Saturday, January 28, 2006
HAMAS won the government. The Muslim Brotherhood took too many seats in Egypt. Hizbollah is in charge in souther Lebanon. Syria is allied with the nuke-making Iranian nutters. Pakistanis rampage, riot, murder Christians, and have nuclear weapons. Christian girls are beheaded on their way to school in Malaysia. Bangladesh is roiling with bomb attacks on markets. Thailand is falling apart under jihadi attacks. Muslims attempted to overthrow the government of Trinidad. And on it goes. It gets worse. Daily it's getting worse. All hell is breaking loose.
And yet, I see this as a good thing. I see this as our call to action. We can't much longer pretend that this is normal, our fault if it's bad, or that it'll stop. No, this is the time to prepare ourselves for the coming and inevitable change in the order of the world's way. I think we in the Modern West have the strength of mind to make the whole world a livable place for all. We will get what we work for. If we don't work, we will die out. Nature doesn't care. It's up to us to decide the future of Humanity.
What a great task we are given.
If you feel that you'd like to organise among your mates some resistence to jihad and against the foolishness of so many of our own, our idiot Left fascist dhimmis, I offer this space to you to announce yourselves ready to sit in public to meet your friends, to discuss, and perchance to plan.
I chose McDonalds as a public place where any and all can meet conveniently. I adopted the sign of the Bleue Scarf movement in France as a way of us signalling to each other our presence. It needn't be that but anything we choose. If you will, please meet your friends. Leave a location if you're will. I'll be at McD.s on Thursday coming from 7-9:00 pm at Main st. off Terminal ave. in Vancouver, Canada. Please join me. Or, if you're elsewhere, join others.
This is our glorious time. How great is Man.
Friday, January 27, 2006
[Dag]. I have mailed Claude Reichman in France about the fantastic efforts that yourself, Voltaire, Rebecca and others have done.
Should anyone be interested in how the Paris event went. Please read [Dag's] blog for the report.
I sign in at jihadwatch.org as sonofwalker, a reference to a probably non-existent relationship to William Walker, 19th century filibuster. To keep things simple here I used my name in the addresses above.
I wish to thank and congratulate all who've dont their parts in thee meetings last night. We can go from here to change the whole world. It's a matter for the most part of becoming intolerant in public of Islamic madness. To sit in a public place and meet people we don't know, to say "Hey, we don't like this and it's wrong to put up with it," that is a message many people want to hear but are afraid to speak openly. If we give them a chance they will add their voices. Yes, even Muslims will come out to join us. Not all of them are insane. They as much as we deserve life rather than the small minorty of ideologues who scream and pose at any point that disagreement with their ideology is fascistic or racist. Sometimes the majority is simply right, and the leaders of our cultures are just dead wrong. Wrong is wrong, and we can say so in public.
No money for HAMAS. No putting up silently with Presbyterian ministers saying criticism of Islam is racist. No turning a blind eye to little girls mutilated by their parents. Some things are wrong. Now we can meet and say it loudly and clearly: No more Islamic madness. We've had enough.
Let's join again and add others to our list of men and women who are ready and willing to sit down and drink coffee with ech other and say no to Islam and terror.
Take Back the Culture. That is roughly what we're beginning to see in some parts of Europe recently. From France to Norway, citizens and residents are this winter expressing their discontent with the governments, media, and public intellectuals who pander to and appoligise for Muslim madness in the nations of Europe, pretending that Islam is important, demanding, even threatening that the locals must bend and bow and scrape in order to prove their moral and social enlightenment by appeasing every whim of the Muslim minorities, violence and mayhemn not withstanding. Now there is a line drawn by artists in the proverbial sand, cartoons published in a Danish newspaper, cartoons deemed offensive to Muslims world-wide, cartoons resulting in Mulsim boycotts of Danish goods. Death threats. Riots. The wide-spread reaction one has come to expect from the religion of peace on any and all ocassions. Danes, Swedes, Norwegians, French, Belgian, they've had enough in some cases, and the cases are growing. Include the Austrians. Perhaps even the Australian. Include me, include yourself. Enough is enough. Below we see what the Danes and their fellows in the frozen far north are thinking, thanks to a link from http://ibloga.blogspot.com/.
Danish Imams Propose to End Cartoon Dispute
The Danish imams, who protested the publication of 12 Muhammad cartoons [see them all below] in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten last September, have announced that they want to end the dispute. For four months the imams and their radical Muslim organizations have unsuccesfully demanded government censorship. However, despite immense pressure (also from international organizations such as the UN and the EU) the Danish government refused to call the newspaper to account.
Last week a couple of Norwegian papers decided to publish the cartoons in support of the Danish paper while in Denmark moderate Muslims, encouraged by the government's refusal to be intimidated by the radicals, have distanced themselves from the imams. The latter announced on Friday that they no longer demand apologies from Jyllands-Posten for the publication. Instead they said they just want two things: a guarantee from the Danish authorities that Muslims can freely practice their religion without being "provoked and discriminated." And a declaration from Jyllands-Posten that the cartoons were not published with the intention of mocking the Muslim faith. "We want Jyllands-Posten to show respect for the Muslims. This can happen with an apology, but it can also happen in some other way. We will leave it to Jyllands-Posten to come up with some ideas," said Ahmed Akkari, spokesman of the Muslim organizations. "We want respect for Muhammad restored and we want him to be described as the man he really was in history, and that he gets the respect he deserves," Akkari stressed that Muslim organizations are still deeply opposed to the publication of the cartoons.
The Muslim organizations and Jyllands-Posten met last week to discuss the matter. "It was a good and constructive meeting. We agreed that we need to find a solution," said Carsten Juste, editor of Jyllands-Posten. Juste stressed that the meeting was one step in a reconciliation process which the Muslim organizations and the newspaper began in December.
Some sceptics wonder whether the demands of the imams have changed fundamentally. They still insist that Jyllands-Posten admit that publishing the cartoons was wrong and make amends for it. The sceptics argue that the paper should not settle for a compromise on freedom of expression by justifying itself. Others wonder why the radical Muslims appear to be softening their demand and seem so eager to make a deal. Perhaps the decision of Norwegian papers such as Magazinet to support Jyllands-Posten by publishing the cartoons has made the radicals reconsider. Perhaps they fear a domino effect. Some Swedish papers are considering publishing the cartoons as well. If the Swedish government subsequently follows the position of the Danish and Norwegian governments, refusing to interfere and limit freedom of expression, the position of the radical Danish Muslims, who are looking for international support, will only weaken.
According to a poll taken this week among 1,047 people in Denmark 57% of the Danes support Jyllands-Posten's decision to publish the cartoons, while 31% disagrees. Young people and men are more likely to support the decision. Almost two out of every three males and 61% of people aged between 18 and 25 years of age did so.
Meanwhile an international organization of Muslim intellectuals has threatened to mobilize "millions of Muslims all over the World" to boycott Danish and Norwegian products unless the Danish and Norwegian government condemn the publication of the cartoons, which is called an "attack on the Muslims of the World and on the Prophet." In Saudi Arabia people are receiving e-mails and sms messages urging them to boycott Danish products "until Denmark offers an official apology." The Organization of the Islamic Conference protested last week's publication of the cartoons in the Norwegian paper Magazinet. The Iranian embassy in Oslo said that freedom of expression cannot justify publishing the cartoons. However, Finn Jarle Sæle, the editor of the Norwegian Christian newspaper Norge I DAG, announced that his paper is also considering publishing the cartoons. He called upon other Norwegian editors to do the same. Sæle says that so far many of them have only written editorials supporting freedom of expression but have not dared to publish the cartoons themselves.
Asked if wider publication will not lead to unnecessary confrontations between Christians and Muslims Sæle said the intention was not to provoke just for the sake of provoking, but rather to confront radical Islam in Norway. Perhaps it is necessary to provoke in order to do that, he said. Sæle wants the Norwegian imams to publicly oppose the death threats that have been sent to Magazinet's editor Vebjørn Selbekk. According to Sæle these threats are not just directed against Magazinet. They affect the entire Norwegian media, not just one editor who dared to stand up for freedom of expression.http://www.brusselsjournal.com
There's more, and there will be more and more. This trivial nonsense is a turning point in our history. Cartoonists drew the line in the sand. Now the Muslims are stuck with their hyper-sensitive pose. They boycott on the one hand and look for an out on the other. Let's supply them with some real food for thought: publish the cartoons and spredad them till the world makes Islmaic posturing the laughing stock of the universe. Maybe that will begin to bring Islam back to reality.
Thursday, January 26, 2006
There is no burning issue here in Vancouver, Canada, not something so immediate that all people are frantic for a solution or at least a crowd to shout to. And yet, there we were at the People's Temple, at McDonalds. We did not meet the numbers of our friends at the rally in Paris. Not yet. We did meet well into over-time, and we will meet again. We will grow and we will make a difference. Here are a couple of letters from others, and I'll update anything else that comes in as it comes.
Here in Vancouver we found friends willing to make the effort. We'll do more. So will others. The French will carry on, and so will we. We can change the world doing this. Unlike our Muslim cousins, we can do good things.
Beauty whithers and dies. Love dies too. Everything. There is Death and Time. There is no hope.
William Shakespeare, Sonnet 64
"When I have seen by Time's fell hand"
When I have seen by Time's fell hand defaced
The rich-proud cost of outworn buried age;
When sometime lofty towers I see down-razed
And brass eternal slave to mortal rage;
When I have seen the hungry ocean gain
Advantage on the kingdom of the shore,
And the firm soil win of the watery main,
Increasing store with loss, and loss with store;
When I have seen such interchange of state,
Or state it self confounded to decay,
Ruin hath taught me thus to ruminate
That Time will come and take my love away.
This thought is as a death which cannot choose
But weep to have that which it fears to lose.
I've lived to see generations born to live. I've seen men live. Women too. Yes, children. Eveything that lives, I think I've seen one live. I've seen places live, cities live, nations live. I've seen lovers and friends live. I've seen Time's gentle hand.
Beauty wakens and blooms. Love wakens too. Everything. There is Death and Time. There is hope.
We will be unbound. We will waste the world. Everything will die, and everything will live again. The women I've loved will be other women other men love. They'll leave and others will take their places. The fell hand will keep its ceaseless sweep.
Tomorrow, when the war comes, let us grasp that fell and gentle hand.
I have just returned from the Blue Scarf protest held in the Place de Sorbonne in Paris.
We got there very early so sat in a Cafe on the square where we met another fellow in a blue scarf. This gentleman hails from Epinay-sur-Seine, the town where Jean-Claude Irvoas was savagely murdered last October in front of his wife and daughter whilst taking photos.
He seemed like so many others I have recently met. Over 60, very angry and the overwhelming feeling of having absolutely nothing to lose.
There was a recent story of man losing his cool and shooting some 'youth' who had been making his life hell for many years. He hanged himself in prison, before the case reached the courts.
Behind us was sitting an obvious islamist from probably the UOIF. The UOIF is the muslim association closely associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, which among other things, makes a fortune from its Halal food operations.
Claude Reichmann entered the café where we were sitting. To be quite honest I didn't recognise him until he was pointed out to me. I approached him and mentioned that the Blue Scarf movement was, thanks to the Internet, generating followers the world over. I mentioned that you were involved in getting people the world over to sit in their Mcdonalds at precisely 6 pm.
He was very very pleased to learn of this and mentioned the fact during his closing speech, to the rousing applause of a crowd that I would estimate to being around 1200.
I would like to mention here the main points of his speech (and others) so that you can understand the basics of the Blue Revolution.
It is primarily about lies in the media. France is the advanced economy with the most rotten politically correct media class. They, and the politicans all stem from the same ideas which drove the 1968 student protests who shouted slogans such as "It is forbidden to forbid"
They have lied to us about the economy. France is bankrupt yet they keep telling us we can have a socialist state and a thriving economy.
They have lied to us about Islam. It has always been presented as a religion of peace.
They have lied to us about the violence. They continually refuse to blame the 'youth' for killing, destroying, stealing and raping.
They have lied to us about the European Constitution. They are still divising ways to cede power to Brussels.
They have lied to us about Turkey. We don't want them in the EU yet it seems inevitable despite the no constitutional vote.
They have lied about gay marriage. A UMP MP was recently piloried for being against gay mariage, despite the fact that vast the majority of people are against it.
Other speakers included Louis Chagnon, the school history teacher chucked out of his job and prosecuted because he said that Mohammed was a brigand and a thief. He subsequently won his case.
A fellow from the Comite Lepante ( http://comite-lepante.affiniti
Finally Mr Reichmann made closing comments, which is when he mentioned that english language bloggers were taking interest in the Blue Revolution.
We finished with the national anthem, after which he announced that next month we would meet again.
During the event a couple of us distributed Mohammed unfriendly literature. It was the of a very long day which we had spent putting stickers and leaving leaflets all over the city. But that's a subject for another post.
I will finish by mentioning that the crowd were not young. No more than 10% were under 30. I kept on wondering why all these peoples' kids hadn't turned up. There was a large crowd of basically nice middle class 45 to 65 year olds but very few kids. My guess is that all their children think of their parents as reactionary fascists.
I hope that you found this report useful. Please share it with everyone who you feel might be interested. I would be interested in Blue Scarf stories you can share
I'm out the door here pretty quick to sit and wait for the Canadians to flock to our meeting. It's not going to happen quickly, but it will come in time. I'll report what I can this evening, and more to come.
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Yes, this is a true story.
We'll break up the original German language with a paraphrased English version. Please feel free to correct or supplement anything herein.
Väter wollen Kopftuch für Lehrerinnen
Drei Moslem-Väter haben in einer Volksschule in Linz eine Kopftuch-Pflicht für Lehrerinnen gefordert. Die Empörung darüber ist groß: Der oberösterreichische Landesschulratspräsident Fritz Enzenhofer sprach von "Wahnsinn" und berichtete, dass gleich gehandelt worden sei. FPÖ-Generalsekretär Herbert Kickl forderte im Gegenzug ein "Kopftuchverbot" in Schulen. BZÖ-Sprecher Uwe Scheuch bezeichnete die Forderungen der Moslems als "inakzeptabel".
Three foreign Muslim fathers with children attending the Linz elementary school demanded that Austrian teachers cover up when teaching Muslim students. Austrians are outraged: Upper-Austrian national school vice-principal Fritz Enzenhofer called the demands "insanity." He claimed the situation requires immediate action. FPOe Secretary-General Herbert Kickl said there will be immediate action in the form of a "hijab ban" in schools in response. BZOe speaker Uwe Scheuch called the Muslims demands "unacceptable".
Die "VS 12"- benannt nach dem sozialdemokratischen Schulreformer Otto Glöckl - gilt als Integrations-Volksschule. Drei Viertel der 178 Kinder haben nicht Deutsch als Muttersprache. Eine Lehrerin hat im Namen ihrer Kollegen ein Schreiben an die Personalvertretung geschickt, in dem sie sich über drei fanatische Moslem-Väter - zwei Bosnier und ein Tschetschene - beschwerte. Sie hätten verlangt, dass die Direktorin und alle Lehrerinnen Kopftücher tragen. Die Kinder dürften weiters von ihren Lehrerinnen nicht öffentlich ermahnt werden. Sie verweigerten zudem den Lehrerinnen die "Sie"-Anrede, weil sie dies als Frauen nicht verdienten. Außerdem sollten ihre Schüler Kinder nicht an Gesangsauftritten teilnehmen, das sei "Prostitution". Und kein Lehrer habe zu fragen, warum die Tochter nicht schwimmen gehe, habe ein Vater verlangt. Die Lehrer sollten froh sei, so viele islamische Kinder zu haben, sonst müsste die Schule zusperren.
The "VS 12" - is the creation of a social-democratic ecuccational reformer, Otto Gloeckl. The elementary model school is open to immigrants. Three quarters of the 178 children at the school speak German as a second language. A teacher received a letter to the teaching-staff association from three Muslim fanatics, two Bosnians and a Chechenian. The Muslims demanded that the headmistress and all other female teachers wear hijabs. They demanded that teachers not discipline Muslim children. Further, they are upset about Muslim children having to address their Austrian teachers as Miss or Madam, the "Sie" address, that complaint stemming from the Muslim opinion that the un-hijabbed teachers are prostitutes. Muslim children are not allowed to sign, that also being a form of "prostitution". Muslim children are not allowed to swim, that being due to Muslim children being in water polluted by filthy non-Muslims, najis kufar. And, the teachers should be grateful to have Muslim children because otherwise the school would be empty.
Landesschulratspräsident Enzenhofer berichtete, er sei von dem Schreiben an die Personalvertretung in Kenntnis gesetzt worden. Radikale Äußerungen dazu seien nicht zielführend, weil sie die Gegenseite provozierten. Es müsse vielmehr "gemäßigt aber deutlich Halt gesagt werden". Die zuständige Bezirksschulinspektorin habe mit einem der Väter ein klärendes Gespräch geführt. Dieser habe sich dabei "relativ einsichtig" gezeigt. Das ändere aber nichts daran, dass die Forderungen der Väter "ein Wahnsinn" seien. Den Lehrern sei geraten worden, bei derartigen Forderungen von Eltern das Gespräch sofort abzubrechen und an die nächsthöhere Instanz zu verweisen. Die Schule sei in ihrer Integrationsarbeit "Spitze", Integration sei aber keine "Einbahnstraße". Es gebe in dieser Schule viele andere Kinder und deren Eltern, die sich gerne integrieren wollten.
National school vice-president Enzenhofer said he had read the letter to the teaching staff. Militant Muslim extremist slogans provoke an uproar from the teachers. The school official demanded a halt to the Muslim campaign. The official spoke to one of the Muslims involved to explain the situation. The problem should be "relatively obvious". It might not seem to be to the Muslims. The Austian called it "an insanity". Any further problems from the Muslims are supposed to be reported to higher authorities. The school in question is a multi-cultural one that is supposed to teach assimilation into Austrians society. It's supposed to help immigrants and their children integrate.
Er würde sich aber auch erwarten, dass sich eine islamische Organisation melde und sage, dass sich ein derartiges Verhalten der Eltern nicht gehöre und damit die eigenen Leute auf Linie bringe, stellte Enzenhofer fest. Es verwies auf die Möglichkeit, Kinder aus einer öffentlichen Schule zu nehmen, selbst zu schulen und den Nachweis dafür zu erbringen.
I'm unsure what this paragraph is about.
FPÖ-Generalsekretär Kickl stellte fest, Zuwanderer hätten sich den in Österreich üblichen Sitten anzupassen und nicht umgekehrt. Kopftücher für Lehrerinnen kämen nicht in Frage. "Ganz im Gegenteil wäre ein Kopftuchverbot in Schulen und allen öffentlichen Instituten nach französischem Vorbild jetzt Gebot der Stunde". BZÖ-Sprecher Scheuch erklärte, es könne nicht sein, dass Moslem-Fanatiker der heimischen Bevölkerung ihre Sitten aufzwängen: "Wenn sie sich in Österreich nicht anpassen wollen, sollen sie das Land verlassen".
FPOe Secretary-General Kickl is adamant that immigrants will adapt and integrate, not the opposite. Teachers will not wear hijabs. Instead, he seems to be demanding and immediate ban on hijabs altogether. BZOe speaker Scheuch said Muslim fanatics in Austria will not be allowed to dictate terms to Austrians and will not force Isamic customs on Austrians.
Scheuch said if Muslim fanatics don't like it they should leave.
When we discuss the nature of our polities, what on Earth are we discussing anymore? I'm a liberal atheist. I have much in common with hellfire and brimstone Protestants and old school Latin chanting Catholic Christians. I agree with tax-cutting middle aged Republicans on the golf course. I hate abortion, socialist activism, ecology, and sentimentalist social engineering. I'm a liberal. God belongs in church, and the churches belong in communities, not in soccer stadia and television studios. "Schools without education, churches without God," as Neil Postman writes in Building a bridge to the 18th century. It's driving me nuts, and I don't like being nuts. I'm really keen or normal.
Below are the first few paragraphs of a story that confuses me. The rest of the story is totally confusing to me. I'm with Homer Simpson on this one: "What's the number for nine-one-one?"
January 22, 2006
This Isn't Your Father's Moral Majority
by Bob Kemper
Would God cut taxes? What does the Bible say about food stamps? Is a Christian serving the Lord if he fails to protect the environment?
All across the country, conservative evangelicals are re-evaluating what it means to be a Christian and their soul searching, evangelical leaders and scholars say, has the potential to fundamentally reorder the federal government's priorities and trigger seismic shifts in the Republican and Democratic parties.
"Never before has God given American evangelicals such an awesome opportunity to shape public policy," the National Association of Evangelicals declared in a manifesto of sorts called "An Evangelical Call to Civic Responsibility." With evangelicals accounting for a quarter of the electorate, it says, "Disengagement is not an option."
But this isn't your father's Moral Majority.
The newly recognized wave of evangelical social activism remains committed to the sanctity of life, the preservation of marriage and protection of the family. But it is far more progressive socially than the Religious Right juggernaut that emerged as a conservative -- and wholly Republican -- political force a generation ago.http://pewforum.org/news
U.S. Holocaust Museum Comes Under Fire For Failing to Address Arab Anti-Semitism
BY MEGHAN CLYNE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
January 19, 2006
WASHINGTON - Amid pledges from Iran to "wipe Israel off the map" and to hold a conference examining whether the Nazi murder of 6 million Jews is a "myth," America's Holocaust Museum is under fire for its silence about Arab assistance to the Nazis during World War II, and about the intensifying hatred of Jews in the Arab Middle East today.
Leading the charge is Holocaust Museum Watch, a national organization formed 18 months ago to spur the museum toward meaningful acknowledgment of Arab anti-Semitism. A forum at the National Synagogue here last night - headlined by Rep. Eliot Engel, a Democrat of New York; the author of "IBM and the Holocaust," Edwin Black; the president of the Amcha Coalition for Jewish Concerns, Rabbi Avi Weiss, and other Jewish leaders - marked Holocaust Museum Watch's inaugural public event.
In particular, Holocaust Museum Watch charges that the federally chartered and federally funded United States Holocaust Memorial Museum is failing to meet the obligations set forth in its government-approved founding documents. The congressional legislation that approved the museum in 1980 was based on a 1979 report issued by the President's Commission on the Holocaust, established by President Carter and chaired by Elie Wiesel. Among other responsibilities, the commission tasked the museum with maintaining a Committee on Conscience, charged with monitoring potential genocidal situations and issuing an "'institutional scream' to alert the conscience of the world and spark public outcry" at the earliest signs of genocidal intent.
But while calls for destroying the Jewish state have been the mainstay of the Arab Middle East for decades, critics say, the Holocaust Museum has not issued any "institutional scream," or even included exhibits or materials about Arab anti-Semitism in the museum's facilities. It has also declined repeated requests to hold conferences or events addressing the issue.
"There is anti-Semitism emanating from parts of the Muslim world, and this is not a problem which should escape the concern of the Holocaust Museum," Mr. Engel said in a statement to The New York Sun. "I think it is time that the museum consider intensifying its focus on this continuing concern."
"It's unbelievable," the rabbi of the National Synagogue, Shmuel Herzfeld, told the Sun yesterday. "They won't talk about Egypt, about Syria, about Saudi Arabia - it's like the big elephant in the room."
Arab anti-Semitism, the rabbi added, is a widely recognized phenomenon; earlier this week, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld likened remarks by President Ahmadinejad of Iran to the early writings of Hitler. The museum's leaders, Rabbi Herzfeld said, "are the last ones in the world to admit that there's such a thing as Arab anti-Semitism."
Rabbi Herzfeld and other critics argued that the museum's silence on Arab anti-Semitism was likely the result of its political burdens. Two-thirds of the museum's operating budget is taxpayer-funded, and its leaders are presidential appointees. This has, in the past, placed museum officials in tricky spots regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict, and Rabbi Weiss cited as an example the Clinton administration's insistence that the former head of the Palestine Liberation Organization, Yasser Arafat, be given a guided personal tour of the museum. The then-director of the museum, Walter Reich, refused and promptly was fired.
"They are not talking about the major issues because they upset certain political niceties in Washington," Rabbi Herzfeld said. "That's fine if you're the State Department, but if you're tasked with preserving the memory of the Shoah, and you deal with it in a callous political fashion, that's deeply offensive."
According to Rabbi Weiss, the museum, which has had more than 22.8 million visitors since it opened in 1993, is also failing in its instructional capacity.
"Everyone looks to the museum for direction relative to Shoah memory," the rabbi said. Their silence on Arab anti-Semitism, he said, "has contributed to it now moving to a next step, and that is the step of Arab leadership denying the Shoah openly."
A spokesman for the museum, Arthur Berger, declined to comment on specific criticisms from Holocaust Museum Watch, and stressed: "We are principally a historical and educational institution on the history of the Holocaust. Our mandate is 1933 to 1945."
Moreover, Mr. Berger said, the museum's Web site highlights a statement denouncing Mr. Ahmadinejad's remarks, and links to organizations, including the Middle East Media Research Institute, that monitor Arab anti-Semitism. Mr. Berger said he was not aware of any exhibits or conferences addressing Arab anti-Semitism as an independent issue.
"We are not able to do everything that is even in our mandate," Mr. Berger said. "We don't have the staff, and we don't have the money for it."
The museum's operating budget for fiscal year 2006 is $66.6 million, $42.6 million of which is provided through federal appropriations.
To the founder and one of the board members of Holocaust Museum Watch, Carol Greenwald, the museum's failure to comply with its mandate represents an unacceptable lack of accountability for taxpayer dollars.
Ms. Greenwald, a financial-investment analyst who sits on the boards of several pro-Israel organizations, was also critical of the museum's contents.
One example of misplaced focus, Ms. Greenwald said, is a video documentary about Christianity's role in the Holocaust, addressing historic episodes such as anti-Semitic violence after medieval passion plays and the writings of Martin Luther. "Given that they don't have any hesitation about having a movie like that," Ms. Greenwald said, "they should have a movie or an exhibit that talks about the role extremist Islam is playing in spreading religious and racial hatred."
The museum's unresponsiveness to such criticism, Ms. Greenwald, drove her to establish Holocaust Museum Watch. Her inability to get the museum to include some mention of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el-Husseini, who conspired with Hitler to liquidate the Jewish population of British Palestine, was particularly irksome, Ms. Greenwald said.
Last night's forum, she added, is just a first step toward bringing accountability and a renewed sense of focus to the museum.
"I'm not going away," she pledged. "We're not going away."
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
"Our habit of constantly and zealously answering to any rabble has already done us a lot of harm and will do much more. ... We do not have to apologize for anything. We are a people as all other peoples; we do not have any intentions to be better than the rest. As one of the first conditions for equality we demand the right to have our own villains, exactly as other people have them. ... We do not have to account to anybody, we are not to sit for anybody's examination and nobody is old enough to call on us to answer. We came before them and will leave after them. We are what we are, we are good for ourselves, we will not change, nor do we want to." Ze'ev Jabotinsky, Instead of Excessive Apology, 1911.
Saturday, January 14, 2006
Bloggers: The Pamphleteers of Today
The spontaneous uprising of Internet bloggers shows a discontent with the orthodoxy of the leftward-leaning mainstream media (MSM.) Blogging today has its precedent in yesteryear's pamphleteering and often driven by a similar dissatisfaction. George Orwell's, in an introduction to the British Pamphleteer, was motivated "by his belief that in Twentieth-century society the press does not adequately represent all shades of opinion." [p2] Orwell wrote,
"The pamphlet is a one-man show. One has complete freedom of expression, including, if one chooses, the freedom to be scurrilous, abusive, and seditious; or, on the other hand, to be more detailed, serious and 'high-brow' than is ever possible in a newspaper or I most kinds of periodicals. At the same time, since the pamphlet is always short and unbound, it can be produced much more quickly than a book, and in principle, at any rate, can reach a bigger public. Above all, the pamphlet does not have to follow any prescribed pattern. It can be in prose or in verse, it can consist largely of maps or statistics or quotations, it can take the form of a story, a fable, a letter, an essay, a dialogue, or a piece of 'reportage.' All that is required of it is that it shall be topical, polemical, and short."Substitute blog for pamphlet and the same can be said today. Far more striking is the role the pamphleteer played in the American Revolution. Bernard Bailyn, in his path-breaking book, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution , explains the phenomena leading up to the Revolution (all quotes from the 1967 edition.)
"It was in this form—as pamphlets—that much of the most important and characteristic writing of the American Revolution appeared. For the Revolutionary generation … the pamphlet had peculiar virtues as a medium of communication. … The pamphlet's greatest asset was perhaps its flexibility in size, for while it could contain only a very few pages and hence be used for publishing short squibs and sharp, quick rebuttals, it could also accommodate much longer, more serious and permanent writing as well. … It was spacious enough to allow for the full development of an argument—to investigate premises, explore logic, and consider conclusions …" [p3]Of course, even in the printed media of pamphlets, some of the personal dynamics of the Internet were evidenced early on.
"It was in this form, consequently, that 'the best thought of the day expressed itself'; … it was in this form that 'the basic elements of American political thought of the Revolutionary period appeared first.' And yet pamphlets of this length were seldom ponderous; whatever the gravity of their themes or the spaciousness of their contents they were always essentially polemical, and aimed at immediate and rapidly shifting targets: at suddenly developing problems, unanticipated arguments, and swiftly rising, controversial figures. The best of the writing that appeared in this form, consequently, had a rare combination of spontaneity and solidity, of dash and detail, of casualness and care." [p4]
"They resulted also, and to a considerable extent, from what might be called chain-reacting personal polemics: strings of individual exchanges—arguments, replies rebuttals, and counter-rebuttals—in which may be found heated personifications of the larger conflict. A bold statement on a sensitive issue was often sufficient to start such a series, which characteristically proceeded with increasing shrillness until it ended in bitter personal vituperation."One wonders if they had trolls who, perhaps, went from pub to pub to irritate the writers.
"Important above all else as expressions of the ideas, attitudes, and motivations that lay at the heart of the Revolution, the pamphlets published in the two decades before Independence are primarily political, not literary, documents. But form and substance are never wholly separate." [p8]Still, despite the humble nature of the pamphlet, Bailyn notes the Revolutionary writings are part of a larger tradition "to which the greatest men of letters contributed. Milton, Halifax, Locke, Swift, Defoe, Bolingbroke, Addison were all pamphleteers at least to the extent that Bland, Otis, Dickinson, the Adamses, Wilson, and Jefferson were." [p8]
Style also varied:
"In addition to satire there is an abundance of other devices: elusive irony and flat parody; extended allegory and direct vituperation; sarcasm, calculated and naive. All the standard tropes and a variety of unusual figurations may be found in the pamphlet literature."The Revolutionary pamphleteers were not professional writers but common citizens engaged in the debate of ideas; they created a sense of democracy to the intellectual struggle that preceded the call to arms. In stark contrast was the French Revolution—debate was among the elites who often looked down on the general population as hopelessly retrograde. If the French Revolution started in salons, the American started in saloons … and town squares, churches, etc. One ended with a stable republic; the other with Napoleon and what was basically a world war.
With the advent of radio and television, particularly the days where networks dominated, the professional writer was separated from the man in the street. With the rise of the Internet the writer-citizen has re-established a healthy balance not seen since great days when our republic was founded. Perhaps two hundred years from now, some graduate student will be writing a dissertation on The Role of Blogs on the Restoration of the Principles of the American Revolution.
Monday, January 23, 2006
Title: She needs to get married
Name: prince of Persia
On Condaleezza Rice:
This female monster needs to get married and leave the politics aside, then we might hope for a less depressing news. Oh one thing I should remind every one is that PERSIANS fight like lions and death is not feared by us, so don`t ever scare my proud nation by nonsense comments. We don`t want to harm anyone including jews living in the occupied palestine, but if some people decide to mess with our honor, they are indeed opening the doors of hell for themselves. By the way we don`t have any problem with jewish faith, but we are most disturbed by the idea of Zionism. http://www.haaretzdaily.com
Politically Incorrect Guide to-- GUESS WHAT
ISLAM OFFENDS ME
The Taliban found offense in the ancient statues of Buddha in Bamiyan, Afghanistan, and blew them to bits. These Muslims also found offense in several smaller and much easier to destroy ancient clay and wood-carved statues at the same location. All of these irreplaceable pieces of history were destroyed because some Muslims found them "offensive." Should the great pyramids of Egypt be destroyed if someone finds them offensive?
The Taliban also found music, flying kites, dancing of any kind, women leaving the house without a male family member, and balloons offensive. Any woman leaving the house without being covered from head to toe was so offensive that she risked being beaten to death.
Strict Islamics find the human female body offensive and believe that every woman should be covered from head to toe. Muslims will tell you that they cover their women out of modesty and respect but this simply isn't the case. Strict Islamics believe a woman is born in sin and is just one living, breathing sin that needs to be covered at all times so that the public cannot see her shame. If a woman crosses a man's path while he is praying, he must begin anew because the woman is offensive to Allah.
An incomplete list of people Islamics also seem to find offensive is: all Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, ex-Muslims, and all non-Muslims.
These days, it seems that Sunni Muslims find Shia Muslims to be offensive as well.
Also offensive is any reference to the Quran by non-Muslims that does not expound on how every word is perfect and written by God himself. Anything less than complete agreement is an offense that often carries a death sentence. Just ask Salman Rushdie, author of "Satanic Verses," who had to hide for years to stay alive, and Theo Van Gogh, who paid with his life for speaking the truth about Islam.
Strict Islamic countries find women wearing white socks sexually provocative and offensive. Pictures of humans or animals are offensive and men who shave their faces are offensive. Card playing is offensive. Girls attending school and receiving an education are offensive. Women who vote are also offensive.
A woman daring to leave her home without permission even to rush her sick child to a doctor is offensive. Of course, female doctors are offensive, so any woman requiring medical care can't receive it because all the doctors are men.
Islamics also seem to be offended by America, Great Britain, Poland, Israel, Australia, Spain, Italy, Japan, Russia, and New Zealand, just to mention a few countries. Interestingly, Islam doesn't seem to be as offended by France or Germany.
In fairness, what Islam doesn't find offensive should be examined. Many Muslims did not find the murder of 3,000 people on 9/11 offensive. Saddam Hussein, responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of fellow Muslims, was not offensive. Forbidding the practice of other religions in an Islamic country is not offensive while daring to question what might be going on inside a mosque in America, is terribly offensive.
The murder of thousands of Iraqi Muslims doesn't seem to offend Islamics, as long the killing is being done by other Muslims. If an American soldier kills a Muslim trying to kill him, that is offensive. The beheading of helpless prisoners by "freedom fighters" is not offensive. Putting mass murderers in a prison camp that provides good food, allows time to pray, provides copies of the Quran and prayer rugs, gives medical and dental care, and allows Islamic clerics to provide the prisoners with religious council, is offensive.
The Quran touching the floor is offensive but urinating on or burning the Bible is not. Profiling people from Islamic countries that support terrorism is offensive but imprisoning Christians for wearing a cross is not.
Teaching people about Islam is encouraged, but teaching Christianity is a beheading offense.
Any American who does not want the Quran replacing the Constitution and who speaks out against Islam is immediately labeled an "Islamaphobe." When Islam is involved, there is no freedom of speech.
Another thing that doesn't seem to offend many Muslims is the killing of a ten-year-old rape victim. She must have been "asking for it." The little vixen soiled the family name and was probably wearing white socks. Also not offensive is the stoning to death of women who are merely suspected of "being with a man not their husband." Hanging college students who dare to speak out against oppressive and cruel ayatollahs isn't offensive to many Muslims either.
Muslims are not offended by the age-old Islamic tradition of forcing their young daughters to marry their 60-year-old uncles. Girls as young as 12 are forced to marry their cousins and occasionally even their half-brothers. This is done to keep the family money in the family. However, this practice also produces the genetic defects caused by constant inbreeding.
However, this practice also produces the genetic defects caused by constant inbreeding.