question.

If you don't buy into the Leftist politically correct epistemologies, you are an medieval ignoramus, that's the idea. Yet nothing is less scientific than elevating theories to sacrosanct dogma, as the medieval Scholastics knew, and some postmodern relativist theorists would be happy to point out!

Surely this must be another one of the Sanity Squad's infamous psychological projections! There's nothing like fear and guilt for a prime mover!

On an entirely other topic, I woke up this morning with the Algerian genocide in mind, which occurred during the nineties of the last century. The 150,000 martyrs to Islamism appear to be all but forgotten. The inhabitants of entire villages had their throats scimitared, after the Algerian government made the mistake of allowing an undemocratic Islamist party (FIS) to participate in democratic elections. When they appeared to be winning, the elections were cancelled in the certainty that democracy would be abolished were the FIS come to power. This sparked a whole series of blood baths that lasted for years.

According to this BBC article the period is characterized as a 'civil war', and apparently the security forces had a hand in it. Not mentioned are the Jihadis of the FIS and other Islamist groups. The reason for this is likely to be found in the BBC's approach towards journalism, by which unequal groups are compensated in proportion to their inequality vis a vis the official government, which in this case means they don't get any attention drawn to their unspeakable sins.

But today Algeria goes to the polls. Let's hope they make it a good one! In the West - especially in Europe - we tend to forget that democracy and freedom aren't free!

Neo-communism exposed! (III)

Fjordman, with an article "Communism for the 21st Century" has the entire conservative blegosphere abuzz in sheer shock, with comments, quotes, cross-posts and re-posts. These pages had already come to the same conclusion some months ago through our own separate, well-documented investigations. The chances therefore, this is only a figment of the delusional, conservative mind - as doubtlessly some projecting Leftists would have it - is herewith narrowed down to practically zero, I posit!

We came to the same conclusion, because the founding fathers of the postmodern pseudo philosophies that underpin the whole miserable construct - positivism, subjectivism (relativism) [1], deconstructionism, multiculturalism and other related sophistries - all had their feet firmly planted in the same Marxist clay in one way or another. This is something that anyone, who's willing to put in a bit of reference work, can conclude for themselves. To read related posts, enter 'communism', 'totalitarian', 'soviet' and/or 'dictatorship' into the top search box).

Another give away are the terms used (intelligentsia, peaceful coexistence); their knee-jerk pathological reactions to concepts like authority, dogma and religion; the need for a common scapegoat to blame all the short-comings of an otherwise perfect ideology on (neo-cons, Christians, Israel); the fact that their ideals are only practically attainable under totalitarian circumstances (intolerance towards dissenters); that the basic unit is the group (as opposed to the individual); criminalization of dissent (crimes against the ideology: racism, Islamo/homophobia, etc.); a mentality in which the end, justifies the means (everything is secondary to the realisation of the ideal); science is seen as a means to 'prove' the scientific correctness of the ideology (Darwinism, suppression of theories that potentially disprove its tenets and underpinnings); transnationalism (a borderless, multi-ethnic and multicultural 'Empire', the Emperor being substituted by a democratically unaccountable meritocratic elite); anti-realism; subjectivism (not: all men are created equal and therefore treated equally in similar circumstances, but: unequal groups must be compensated in proportion to their inequality); collectivism (ditto); a socially constructed identity and victimhood (ditto).

The above also explains the mutual identification of the postmodern ideologies with the cause of Islamism and their cooperation in the Unholy Alliance. All totalitarian concepts have a lot is common. Hence the mutual admiration. I don't propose to repeat the whole argumentation here again, as these posts are readily available in this blog (enter 'unholy alliance' and/or 'Islamo-Nazism' into the top search box).


Commentary from a contributor identified as The Great Satan, and brought together in an easy readable post "The Long Game- Enlightened Commenters Reveal All" on weblog "Mr Smith's Refusal" has some additional insights into the matter on the basis of Darwinism (natural selection and survival of the fittest), worth quoting extensively.

On the postmodern version of 'democracy':

"An ideal democracy is a coalition where political power is allocated among groups in proportion to their numbers. It has nothing to do with voting or with individual citizens expressing opinions, and in fact it doesn't require elections at all. A 'winner take all' system, or one ruled by a majority, is profoundly repugnant because it disenfranchises minority groups of all kinds and deprives them of their proper share of power."

... and emphasizes that ...

"National identity is evil. We should try to think of ourselves as citizens of the world, not as citizens of the nations in which we live, and we should try to minimize the effects of national interests, especially our own if we live in powerful nations."

And concludes ominously that ...

"... basically, the government policy is to ethnically and culturally replace the current majority ethnicity/culture with a different majority ethnicity/culture (ed.: Latino and Muslim for the U.S. and the E.U. respectively). Sounds familiar? It should because that is defacto GENOCIDE - albeit soft genocide by stealth [sic]. I imagine in Europe the Muslims would then wipe out the remaining Westerners by traditional genocide which they are quite good at."

In other words:

"... 'my' supposedly democratic government and media has the nerve to simply inform me it will continue with policies that will replace my ethnic/cultural group as the major ethnic/cultural group in my own country in relatively very small number of years, and if I don't like that, I am racist? ...."

"Diabolically clever. Hitler failed in his genocide of European Jews. The political U.S. and E.U. elites are much closer to a successful genocide of a much more numerous ethnic group."

I firmly agree with the qualification 'diabolical': that term sums up the stealth with which this treacherous policy of global proportions is being executed upon the indigenous people. Diabolical is also the crypto Marxist pseudo philosophy that underpins it all: relativism, i.e. your senses are untrustworthy, objective truth does not exist, and each person/culture/country/religion is identical except Western ones which are inherently and uniquely bad.

If you can make people believe that - eventually with the assistance of the useful media - anything goes - even global Islamic crypto Marxism.

Iran Day: Expressions of Fear on E.U. Index Expurgatorius

Given my complete lack of comprehension of the postmodern obsession with trivia, of which the Eurovision Crimes against Culture is a prime example, for the sake of completeness I briefly need to revert to yesterday's post, dealing with the subject. It is unbelievable how serious this nonsense is taken in some political circles, but that isn't what concerns me at present.

What does, is the depth and intensity the Eurabian self-censorship has taken. And it evidently extends to Iran. Let's not fool ourselves here anymore in respect of freedom of expression. These days you have to fine-comb all news outlets so as not to miss the finer points.

Only just now I discovered that the Israeli Eurovision entry "Push the Button" was disqualified from the song contest for expressing fear of an Iranian nuclear device! Though not officially so, the banning of the Jewish contribution was no doubt done with reference to Islamophobia, a state of mind on the E.U. Index Expurgatorius.

So they do understand that phobia means fear, not hatred! Europe and the mainstream media (MSM) are far braver than previously presumed! These aren't pocket size versions of Neville Chamberlain! They are taunting the sources of terror, communicating that 'we are not afraid of your bombs ... suppressing all expressions of fear is just the E.U. way of fighting terrorism!

After the abduction of the fifteen British sailors and the questionable way in which it was handled by the U.K. government, we are currently to understand there are more people missing. Take this BBC article about the 'lawful' arrest of Iranian-American academic Haleh Esfandiari on trumped up charges of spying for Israel. It mentions in passing that also a journalist, Parnaz Azima working for the US-funded Radio Farda, has gone missing. Since the Gulf War we know how the 'lawful' taking of hostages works.

A 9th May article on Opinion Journal argues that Iran's economic crisis should not be underestimated. I can recommend reading it: it's a shocker! And that, in spite of the E.U. economic assistance that ultimately means subsidizing Hizbollah's and Hamas' terror campaigns. On top of that "the mullahs are betting that short-term financial interests will prevent Europe from defending itself and acting against an existential threat to Israel."

With Iran also throwing its weight about in the region, things could hardly get any worse now that the two paranoid, nuclear rogue states are making it official! Only yesterday Reuters reported that "Iran and North Korea have agreed to step up bilateral contacts, an Iranian news agency said on Friday, signaling closer ties between two countries."

As the brain drain and the economic situation worsen Mahmoud Ahmadinejad needs the Jewish and American scapegoats to divert attention and to maintain a semblance of unity in the country. The Jerusalem Post recently provided interesting insights into the psychological mechanisms within the Islamic Republic and what it means: "For Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Israel's destruction is the final step in the realization of the Islamic revolution. He certainly must believe in his own propaganda, and he means what he says."

At which point we come full circle with the E.U. indexing any expressions of fear of an Iranian nuclear device: 'Bring - It - On!'

Of Empire and Metacultural Kitch

For a number of reasons I don't really want to do this post. The first item fills me with nostalgia of a world now definitely gone (and good riddance to it, as some would surely exclaim); the second subject is too stupid to exist, but it keeps an entire continent abuzz for weeks on end.

The first subject concerns the unveiling by Baroness Thatcher of a commemorative arch for the soldiers who fought during the Falklands War, when during the 1982 crisis, Argentina invaded the islands.

Needless to say I'm an admirer of Margaret Thatcher, who is not just one of the last generation of great statesmen, but also the Prime Minister who saved Britain from the stranglehold in which the unions kept the country. I personally was too young to remember very well, but my father assured me the country was on the verge of total collapse when she took over. Baroness Thatcher has thus left us the wonderful expression which to this day governments can take to heart: "to do a Maggy".

The costly defense of the barren, windy Falklands is something we wouldn't bother with today. So much do we desire peace in our time at any price, that we wouldn't think twice of turning the entire Falklands population as an imperialist remnant over to Argentine rule - to a murderous military junta or to a benevolent democratically elected government, is immaterial.

For fun I have purposely taken out a RSS subscription to the comment section of this article, just to see how the postmoderns' predictable reaction will be. The first one is already in: "A Great display of Imperialism!" Postmodernism is all about an imbecile's sense of justice, isn't it.

As a blog to which cultural issues are are all important, we simply have to 'deal' with that lovely, miserable piece of European metacultural bling bling that is the annual Eurovision Festival of Crimes against Culture. Year after year I swear a solemn oath never, ever to watch that piece of Euro junk again; year after year I forget my dire vow and tune in to it.

Sometimes I find myself bitterly complaining that it cannot possibly sink any lower and the whole thing is destined to become dog breakfast; in other years I have the distinct impression that the quality is actually improving somewhat, until the next performance tells me that this was merely wishful thinking on my part.

This year was of the latter category. Some countries converted to metacultural kitch, as a Baltic country performed an above average song in Italian; others are still deeply entrenched in multiculturalism. Like the Danes who had the gall to choose an illuminated Disneyland mosque as background to their jury presentation! It is only to be expected that some barbarian adherent to Operation Western Auto-Destruct at some point will call for the E.U. flags that bear cross symbolism, to be abolished as offensive to Muslims!

In many respects I thought I had passed the stage of substitutional shame long ago, yet I can't help the feeling of simply being sunk by embarrassment at some performances. Another thing one is always assured of, is that the best acts remain at the bottom end of the voting scale, while the most outrageous 'camp camp' ends up in the top ten. Yesterday was no exception. As Germany, Romania and the Baltic states produced some real quality music that remained dangling somewhere around the middle to lower sections of the popular vote; the cheap, bizarre nightmares of the Farther East came up trumps.

This phenomenon has given rise to Western complaints about an unbridgeable taste gap and even signs of open warfare on the festival as a whole. Personally I switched off the set half way through the night, entirely persuaded that the age-old rumours about political vote rigging must definitely be true! How else can you account for the advance of the Far Eastern 'bad taste' advance at the expense of the 'quality' Further West? Where's Monaco, where's Switzerland, Italy? Who's policing the popular televoting system? We don't know, do we?

Noteworthy last night was also the truly undeserved high vote received by Turkey, which must be due to multicultural positive action emanating from the P.C. West, and/or the Turkish diaspora using every phone appliance available, to ensure the homeland receives as many votes as possible. How else can the vulgar piece of ostentatious gender bending that was the Turkish contribution, end up at the very top?

I can now definitely cast some light on the Greek-Cyprus mutual admiration mechanism that the Western hemisphere is almost eagerly awaiting each year with some traditional hilarity. I can presently personally attest to the fact that the Athens commentators were sincerely surprised at so much unexpected benevolence on the part of the sister island! Thanks very much for the douze points, guys - we'll return the compliment next year!

Dutch jury anchor Paul de Leeuw still doesn't get that his particular brand of cynical gay humor simply isn't understood beyond the confines of the narrow Dutch borders! His blatant meant to shock gayness doesn't even come across as such: the Athens commentators called him an equivalent Greek colloquial term for a macho! Stop shaming the country before an international audience, Paul, and for Narcissus' sake, next year make a stop-over at the powder puff's prior to going on air, dear!


I can say I'm glad Serbia's Marija Serifovic won the contest as the ballad, entitled 'prayer' was above average and the performance was within the limits of propriety. But in good Eurovision tradition I can't say I have no suspicions.

To be quite, quite, Marija is a bit too diky - which is of course an officially E.U. recognized minority that must be compensated in proportion to their inequality. Likewise the E.U. seeks to rehabilitate Serbia as a politically correct nation, with the upcoming Kosovo independence deserving of some compensation, as for example re-instatement into polite European society. One way of doing that is winning and hosting Eurovision. Or am I simply too much giving in to the conspirational tradition?

As for the countries that make up the British Isles, they simply haven't got enough neighbours to ever win another Eurovision again! Cheerio, Johnny Logan!

Glad we got that out of the way. Perhaps the whole thing will finally blow up over the East-West taste divide, enabling us to revert to the more serious E.U. conspiracies.

"Yes my Friends, I will Call for War ..."

"Yes my friends, I will call for war just as powerfully as the bad guys do and I must show them that I'm stronger than they are, because they do not understand the language of civilization and reason. They understand only power ... everything they accomplished was through absolute control over the assets of their nations through murder, torture, repression and intimidation."

The above is a paragraph from the 7th May's post on blog "Iraq the Model". To those whose political affiliation leads them to the denial of reality, here's a contribution from Bernard Lewis, a breed of scholar on the brink of extinction thanks to dumbing down to ensure equal dumb outcome and the onslaught of relativism. Lewis' lecture deals with recent historical backgrounds in the Middle East, pertinent to the above:

"In 1940, the government of France decided to surrender and, in effect, changed sides in the war. The greater part of the colonial empire was beyond the reach of the Axis, and the governors therefore had a free choice: Vichy or de Gaulle. The overwhelming majority chose Vichy, including - and this is what concerns us specifically - the governor, high commissioner, he was called, of the French-mandated territory of Syria-Lebanon. So, Syria-Lebanon was wide open to the Nazis, and they moved in on a large scale, not with troops, because that would have been too noticeable, but with propaganda of every kind."

"It was then that the roots of Ba'athism were laid and the first organizations were formed, which ultimately developed into the Ba'ath Party. It was then that the Nazi style of ideology and government became known, eagerly embraced simply because it was anti-Western rather than because of inherent attraction."

"From Syria, they succeeded in spreading it to Iraq, where they even set up a Nazi-style government for a while, headed by Rashid Ali. It was possible to deal with that, and they were driven out of the Middle East. But after the war, the Western allies also left and the Soviets moved in, taking the place of the Nazis as a champion against the West. To switch from the Nazi to the communist model required only minor adjustments".

The communists may have gone as well with the demise of the Soviet Union, but a system and a mentality aren't shaken that easily. In any case the Ba'athist regimes in Iraq and Syria remained, until Saddam was thrown out of Iraq by 'the neocon Coalition'. Here's Iraq The Model's blogger again with another excerpt from "Don't bury your heads in the sand":

"I have said it over and over again that some of us in Iraq and America are sending wrong messages to the terrorists and the dictators behind them; in fact I wasn't surprised when I saw Zawahiri appear on al-Jazeera to announce America's defeat, not long after Reid did. Zawahiri claims al-Qaeda has won and Reid claims America has lost but I see only a war that's still ongoing and I see ... that al-Qaeda has the shortest stick."

"We are going through a fierce war and sending more wrong messages could only further complicate an already complicated situation and create more mess that would be exploited by Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia for their own purposes - more iron-fist control on the peoples and treasures of the region and pushing the Middle East to crises and confrontations with the world, not forgetting spreading their dark, backward ideologies."

Need I go on? So much for the real world. And this is while American and Coalition soldiers bite the dust in Iraq, risking life and limb for a cause bigger than themselves, that Democrats are willfully endangering the soldiers' lives through petty party politics, and European and American brats that are spoiled to the bone, display their mindless message of No To Fascism! to the wrong party, the ones that are fighting it!

How stupid can a human being get! In France and Greece cars are set alight night after night as they play "anarchist". Here are the figures from France's blasé anti Sarko lot, to whose youthful cynicism

"(to the) persecuted by the tyrannies and by the dictators, to all the children and to all the martyrized women in the world to say to them that the pride, the duty of France will be at their sides"

has no meaning at all because "he's a neocon, isn't he?" Blister their little bourgeois buttocks with .... censored for legal reasons.

In Greece they got out the heavy weaponry and are attacking entire police stations. In fact, the latter might be of another order altogether, more inspired by 19th century Russian nihilism. As we have seen in "History Class: of Agit-prop, Revolution and Terror this was the pet project of their variety of bourgeois brats, the children of the new Russian middle classes: they took up terror as a weapon to create an atmosphere that fostered repression, war and revolution, clearing the ground for their Marxist worker's paradise.

All that romantic quasi heroism might appeal to the average postmodern, suburban, middle class, ignoramus, bored to death as he is with his own lack of spirit and character; but in consideration of the present state of affairs, reliving their romanticized versions of history amounts to handing a Daisy Cutter to a baby.

Alternatively they might find it in themselves to pick up a book and learn the first things about democracy and liberty: that it requires a rational population with a sense of responsibility and respect for each other's rights, possessions and opinions! Apart from it looking a bit moronic to blindly keep on fighting the wrong parties, how else are we to deal with the assimilating aspirations of The Borg, like the ravings of this particular Muzzleman:

"Western 'civilization' is in its death throes. It is collapsing around you as every day the blasphemous lies upon which it is based are exposed. Every day the descent into degeneracy accelerates. You recognise this and have become quite irrational as you contemplate your future. But there is no reason to fear. Just open your eyes and look around you. Everywhere you look you will see the advance of Islam. You must realise that Islam is not just a "religion" in the sense that Westerners understand that term. In fact, Islam is a complete way of life and provides the answers to all questions. Open your eyes, embrace Islam, and live in peace in submission to the will of Almighty Allah (swt). Your grandchildren will be Muslim. Allahu akbar!"

Bees pee upon them all! (Thanks for the loan, Skipper!).

Tony's Canard, Bunkers and some darned thing in the Balkans

"I did what I thought was right". The end of an era. Tony Blair today announced he will tender his resignation to the Queen on 27th June after ten years in office. His Labour economic legacy is debatable. I haven't had the pleasure of seeing the U.K. up close for a while, and cannot really judge the fairness of statements like "whole towns are on the state's payroll: we have no one on the dole, we only have civil servants". What I do admire is the man's core decency, his patience and power of persuasion - at least, his efforts in casu the Iraq War, which I still consider to be a Liberation.

I still see him endlessly debating TV studios filled to the brink with hysterical anti war activists.Teenagers, some moved to tears with frustration over their incapacity to understand that removing a murderous tyrant from one of the world's strategic hot spots, is of a higher moral order than letting the bastard sit out his time at the rate of hundreds tortured to death on any given day, only to be succeeded by a dynasty of recreational serial rapists. Tony, you did the right thing!

There's no debating postmodern sentimentality and irrationality, is there? The time of great statesmen is definitely over as baby-boomers hold the reigns of power. Since postmoderns have done away with the concept of objective truth, it is consequently not something they aspire to. So we don't have seekers for truth, we have activists whose opinion is formed by blurting out the very opposite of what they deem to be "the enemy's".

For instance, if U.S. President George W. Bush seeks to disseminate democracy in the Middle East, if only because democracies are on the whole more peaceful nations than Islamic versions of Nazi-Germany - the concept of democracy is vilified and its virtues relativised out of existence: suddenly "so overrated!"

Similarly, if author Melanie Phillips "is a British neoconservative" (no need to ask any less shallow questions: she's a neocon, isn't she?) "who has devoted herself to warning England that Muslims are taking over and destroying its culture" , as stated in her "oh-so-cleverly titled book, Londonistan", this is considered a hype and a gross exaggeration (or something). Let me not fall into the trap of retaliating at the italics at this point with a list of laughable Leftist book titles, their particular fruits of cerebral ravings!

The point is that if someone finally unearths Marshall Tito's Iraqi bunkers, an obvious WMD storage facility and hiding space as there ever was (one that was destroyed is described here), these reports are consigned to the muck-heap as "drooling, deranged, self-evidently moronic conspiracy dribble" ... have you quite finished? Let me ask the reader in all honesty: what age do you suppose the producer of this infantile graffiti is?

This champion linguistic distance urinating is Glenn Greenwald, blogger at Salon.com. His juvenile invective is condensed in an article with the brilliant title "Right-wing blogs discover massive conspiracy to hide WMDs in Iraq", together with updates II, III and IV. Here are links to Melanie Phillips' article "I found Saddam’s WMD bunkers" and to Front Page Magazine's item "The Iraqi WMDs That Slipped Through Our Fingers".

Let's remind ourselves at this point that the WMD as a casus belli was a British canard, initiated by Tony Blair to make his task at home a little easier - and fat lot of good it did him! Factual reason was that Saddam had been violating the terms for ending the 1st Gulf War for twelve long years, an offence the Security Council for economic reasons best known to themselves, failed to enforce.

This item warrants much more in-depth coverage, which I will certainly do, but early awareness - if not hot-blooded activism - is important on this point. Michelle Malkin yesterday in "Jihadists Exploit Our Hospitality and Open Borders ... Again" describes a 'plot' in CNN inverted commas to massacre U.S. soldiers at Fort Dix. One of the suspects, "Abdullahu was familiar with the base because it was the first place he landed when arriving in the United States as a refugee from Kosovo ... Abdullahu arrived at Fort Dix as a teenager in 1999 as part of a group of about 4,400 refugees from Kosovo, officials said".

Thanks, says Michelle Malkin. Thanks, says I, after the U.N. and the E.U. with U.S. endorsement - are saying Yes to a potentially Muslim state in Europe's heartland. "As said by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Lantos at a recent Kosovo hearing "Here is yet another example that the United States ... stands foursquare for the creation of an overwhelmingly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe."

Diana West's Townhall article "The 'limited' war for 'hearts and minds'" from which the above is an excerpt, carries an icon at the top: "Take Action"; please hit it!

As Europe, the U.N. and America console themselves with the thought that, since "we're all interconnected now" which seems to warrant "peace at any price", and the Balkan's Muslims moreover are a far cry from the Saudi desert, the signs are there - if suppressed by the MSM - that things are already starting to go very wrong indeed! Try that ... and this, for an appetizer of some darned thing in the Balkans ...

Eurabia: Brace Yourselves, Here Comes Sharia Law!

We are faced with freedom issues, more precisely, freedom of speech and freedom of the press. What is termed the Western mainstream media (MSM) are either so seriously biased, or so self-censored, to the point that - frankly, whatever they write - it has become suspect.

In the more recent past this phenomenon touched classical socio-economic Left versus Right issues, such as free-markets, trade unions, the size of the government (big versus small), liberalisation, price controls, etc. To anyone with any sense of objectivity left, it is obvious that most of the press rooms and media offices are inhabited by Leftist activists, or at least journalists with Left leaning sympathies.

I write this from a European perspective, which is why I have no exact knowledge why the press as a whole became somewhat more balanced in the United States. But I think it was during the Reagan years that conservative press and radio were born, something I understand the Democrats now want to abolish by legislating 'balanced journalism'.

The problem why Leftist journalists cannot be objective in their coverage, is that they're persuaded that men aren't created equal; reason why minorities must be compensated in proportion to their inequality, and groups of 'victims' get a different press treatment in similar cases.

With the vast inroads made by Muslim immigrants, and the event of Eurabia - the snail-pace merging of Europe, Northern Africa and chunks of the Middle East - we are faced with media bias of yet another - and let's face it - of far more sinister proportions. And apparently it's not just an European problem either!

Added to above described mechanism is last year's E.U. involvement in guiding the press towards better coverage of the Eurabian merger. To this end the boys in Brussels have drawn up a vocabulary of acceptable, 'unemotive' newspeak. The Brussels Journal has covered it extensively. An E.U. official: "The basic idea behind it is to avoid the use of improper words that would cause frustration among Muslims and increase the risk of radicalisation."

The Brussels Journal has rightly likened said list of politically correct lingo to George Orwell's 1984 B-vocabulary, that is described by Dictionary.com as "Deliberately ambiguous and contradictory language used to mislead and manipulate the public."

Just recently it would appear the E.U. watchdog has given up on the official media altogether and placed all its faith in the conservative blegosphere.

Last March the E.U. issued a secret common lexicon or guidebook, instructing government spokespersons how to use the newspeak so as to prevent "the distortion of the Muslim faith and the alienation of Muslims in Europe."

In October Britain's Daily Mail published an article in which BBC News' star reporters openly and rather proudly admitted that, yes "We are biased". This is so shocking because first of all the BBC have always been synonymous with the highest standards in journalism, and secondly that they aren't in the least ashamed of their malpractice ... on the contrary, they are proud of it!

In the recent post "AnotherVictory of Unreason over Reality" we have seen that the 35,000 members of Britain's National Union of Journalists have simply given up on even pretending to keep up neutrality and emotional distance.

The Dutch government now seems to be in competition with the boys in Brussels in finding innovative ways to muzzle free speech. Not content with reigning in citizens and government spokespersons, it is now seeking ways to pressure constitutionally independent politicians in behaving in accordance with the Eurabian merger.

Heavily guarded Dutch M.P. Geert Wilders, founder of the Freedom Party (PVV) which operates on a immigration stoppage platform and voices perfectly legitimate concerns of citizens who see their world crumble before their very eyes - recently received an invitation to tea at the premises of the national anti-terrorism czar. Although accounts of reason and content vary from both sides, we can safely assume it didn't involve small talk over compost heap management.

According to Elsevier Magazine, the last remaining independent Dutch media outlet left standing, Wilders was told to moderate the tone in which he normally discusses immigration issues, so as "not to provoke Muslims". In recent months Wilders has voiced criticism of Islam which specifically prompted Saudi Arabia to 'unofficially' demand a retraction and an apology.

Elsevier mentions also that reason for the discussions at the czar's "formed the raging responses in the Islamic world and the fear for terror, violence and economic sanctions. A threat of a recurrence of Islamic intimidation after the publishing of the cartoons of the prophet Mohammed in Denmark."

The article concludes that "The fear is not unfounded. It has been established how Islamic fundamentalists react to ridicule and criticism. But it is especially painful in this affair, that intimidation by Muslims leads to a plea for (self)censorship. If anxious Dutch authorities request M.P.s not to provoke Muslims in order to prevent sanctions, it is proof that terror does work."

Above examples are just an upbeat to the real thing!

The newest member of the E.U. dedicated MSM today in passing mentions that: "German government talks with the Islamic community reflect growing concern in Berlin that the angry children of immigrants may turn to terrorism because they are excluded from German prosperity."

The article "Background: Alarm grows over Muslim youth in Germany" by Jean-Baptiste Piggin goes on to specify the figures of Islam in Germany and concludes in passing that - and sit down for this one:

"The government says it is seeking a trade-off, where Germany changes some laws to accommodate Muslims while the Islamic community commits itself to German democracy."

This is how Germany proposes to save freedom as we know it: by a trade-off involving elements of Sharia Law! By cheap bargaining over our rights and freedoms as if they were peanuts!

Even yesterday it seemed far fetched, theoretical and an exaggeration that Dutch Government Minister Donner remarked that "imposing Sharia Law must be possible if a constitutional majority so wishes", today we are faced with the shocking reality of it in Germany. C'mon! Nazidom was nasty, but even Germany doesn't deserve this fate! Stop the self-mutilation!

But that is not all! Not only is this happening without any democratic consent whatsoever, but nobody of our ruling elites perceives the lack of morality in this. This treasonous lot aren't even moral relativists, they're simply amoral!

It's been a wonderful experience, the diversity of European culture! And it seems a waste of all that blood that's been shed to come this far. But it seems our spine has given out. Will the last person to leave please switch off the light?

Socialism's Dangerous Games

An article by French columnist Sylvain Ephimenco in Dutch newspaper 'Trouw' brings the subject of present post to three concurring events: the fifth anniversary of the assassination of Pim Fortuyn at the hand of an animal rights fundamentalist stirred into action by Leftist invective - expressed amongst others by the former Socialist leader Ad Melkert - presently at the World Bank grinding neocon Paul Wolfowitz to Gerbil Mix; today's final round of French presidential elections in which the Gaullist candidate Nicolas Sarkozy is favorite by a margin of 10 percentage points or thereabouts, and the dangerous cards played by Socialists.

Five years after the Fortuyn revolution ended in tears, events are commemorated as postmodernity knows best: with useless polls. Forty percent of Dutch surveyed would vote for him again today, if they could. The man was popular because he broke the mold in which Dutch politicians are usually made, and because he hadn't a politically correct bone in his body.

After the dominance of politics per Ad Melkert, who was the champion of both traits, Fortuyn's eccentricity came as a fresh breeze. He was Melkert's alter ego in many respects. The situation was without precedent, and established politicians reacted as they do at present in France: by vilifying the opponent to the point of some nut taking it upon himself to "save the world of this dangerous upstart".

Ephimenco writes: "... this man was dangerous and therefore had to be taken out. If anything hasn't changed since that day, it is the cynical intolerance of politicians and pundits who hung themselves with the rags of tolerance and progressiveness to demonize him. I write this while my heart is filled with anxiety, for what I see in this French campaign for the land's highest office, strongly reminds me of the those days in the Netherlands, five years ago. The hatred towards the rightist favorite, Nicolas Sarkozy during the French election campaign is similar to what Fortuyn underwent in his short political career. The vindictive Left sometimes seems to have the exclusive rights to use improper instruments to foster intolerance. With dangerous consequences. l'Histoire se répète: as soon as electoral defeat gets into sight, demonization becomes the weapon of the poor of spirit."

If that isn't blood curling enough, he continues: "The director of the film 'Shoa' on the Jewish holocaust, Claude Lanzmann writes in magazine 'Le Point': 'I believe that never in my life in France, I have experienced such negative campaigning, so filled with stinking libel against a candidate for the presidential election. I never imagined a democratic debate could go this far.' The left camp around Ségolène Royal has struck at anything to picture the rival Sarkozy as the new Pinochet. Just to cause fear and civil unrest. Last Friday morning, on the point of losing, Royal brought forward the most repulsive arguments yet to save her campaign: with a victory of Sarkozy, France will be brought to the edge of civil war, she suggested: "It is my responsibility to sound the alarm concerning the dangers of a Sarkozy win, and the violence that will occur in this country. Everyone knows this and everyone is silent, because it's a taboo". It is my conviction that this woman who is provoking the suburbs, is deeply malicious."

Just how vile, personal and bordering the surreal the political polarization is, is exemplified by a tiny piece of vitriol on the BBC website: "In Argenteuil, the town north-west of Paris where Mr Sarkozy notoriously talked of hosing out 'rabble' before the 2005 urban riots (my emphasis), Doratine Ekoka, a 70-year-old retired computer programmer, said she trusted Ms Royal to 'clean up public life'. A Sarkozy victory, she added, "would be like a punishment from God" because of his "terrible character". How, in the name of anything that's holy did we get so far, that God and a rabble rousing moral relativist are invoked against a politician for stating the obvious, as his personal character is smeared in the process?!

Which begs the second question: just how far is the Left prepared to go in accommodating and placating the Muslim electorate and play the Islamist card, euphemistically dubbed "the suburbs"? If the Socialist win in Spain was brought about in reaction to a massive terrorist attack, the above picture is one of political blackmail and threats against the public order. All this poison might be the result of sheer panic over what's brewing in 'the suburbs', but playing it as an electoral card is a mighty dangerous game.

Muslim assertivity, discontent and victimhood might be harnassed in the service of a Socialist electoral win, it may be placated, apologised and appeased against better judgment, but it will be next to impossible to get this particular genie back into the bottle.

Today we are witnessing the next major instalment in the global culture war. At stake: survival of Western civilization.

Liberation: celebrations 2007

These commemorations on 4th and 5th May marking the Allied liberation of The Netherlands from Nazi occupation (see yesterday's post), are in its current form a story in themselves. This Commissariat that is coordinating the festivities at the behest of the sitting government (letting things run their natural course isn't an option), consists of a couple of obligated retired Leftist politicians, and a number of unknown functionaries whom I take to be (retired) civil servants, worthy of such honour.

Commemorating such a happy event suggests laurels, flags, air shows, floral tributes, eulogies, parades, military tattoos and church services, followed by perhaps a open-air concert. Not so, in postmodern Holland. The entire business is safely steered clear of anything remotely smelling of patriotism and 'militarism', which could only be offensive to immigrants.

An explanation for this postmodern piece of 'logic' is never on offer: I think that - on the contrary - it's far from obvious! But to the average Leftist patriotism always smacked too much any way of the days of empire, to the bad old days when the dwarf subjected a giant (i.e. today's Indonesia). America, a former colony themselves, put a stop to that situation - not that they're ever thanked for it ...

Favoured theme of the Commissariat is "Freedom is what you do together", with a heavy accent on genetic diversity, an appetizer for another borderless empire that is as yet in the process of being constructed. Festivities are pop concerts, the recitation of politically correct poetry, ethnic fairs and other expressions of multicultural kitch; open air activities involving lots of drums and pre-selected representatives of just about any ethnic and cultural group that makes up the new nation.

The old Prince-Consort, Bernhard played a prominent role during World War II. After 1945 he maintained close personal ties with veterans and heroes of the resistance. Two years back the unpatriotic-togetherness-in-diversity brigade heaved a sigh of relief when the old rascal was finally laid to rest, and the whole disgusting circus of flag waiving, military medal peddling, wheelchair parade of old-timers became a thing of the past, where it belonged.

Since then - uninterrupted by the antiquated liberators and their smelly old rolling stock, and the politically incorrect assorted bric-a-brac of a nation past - the unpatriotic-togetherness-in-diversity crowd enjoys the celebrations of pluralism to their heart's content, blissfully unaware they owe the opportunity to the Allied old-timers in the first place.

Liberation: commemorations 2007

In news from the Netherlands, the results of an annual survey, carried out by the commissariat that is responsible for the 4th and 5th May commemorations and festivities, marking liberation by the Allied Forces from German occupation in 1945, show the following remarkable details.

From the 1,000 respondents eighty percent 'believe in the existence of groups in the country that are a threat to democracy'. Respondent's first choice is a group composed of 'right wing fundamentalists, extremists and religious fanatics'. Second choice is 'terrorist groups'.

This is a puzzle! It's more the questions than the answers that beg clarification. What's with this relativism? You don't believe in facts, you know them, or not! Who do they suggest the perpetrators of terrorism are? Are there any other than right wing fundamentalist religious extremist fanatics, unless they are left wing fundamentalist religious extremist fanatics, otherwise known as animal rights activists, environmentalists (a.k.a. Gaia animists ) or anti-globalists? Considering one of them, a Gaia worshipping legal terrorist - committed the first politically motivated assassination in modern Dutch history - the cold blooded murder of Pim Fortuyn - one would have thought they'd be included.

The thought that the very ideology that centres around individual freedom, Liberalism itself, behaves as an enemy of freedom, hasn't been noticed yet, or isn't perceived as such.

Freedom of speech is seen as a fundamental right, but apparently not absolutely so, as forty percent thinks that in respect of multiculturalism it is sometimes preferable to think twice before expressing an opinion. "Apparently the debate has gone to such extremes that you cannot always speak your mind", concludes the report.

I'll have a closer look at it and report back: I smell a gerbil.

Another Victory of Unreason over Reality

We live in blessed times. Man is making great strides forward. After we have done away with the shocking notion that one religion or culture might actually be superior to another if only because one stayed barren while another caused civilization as we know it; and even the regrettable scientific theory of the existence of objective truth has been discredited, thus enabling us to commit oppressive ideas as 'lies', 'wrong', 'mistake' and 'error' to eternity; today we can celebrate that neutrality as vital prerequisite for professional journalism has finally fallen in the name of victory of unreason over reality.

That the mainstream media (MSM) have become a by-word for political bias was an accusation which - till today - was always vehemently denied. Yet any owner of a bit of an open mind reading the papers, watching television or the Internet, could come to the conclusion that the dice are loaded on the left hand side.

As neutrality and emotional distance once were the trademarks of professional journalism, one would have thought that the allegation of bias is a serious one. Yet the BBC has gone within the course of one year, from the standard bearer of the trade to one of the worst offenders against it.

Since anti-Americanism re-took hold - as it usually does to some degree with a Republican President in the White House - even the pretence of impartial reporting got less and less with each passing year that George W. Bush has been in office.

As former neoconservative politicians turn into Gerbil Mix wherever the opportunity presents itself, U.S. ally Israel is at present singled out by Britain's 35,000 strong membership of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) as a particularly savage country, as it sits in an ocean of human and social injustice. But in this vast field of choice in the Middle East, the NUJ has declared a boycott against America's ally.

Just say No! to Israeli agricultural produce, they demand, echoing former U.S. President Carter's ludicrous accusation of "Apartheid!". Ludicrous, as the essence of Apartheid is discrimination on the basis of race: the author was the first to deny that this was the case, thereby declaring the title of his own book null and void.

The luminaries and intelligentsia that make up the Leftist elite, likely subscribers of the Euston Manifesto and other such offences against reason, en masse adhere to "multiculturalism, that university-nurtured version of cultural relativism that has now firmly ensconced itself wherever politically correct college-educated elites congregate, which is to say just about everywhere." Needless to say that the vast majority of the NUJ are likely self-proclaimed members of said elite.

Another trait of this côterie is the blood-chilling cynicism that is the result of the disappointment after communism failed to live up to its earlier promises to put an end, once and for all, to Western civilization. After a decade or as so of brooding over this unsatisfactory state of affairs, a particularly nasty piece of irrationality was dreamed up: relativism, accompanied by its ugly stepsister multiculturalism.

A lot has been said in these pages about these postmodern pseudo philosophies, but the fact of the matter is, at heart, these fallacies to a large extent cloak cowardice in a shroud of intellectualism. It sounds as an excuse, but Clifford Day in his article "Hacks or Flacks?" on the site of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies describes why the NUJ seems to be caving in to intimidation:

"Johnson’s kidnapping (by Palestinians), the abduction and forced conversions of Fox journalists Steve Centanni and Olaf Wiig, the video-taped decapitation of Daniel Pearl - these and other atrocities are intimidating a growing list of journalists."

He sarcastically concludes that "with this as backdrop, perhaps the NUJ boycott against Israel should be seen less as bias and more as a kind of tribute - a sacrifice of journalistic integrity in the hope it may appease the editors who matter most, those who cut not with red pens but with butcher knives, those who produce not packages for the evening news but snuff videos for the Internet."

I say, if you haven't got the spine to uphold your own standard of professionalism against your personal political activism, go find a job where your lack of character and spirit is less required. Go restock store shelves, or something!

Multicultural Eggs? Please, not again ....

Further to the post "After Easter: Islamic Tyrannosaurus Eggs II" which, amongst other items, dealt with the recent article "The Strange Death of Multiculturalism" from the hand of one of the Threefold Kings of the Borg, Ian Buruma, an apostle of multiculturalism and irrationalism, I can at present advise that I encountered a true soul-mate.

On Armavirumque, weblog of the New Criterion, Roger Kimball is also critiquing the article with the enigmatic title. I especially feel for him where he utters in true despair: "Where to begin ...?".

Dealing with the fruits of the relativist mind truly isn't for the fainthearted and for those of tender stomach!

By all means read it, but don't say I didn't warn you!

An Existential Answer!

The question posed yesterday, i.e. is any majority ever justified in abolishing the state of democracy, was not only given in by the constitutional problems presently playing out in Turkey - by which the E.U. blindly sides with fundamentalism over preserving democracy - but also by the remarks made by a Dutch Government Minister that - if such would be the wish of a constitutional majority - it should be possible to impose Sharia Law in The Netherlands. That remark was made some months ago, but frankly - after a storm of protest - I haven't seen him retract the statement!

The consequences of wars and revolutions excepted, it might so come to pass that even a minority government stands before the question. I take that to be insufficient in any case for such existential decisions. Frankly, I think all the world's nations would be well advised to set a few constitutional rules in stone about this matter.

The question might be excused if Dutch Minister Piet Hein Donner is perhaps intellectually challenged or morally impaired. Or is he simply criminally naive? Is he a psychiatric patient on the loose, or is he suicidal to the point that he even wants to take the Dutch welfare state with him to his grave? Alternatively, perhaps he's just a relativist? Or a multiculturalist who ran out of patience to see Islamic rule replace Western ethnocentric hegemony at its natural demographic pace?

Truth is Mr Piet Hein Donner's pedigree is simply above any suspicion: decency is his middle name and he has an above average intellect, at least officially so. He comes from good, solid Calvinist stock, born in a patrician family with a long history in government and the judiciary. Actually, his remarks may have been 'quoted out of context' by the MSM. Mr Donner himself says he meant issuing a warning. Indeed.

I think however that's not the whole story. Black and white Calvinist as he is, I believe he may have been coldly extrapolating future demographics and taking the state of democracy to that ultimate result: a two thirds majority that is required to change the Constitution and vote the rule of law out of existance and with it - de facto - democracy. Mr Donner's no fool, he's a democratic fundamentalist!

As we have concluded in the 'Easter Egg' series of posts, that contrary to multiculturalist tenets that "all faiths are the same", the religion of Islam isn't your any home and garden, bread and butter faith at all. Far from it. We shouldn't confuse our Buddhist ammonium nitrate collectors with our Evangelist disenfranchised bombists, as it were. By Muslim admission, and as the founder of the modern Turkish state, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk well knew, the religion of Islam isn't compatible with democracy: the people would be usurping the power of Allah, it's that simple.

From my part here I'd like to argue that by allowing a government by the people, the rule of law, and the separation of Church and State to be replaced by a theocracy to which either three don't owe one iota, such would be an unnatural and irreversible step backwards that cannot be man's destiny.

By which I mean this: the people can decide to impose an Islamic theocracy, an Islamic theocracy would never freely choose to impose a rule by the people. By the same token - and contrary to any ordinary European Christian Democrat party - a Koran based political party is an anomaly: it's like giving the fox the ballot about raiding the hen house!

Another way yet: while democracy has Greek classical roots, the rule of law is founded on Jewish biblical tradition and Roman law, the separation of Church and State (secularism, laity) is a Christian principle, Islam is bent on replacing all that by the law of 7th century desert raiding.

The ultimate goal of democracy can never be the irreversible end of its own existence. No wonder Ataturk gave it a formidable watch dog to prevent it from committing suicide, boys of Brussels!

An Existential Question?

Long time readers might be aware of our failed campaign against the inappropriate polls and surveys that fill every possible inch of cyberspace available.

Today nevertheless a question for you:

Does any majority ever have the right to knowingly vote for abolishing the state of democracy?