I recall my early years sometimes, like the time my mother pounded on the bedroom door, yelling: "Dag, what are you doing in there? Do you hear me? What are you doing? Are you looking at the Monkey/Ward catalog again?" And I'd say, "No, mother," in a shuddering whimper kind of voice, overcome within the confines of my room by fantastic passions and lurid early teen dreams. "I'm going to report you to your father," she yell. He'd come home, take me out back and give me the chat I always dreaded. "Son, why don't you try to get a girlfriend? You're a nerd like all you loser friends, but can't you even try? Do you have to send all your time in your room with that? I can't believe you're my kid."
I'd go back to my room as quickly and discretely as I could, and I'd hear them talking in the next room: "I don't understand it. How can he do that day after day? It's unnatural for a boy his age. And it's not even English."
Actually it is. Coup d'Etat.
I love the following Amazon.com review. Normally I'd think the name below is a pseudonym, but after having recently encountered Ceramic Anneal from Pakistan, nothing's too weird for me to accept, even that I would stay indoors to read a book like that rather than bomb at getting a date. Uh huh.
Coleman Fuel: WARNING: This book is not in the class of typical, vague strategy compendiums that business gurus and self-help seekers can read in hope of finding some inner meaning to help them find their "way." Coup d'Etat is merely a book on overthrowing government structures with the intention of deterring unpopular regimes from the quest for dominion. Accurate in strategic principles, this book could be very dangerous or totally useless in the wrong hands. If you are one of the rare ones out there who actually reads strategy books with the intention of war, then this work is definitely required reading. Study it as a guidebook, and go overthrow a facist regime in a third world country (for fun and profit), or die a horribly violent death while trying. It's up to you, but my guess is that most people who read this will end up infamous, dead, or writing stupid reviews for it saying how well it can be used as a metaphor for human life.
Edward Luttwack, author of Coup d'Etat, is a serious fellow, as is his subject above. Not now, of course of course of course, but maybe later and maybe elsewhere in the world we might maybe want to know a few things about this and that in a serious way. In a relative way.
Yeah, I was probably adopted. My so-called parents flipped out thinking I was reading homosexual erotica when they discovered The Prince under my mattress. Honestly, I tried, even humor, like the time I told them that I'd been in jail overnight. "I told the judge: 'Yes, your Honor, I confess I killed my parents, but have mercy! I'm an orphan'."
I'm sure they'd heard that joke before. Not even a smile.
Subscribe To No Dhimmitude
Posts
All Comments
Friday, April 04, 2008
American Liberal: A Friend of the People.
I recall the look on Truepeer's face one evening early on in our meetings of a Thursday when I, in all innocence, proclaimed myself to be a Liberal. I didn't have a cell phone or I might have dialed for an ambulance straight away. After some long explanation I got through to him that 'Liberal' doesn't mean I'm a supporter of the Liberal Party of Canada, which he assumed. When he made plain that was his understanding I begged him to call an ambulance.
Liberal is to me, then, if not so much now, one of those from Britain in support of the merchant class, a supporter of industrialism and the marketplace monetary economy as opposed to the agricultural economy based on goods and services outside the money economy, the economy of entitlements, feudal duties, seigneurial rights and noblesse oblige. To me, at that time, Conservative meant, and means to a lesser extent today, a peasant economy, i.e. one based on labour without money, sans Capital. I still find myself, on rare occasions, reaching automatically under my arm for a persuasive counter-argument when I hear "Conservative." But then I remember, ha ha, that this doesn't mean a manorial economy, no latifundista class and smiling, happy peasants in the distance, the starving clad in traditional costumes, waving from afar. So, yes, let us define what we mean when we loosely use such terms as liberal and conservative. Liberal means free markets, money economy, free exchange of goods and labour.
What Peers and others refer to as Conservative I think of in terms of the French Revolution, and frankly, so do most today, whether they know it or not: The Liberals are the Right in that sense, i.e the manufacturing classes, the owners of the means of production, those who employ and utilize manu / labour and machinery that is used to produce further from others with same; and the Left are the latifundista adjuncts, such as disaffected lawyers. The whole fiasco of Left and Right today comes from the National Assembly in 1788ish when the profit group sat on the right side of the building, the lawyers on the left side. It was a seating arrangement then; it is less than that now. The Liberals on the Right sided with the business /profit interests, the Capitalists, the bourgeios. They stood for market freedom, including labour freedom, i.e for workers' freedom to move to better paying jobs and for social mobility. When others speak of conservatives, I don't assume they mean free marketeers.
By the most remarkable co-incidence, the photograph of my smiling face here makes me look almost exactly like a sketch of Jean-Paul Marat, a leader of sorts during the Terror after the initial Revolution of 1789. Marat was so far to the Left that he was more or less on the Right. I see it clearly in Robespierre's lament, as he wrote shortly before shooting himself in the jaw in a failed suicide attempt, "Extremes meet." And so I find it is true in real life.
Marat, to his ever-lasting credit, understood and acted upon the knowledge that one cannot leave the remnants of the reactionary classes intact to restore the status quo ante if one is a revolutionary; one cannot allow the preservation of the classes who would restore the period prior to the Revolution, i.e. the reactionary classes, those reacting negatively to the Revolution. Marat's solution to the problem of the reactionary classes' attempts to restore privilege was to cut off their fucking heads. I, being a kinder, gentler version of Marat, find the solution we require in, for example, the retrograde world of Islam, to be the imposition on the reluctant reactionary world to be School Teachers with Guns. I argue for a Rational Terror as an integral aspect of neo-colonialist "America of the Mind" manifest destiny, all of which is nicely put throughout the past years at No Dhimmitude.
You want "middle-class" values" of Universal Modernity, i.e. universal Human rights, a market economy across a
free world of individualist members of free nation states? Not all democrats do. If you do, then you might agree with me that the way to bring about the furtherance of our beautiful revolutions of Modernity-- the Industrial, American, and French Revolutions-- is to invade "places" as free individuals, as filibusters, i.e. privately interested colonialists whose interest is in overthrowing the powers that be, of reducing the populations to order, and of bringing forth a self-colonization of the locals through education and brute force till the force is so overwhelming and terrifying that only the most ardent native will survive it as self-identifiers and promoters. The meek masses, having lived through the destruction of their previous epistemologies, will succumb to power and will obey the revolutionary norm; and in time, with the winnowing by armed philosophers, the colonialist Revolution will produce democrat children as American in the mind as any American in America today.
What? Am I some kind of fascist? A Rightwing religious bigot? A monster without concern for individual life? I'll get back to you on that one. A social engineer? A Platonist Philosopher King? A Leninist party hack? Uh, I'm busy right now but I'll have my secretary look into the files and she'll send you a form letter.
American did not exterminate its feudal classes in the Revolution. You ask me why. You say, "Dag, why didn't America exterminate the feudal classes in the Revolution?"
'Cause we had none! There was no one needing to die. The Muslim world? Let me count the ways. I must borrow briefly your fingers and toes as well. We, only we, we colonial members of democracies in the West, are Revolutionaries alone. No other people are revolutionaries. Even many of our own are reactionaries who wish to restore the world to a neo-feudalism, those, our so-called Left, not a spit of difference between them and the so-called Right. There is no difference between Left and Right. There is no meaningful distinction to be made between liberal and conservative. Meaning is found only in Revolutionary and Reactionary.
Rational debate of this kind of project is fine right up till such time as those who think as I do are organized and armed. Then it's a matter of which side one opts to support. I'm a liberal kind of guy. I stand for freedom and individualism. I take it with me wherever I go.Revolutonary Americanism. It's free, portable, and importable. It grows everywhere it's planted. But it has to be guarded till it's strong enough to flourish alone. I defend it. That's why I'm proud to be a Liberal and a friend of the People.
Liberal is to me, then, if not so much now, one of those from Britain in support of the merchant class, a supporter of industrialism and the marketplace monetary economy as opposed to the agricultural economy based on goods and services outside the money economy, the economy of entitlements, feudal duties, seigneurial rights and noblesse oblige. To me, at that time, Conservative meant, and means to a lesser extent today, a peasant economy, i.e. one based on labour without money, sans Capital. I still find myself, on rare occasions, reaching automatically under my arm for a persuasive counter-argument when I hear "Conservative." But then I remember, ha ha, that this doesn't mean a manorial economy, no latifundista class and smiling, happy peasants in the distance, the starving clad in traditional costumes, waving from afar. So, yes, let us define what we mean when we loosely use such terms as liberal and conservative. Liberal means free markets, money economy, free exchange of goods and labour.What Peers and others refer to as Conservative I think of in terms of the French Revolution, and frankly, so do most today, whether they know it or not: The Liberals are the Right in that sense, i.e the manufacturing classes, the owners of the means of production, those who employ and utilize manu / labour and machinery that is used to produce further from others with same; and the Left are the latifundista adjuncts, such as disaffected lawyers. The whole fiasco of Left and Right today comes from the National Assembly in 1788ish when the profit group sat on the right side of the building, the lawyers on the left side. It was a seating arrangement then; it is less than that now. The Liberals on the Right sided with the business /profit interests, the Capitalists, the bourgeios. They stood for market freedom, including labour freedom, i.e for workers' freedom to move to better paying jobs and for social mobility. When others speak of conservatives, I don't assume they mean free marketeers.
By the most remarkable co-incidence, the photograph of my smiling face here makes me look almost exactly like a sketch of Jean-Paul Marat, a leader of sorts during the Terror after the initial Revolution of 1789. Marat was so far to the Left that he was more or less on the Right. I see it clearly in Robespierre's lament, as he wrote shortly before shooting himself in the jaw in a failed suicide attempt, "Extremes meet." And so I find it is true in real life.
Marat, to his ever-lasting credit, understood and acted upon the knowledge that one cannot leave the remnants of the reactionary classes intact to restore the status quo ante if one is a revolutionary; one cannot allow the preservation of the classes who would restore the period prior to the Revolution, i.e. the reactionary classes, those reacting negatively to the Revolution. Marat's solution to the problem of the reactionary classes' attempts to restore privilege was to cut off their fucking heads. I, being a kinder, gentler version of Marat, find the solution we require in, for example, the retrograde world of Islam, to be the imposition on the reluctant reactionary world to be School Teachers with Guns. I argue for a Rational Terror as an integral aspect of neo-colonialist "America of the Mind" manifest destiny, all of which is nicely put throughout the past years at No Dhimmitude.
You want "middle-class" values" of Universal Modernity, i.e. universal Human rights, a market economy across a
free world of individualist members of free nation states? Not all democrats do. If you do, then you might agree with me that the way to bring about the furtherance of our beautiful revolutions of Modernity-- the Industrial, American, and French Revolutions-- is to invade "places" as free individuals, as filibusters, i.e. privately interested colonialists whose interest is in overthrowing the powers that be, of reducing the populations to order, and of bringing forth a self-colonization of the locals through education and brute force till the force is so overwhelming and terrifying that only the most ardent native will survive it as self-identifiers and promoters. The meek masses, having lived through the destruction of their previous epistemologies, will succumb to power and will obey the revolutionary norm; and in time, with the winnowing by armed philosophers, the colonialist Revolution will produce democrat children as American in the mind as any American in America today.What? Am I some kind of fascist? A Rightwing religious bigot? A monster without concern for individual life? I'll get back to you on that one. A social engineer? A Platonist Philosopher King? A Leninist party hack? Uh, I'm busy right now but I'll have my secretary look into the files and she'll send you a form letter.
American did not exterminate its feudal classes in the Revolution. You ask me why. You say, "Dag, why didn't America exterminate the feudal classes in the Revolution?"
'Cause we had none! There was no one needing to die. The Muslim world? Let me count the ways. I must borrow briefly your fingers and toes as well. We, only we, we colonial members of democracies in the West, are Revolutionaries alone. No other people are revolutionaries. Even many of our own are reactionaries who wish to restore the world to a neo-feudalism, those, our so-called Left, not a spit of difference between them and the so-called Right. There is no difference between Left and Right. There is no meaningful distinction to be made between liberal and conservative. Meaning is found only in Revolutionary and Reactionary.
Rational debate of this kind of project is fine right up till such time as those who think as I do are organized and armed. Then it's a matter of which side one opts to support. I'm a liberal kind of guy. I stand for freedom and individualism. I take it with me wherever I go.Revolutonary Americanism. It's free, portable, and importable. It grows everywhere it's planted. But it has to be guarded till it's strong enough to flourish alone. I defend it. That's why I'm proud to be a Liberal and a friend of the People.
Wednesday, April 02, 2008
The Psychopath and the Gun Slinger
Clint Eastwood plays this character who sits in the barber's chair, the barber's hand is shaking so badly he gets lather all over Clint's face, Clint "looking" at him, the barber
going even shakier, and then trying to hold the straight-razor steady as he attempts to shave Clint's throat of a week's beard. A third character stands by the door. He says to Clint: "The Rojas brothers wanted to meet you." Clint says: "I don't know those men." The guy in the doorway says: "Now you never will. You just killed them." As I recall, Clint looks mildly amused. Or is it just me? It's been 40 years since I saw the movie so the details are as fuzzy Clint's beard. What is clear is that Clint's character encountered three men on a dusty frontier street, that they drew their guns on him, and he shot them all down before going off for his shave and a haircut, which he didn't actually get, perhaps his only real regret of the day. He killed three strangers and didn't bother to know more about them than that. What do you think? Would it wash today among the EU/UN crowd? I don't think so. But look at this instead and think how well the character would be received by the same lot as above:
Anthony Hopkins is bound and masked and other ways made immobile on his way from one prison cell to another, during which time he manages to free himself of his restraints to kill a prison guard and more, I can't recall exactly, before he goes on to murder a whole whack of folks, all in the name of getting away with previous murders. I can't recall and I don't want to. The so-called liberals among us can, perhaps do, come up with all kinds of "theories" about how social conditions have created such a person, how we are all responsible for the being of such a being in our midsts, and ya ya.
I see a difference between Clint Eastwood's Man With No Name and Hopkins' Hannibal Lecter. I see the former as a man with principles, and I see the latter as a psychopath. At wikipedia we read: "Red Dragon firmly states that Lecter does not fit any known psychological profile. However, Lecter's keeper Frederick Chilton claims that Lecter is a "pure sociopath" despite characteristics in his behavior that are inconsistent with the disorder. Lecter's pathosis is explored in greater detail in Hannibal and Hannibal Rising, which explain that he is irreparably traumatized as a child when he witnesses the murder and consumption by desperate military men of his younger sister, Mischa." Spare me.
In Eastwood's character we might find moral ambiguity; in Hopkins' character it is society that is, at best, ambiguous, and more than likely outright evil in the making of an evil person. What value do we have in mind as we relate our desires and being to such characters? Given that few of us drift around the world encountering those who would kill us without a thought, and that most of us actually work day jobs and have evening and weekend families, what are we thinking when we relate to cinema idols? Most of us, I think, have a sense of fair-play and honor, seeing ourselves as competitive in business if ruthless in self-defence; but what about those of us who don't see anything beyond ourselves as victims bent on revenge for slights and woes, for outright evils visited upon us by life? What do we value anymore? We, those who might cherish the thought of adopting a Palestinian suicide bomber baby? We who might find ourselves in a flashy new and brightly lit public library coming up from the darkest depths with glibberies excusing those who kill for the sake of Islamic rectifications and yet more and more ya ya?
Kim Bolan, "Society encourages psychopaths: expert." Vancouver Sun; 2 April 2008
Psychopaths flourish in wars and civil catastrophes. It is then they are unrestrained and seldom captured; that they are even lauded as the best of men in the worst of times. We seem in our day and in our neighbourhoods to like them now. Witness the hero-worship of jihadis among our intelligentsia. See our politicians go groveling before the cold-eyed killers of countless civilians; our dhimmi academics hurling stones at democrats; see our artists lying dead on the streets for challenging them.
What are you going to do when life is really boring and you can't find anything on tv worth wasting your time on? What if your life is totally boring and you have no values to keep you morally sane? Well, there's always a place to hang out and chat about the latest victims you admire who are fighting back against the system of which you are an unhappy part but wish you weren't. Definitely, if you're a psychopath with a grievance you'll find a sympathetic audience among the Middle-Class-bored and the desperate-for-meaning crowd. If you're a barbarian, they'll still love you. Maybe especially so if so.
Maybe some of us are still Clint Eastwood fans rather than cheerleaders for the lunatic fascist Grand Gesture types. Maybe some of us would happily and casually shoot down a few psychos on the street without thinking much about it if the latter pulled guns on us and meant to kill us. But we might then land ourselves, still living, in jail. Hard call, ain't it? Especially when it's not the movies but the subway or the office or the local school under attack. Yeah, London and Madrid, New York and Washington, Beslan, Bali... you pick it.
going even shakier, and then trying to hold the straight-razor steady as he attempts to shave Clint's throat of a week's beard. A third character stands by the door. He says to Clint: "The Rojas brothers wanted to meet you." Clint says: "I don't know those men." The guy in the doorway says: "Now you never will. You just killed them." As I recall, Clint looks mildly amused. Or is it just me? It's been 40 years since I saw the movie so the details are as fuzzy Clint's beard. What is clear is that Clint's character encountered three men on a dusty frontier street, that they drew their guns on him, and he shot them all down before going off for his shave and a haircut, which he didn't actually get, perhaps his only real regret of the day. He killed three strangers and didn't bother to know more about them than that. What do you think? Would it wash today among the EU/UN crowd? I don't think so. But look at this instead and think how well the character would be received by the same lot as above:Anthony Hopkins is bound and masked and other ways made immobile on his way from one prison cell to another, during which time he manages to free himself of his restraints to kill a prison guard and more, I can't recall exactly, before he goes on to murder a whole whack of folks, all in the name of getting away with previous murders. I can't recall and I don't want to. The so-called liberals among us can, perhaps do, come up with all kinds of "theories" about how social conditions have created such a person, how we are all responsible for the being of such a being in our midsts, and ya ya.
I see a difference between Clint Eastwood's Man With No Name and Hopkins' Hannibal Lecter. I see the former as a man with principles, and I see the latter as a psychopath. At wikipedia we read: "Red Dragon firmly states that Lecter does not fit any known psychological profile. However, Lecter's keeper Frederick Chilton claims that Lecter is a "pure sociopath" despite characteristics in his behavior that are inconsistent with the disorder. Lecter's pathosis is explored in greater detail in Hannibal and Hannibal Rising, which explain that he is irreparably traumatized as a child when he witnesses the murder and consumption by desperate military men of his younger sister, Mischa." Spare me.
In Eastwood's character we might find moral ambiguity; in Hopkins' character it is society that is, at best, ambiguous, and more than likely outright evil in the making of an evil person. What value do we have in mind as we relate our desires and being to such characters? Given that few of us drift around the world encountering those who would kill us without a thought, and that most of us actually work day jobs and have evening and weekend families, what are we thinking when we relate to cinema idols? Most of us, I think, have a sense of fair-play and honor, seeing ourselves as competitive in business if ruthless in self-defence; but what about those of us who don't see anything beyond ourselves as victims bent on revenge for slights and woes, for outright evils visited upon us by life? What do we value anymore? We, those who might cherish the thought of adopting a Palestinian suicide bomber baby? We who might find ourselves in a flashy new and brightly lit public library coming up from the darkest depths with glibberies excusing those who kill for the sake of Islamic rectifications and yet more and more ya ya?
Kim Bolan, "Society encourages psychopaths: expert." Vancouver Sun; 2 April 2008
Today's society is a fertile breeding ground for psychopathic behaviour, says an international expert in the field.
Dr. Robert Hare, professor emeritus at the University of B.C., says that shifting ethical standards, reflected in television crime shows that glamorize the abnormal, allow psychopaths to flourish.
"What is clear is that society is making it a lot easier for psychopathy or psychopathic behaviour to flourish," Hare said.
"The moral ethical standards that we have now are shifting. What is acceptable now would not have been acceptable five or 10 or 20 years ago."
[....]
Hare, author of the best-selling Without Conscience, The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us.... Hare said research indicates that about 15 per cent of the prison population in Canada is psychopathic, compared to a guess of about one per cent of the general population.
He said it is hard to know if the numbers are increasing overall because studies are generally limited to people in jail and not society at large.
But he said changing social values -- reflected in popular TV hits like Dexter, which is about a heroic serial killer -- have made things worse.
"I won't even watch Dexter," he said. "In a sense what they are doing is glorifying, glamorizing and making normal what is really abnormal. All these programs like CSI and the hundreds of others. They are caricatures of what law enforcement does."
[....]
"My argument is that they know the difference between right and wrong. They know the rules of the game. They are perfectly aware of what society expects of them, but they have chosen for whatever reason not to follow these rules," he said of psychopaths.
"If it is to their advantage to engage in pro-social good behaviour, they are going to do so; if it is to their advantage to engage in anti-social behaviour, they are going to do so."
[....]
http://www.canada.com/vancouver
Psychopaths flourish in wars and civil catastrophes. It is then they are unrestrained and seldom captured; that they are even lauded as the best of men in the worst of times. We seem in our day and in our neighbourhoods to like them now. Witness the hero-worship of jihadis among our intelligentsia. See our politicians go groveling before the cold-eyed killers of countless civilians; our dhimmi academics hurling stones at democrats; see our artists lying dead on the streets for challenging them.
What are you going to do when life is really boring and you can't find anything on tv worth wasting your time on? What if your life is totally boring and you have no values to keep you morally sane? Well, there's always a place to hang out and chat about the latest victims you admire who are fighting back against the system of which you are an unhappy part but wish you weren't. Definitely, if you're a psychopath with a grievance you'll find a sympathetic audience among the Middle-Class-bored and the desperate-for-meaning crowd. If you're a barbarian, they'll still love you. Maybe especially so if so.
Maybe some of us are still Clint Eastwood fans rather than cheerleaders for the lunatic fascist Grand Gesture types. Maybe some of us would happily and casually shoot down a few psychos on the street without thinking much about it if the latter pulled guns on us and meant to kill us. But we might then land ourselves, still living, in jail. Hard call, ain't it? Especially when it's not the movies but the subway or the office or the local school under attack. Yeah, London and Madrid, New York and Washington, Beslan, Bali... you pick it.
Truepeers' comic genius surfaces; and Bill O'Reilly flips out over Fitna
After posting on the shameful P.J. Balkenende's Stupid Groveling Human Tricks, 'Peers goes on to wrap up that fish with genuine panache:
Meanwhile, in his response to complaints from Indonesian authorities, Dutch Prime Minister, Jan Peter Balkenende, admitted that the Amsterdam pornography industry shares a good part of the blame for youth in Indonesian mosques being tempted by internet pornography.
Balkenende called on Dutch film makers to end the continuing cultural imperialism that the Dutch impose on their former "East Indian" colony, and to show respect and avoid internet publication of pornography. This has led to promises from the Pornography Actors' Guild, and leaders of Dutch cultural and industry associations to fill the streets May 1 with tens of thousands of people to demonstrate in defense of freedom of expression on the internet.
[The whole is good-time reading: http://covenantzone.blogspot.com/2008/04/freedoms-news.html ]
http://wildersnews.blogspot.com/2008/04/geert-wilders-fitna-movie-bill-oreilly.html
****
Freedoms News
[....]Meanwhile, in his response to complaints from Indonesian authorities, Dutch Prime Minister, Jan Peter Balkenende, admitted that the Amsterdam pornography industry shares a good part of the blame for youth in Indonesian mosques being tempted by internet pornography.
Balkenende called on Dutch film makers to end the continuing cultural imperialism that the Dutch impose on their former "East Indian" colony, and to show respect and avoid internet publication of pornography. This has led to promises from the Pornography Actors' Guild, and leaders of Dutch cultural and industry associations to fill the streets May 1 with tens of thousands of people to demonstrate in defense of freedom of expression on the internet.
[The whole is good-time reading: http://covenantzone.blogspot
Geert Wilders' Fitna Movie: Bill O'Reilly Declares Jihad |
| Tuesday, April 1, 2008 |
| Amsterdam, The Netherlands -- Controversial far-right Dutch politician Geert Wilders' provocative dissertation Fitna hit the Internet March 27. Even before the seventeen minute film's release, protests erupted due to the incendiary subject matter contained within. The movie is a documentary-style exposé of American trash-journalist Bill O'Reilly's militant calls for violent demonstrations and reprisals against "unbelievers" who dare to oppose his dogma. "Bill O'Reilly is one of modern society's greatest threats to personal safety, individual's rights, and freedom of thought," Mr. Wilders told reporters outside the Binnenhof government offices in Amsterdam. "He has taken a benign doctrine and corrupted it to serve his own petty agenda. O'Reilly can, how do they say in America, dish it out but he cannot take it." "I don't have anything against Fox News viewers," the maverick legislator continued. "They are people just like you and me. My concern is with O'Reilly's fascist message of intolerance and hate. If you slam the guy, he comes after you." Socially liberal Holland, normally known for easily available prostitution, pot smoking, and money laundering, officially denounced Mr. Wilders' assertions. "As a nation, we Dutch are pretty laid back," said Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende, "but this has gone too far. Geert Wilders' self-aggrandizing extremism, as exemplified by his funny facial expressions and poofy blonde hair, brings shame to the Netherlands." [Check out the rest. Very cool.] *smithismyrealname.typepad.com |
http://wildersnews.blogspot
****
Ayatollah Khomeini, 1979
"Allah did not create man so that he could have fun. The aim of creation was for mankind to be put to the test through hardship and prayer. An Islamic regime must be serious in every field. There are no jokes in Islam. There is no humor in Islam. There is no fun in Islam. There can be no fun and joy in whatever is serious."
****
Looks like some of us will never make it as good Muslims. You'll find me laughing on the way out.
Tuesday, April 01, 2008
The Patriot and the Filibuster
First, are these two different and separate?
In a Democracy, democracy means not simply the right of the majority to its will and wishes but also reasonable accommodation of its opposition with at least full protection of and from and equality before the law. If a Democracy doesn't provide for its opposition, then it's merely a tyranny of the majority, a bullying crowd, an intolerant mob with too much power.
But there is the tolerant Democracy too that is every bit as evil as the Tyranny we all know of and fear the return of: there is the Velvet Fascism of liberal social engineers and Social Gospel tyrants. There is the nice, the smiling, the concerned intimidation of the sharing and caring and inclusive. There is the politically correct multi-culti Left dhimmi fascist. Yes, the majority vote goes to them over and again in the Modern West. Yes, those who dismiss the Left dhimmi fascism of our time as a heinous crime against Humanity are dismissed in turn as fascist. Analysis tells. Sometimes even a few anecdotal pieces from BruJo do as much quickly:
/node/3145
What does the patriot do in ones own nation when the nation is overwhelmed by a really nice dictatorship elected by a majority of voters? What does one do when the majority of the nation's voters elect a creature like P.J Balkenende who runs off to apologize to Muslims over a film when the latter threaten violence of all kinds? What is a democracy when one politician is hounded out of the nation by Muslim death threats as is Ayaan Hirsi Ali; what does one do in a really nice place of elected fascists when they keep under guard from Muslim would-be killers an elected politician like Geert Wilders; and what does one do in a democracy when the government allows a minority to run amok committing violent crimes because it both fears more violence and fears perhaps even more the dent law-enforcement would put in their "nice" image?
What if you're not exactly a "nice" person? What if you're a decent person and a person who is still committed to the concept of genuine democracy in the face of the smiling fascism that is now so much a system of rule throughout our Modern West? What counts? Rule by bureaucrats? Or democracy that abides by universal positive law?
So again: Patriot; Filibuster. Are these two roles contradictory? I have no opinion, of course, this being simply a rhetorical question.
In a Democracy, democracy means not simply the right of the majority to its will and wishes but also reasonable accommodation of its opposition with at least full protection of and from and equality before the law. If a Democracy doesn't provide for its opposition, then it's merely a tyranny of the majority, a bullying crowd, an intolerant mob with too much power.
But there is the tolerant Democracy too that is every bit as evil as the Tyranny we all know of and fear the return of: there is the Velvet Fascism of liberal social engineers and Social Gospel tyrants. There is the nice, the smiling, the concerned intimidation of the sharing and caring and inclusive. There is the politically correct multi-culti Left dhimmi fascist. Yes, the majority vote goes to them over and again in the Modern West. Yes, those who dismiss the Left dhimmi fascism of our time as a heinous crime against Humanity are dismissed in turn as fascist. Analysis tells. Sometimes even a few anecdotal pieces from BruJo do as much quickly:
Dispatch from the Eurabian Front: Austria, European Parliament, the Netherlands, Belgium
From the desk of Thomas Landen on Tue, 2008-04-01 22:13
The Austrian authorities have indicted politician Susanne Winter on charges of incitement and degradation of religious symbols and religious agitation. This offence carries a maximum sentence of two years. Last January, Ms Winter said that the prophet Muhammad was "a child molester" because he had married a six-year-old girl. She also said he was "a warlord" who had written the Koran during "epileptic fits."
The politician, a member of the Austrian Freedom Party FPÖ, an anti-immigration party which is in opposition, added that Islam is "a totalitarian system of domination that should be cast back to its birthplace on the other side of the Mediterranean." She also warned for "a Muslim immigration tsunami," saying that "in 20 or 30 years, half the population of Austria will be Muslim" if the present immigration policies continue.
Following her remarks, Muslim extremists threatened to kill Susanne Winter and she was placed under police protection. Today, the Justice Department in Vienna announced that Ms Winter will be charged with "incitement and degradation of religious symbols" (Verhetzung und Herabwürdigung religiöser Symbole). If convicted she may have to serve up to two years in jail for her opinions.
However, Alfred Hrdlicka, the Austrian "artist" who depicted Jesus and his apostles engaging in homosexual acts of sodomy during the Last Supper, has not been indicted. Nor will he be. Depicting Jesus sodomizing his apostles is not considered to be a "degradation of religious symbols" in Austria, but referring to the historic fact that Muhammad married a six-year old girl is "incitement to racial hatred."
Neither has Mr Hrdlicka been threatened by Christian assassins for his "opinions." The difference between Christian and Muslim extremists is that the former do not aim to kill those who offend them, but the latter do – which is perhaps also why the European authorities fear the radical Muslims and persecute their opponents while they subsidize those who insult Christians.
Meanwhile, it has become clear that only 144 of the 785 members of the European Parliament have supported the proposal of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a former Dutch politician who lives in hiding following death threats from Islamists, to establish a European fund to protect people who are stalked by assassins for their opinions. Ms Hirsi Ali is under de facto house arrest because the Dutch authorities are only willing to protect her while she remains in the Netherlands, but not when she travels abroad. Due to the lack of protection she is confined to hide-outs in the Netherlands.
Last month, Henk Hofland, a leading Dutch journalist, proposed that the Dutch authorities lift the police protection of Geert Wilders, another politician whom radical Muslims want to assassinate for his opinions. Several Dutch individuals and organizations have lodged complaints against Mr Wilders for incitement to racial hatred because he made a 15-minute film, called Fitna, to express his views about Islam.
VNO-NCW, the Federation of Dutch Employers, has ordered its lawyers to see whether it is possible to claim damages from Mr Wilders for the loss of income which Dutch companies may possibly suffer as a result of a boycott of Dutch products by Muslims who are angry at Mr Wilders and at the fact that the Dutch have not been able to shut him up. "Companies like Shell, Philips and Unilever are easy to recognize as Dutch companies," VNO-NCW chairman Bernard Wientjes told the newspaper Het Financieele Dagblad. "I do not know how rich Geert Wilders is, or how well insured he is, but if we suffer from a boycott, we will investigate whether it is possible to claim damages from him." Last November, Doekle Terpstra, a member of the board of Unilever, called upon the Dutch to "rise in order to stop Wilders" because "Geert Wilders is evil and evil has to be stopped."
Today in neighbouring Belgium the government's anti-discrimination body CEOOR warned bloggers and websites to remove their links to Wilders's movie. The CEOOR states that the movie aims to foster "fear, distrust and hatred of Muslims." The anti-discrimination body has asked the Belgians to be "vigilant" and to report "cases of incitement to hatred and/or discrimination."
http://www.brusselsjournal.comWhat does the patriot do in ones own nation when the nation is overwhelmed by a really nice dictatorship elected by a majority of voters? What does one do when the majority of the nation's voters elect a creature like P.J Balkenende who runs off to apologize to Muslims over a film when the latter threaten violence of all kinds? What is a democracy when one politician is hounded out of the nation by Muslim death threats as is Ayaan Hirsi Ali; what does one do in a really nice place of elected fascists when they keep under guard from Muslim would-be killers an elected politician like Geert Wilders; and what does one do in a democracy when the government allows a minority to run amok committing violent crimes because it both fears more violence and fears perhaps even more the dent law-enforcement would put in their "nice" image?
What if you're not exactly a "nice" person? What if you're a decent person and a person who is still committed to the concept of genuine democracy in the face of the smiling fascism that is now so much a system of rule throughout our Modern West? What counts? Rule by bureaucrats? Or democracy that abides by universal positive law?
So again: Patriot; Filibuster. Are these two roles contradictory? I have no opinion, of course, this being simply a rhetorical question.
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Left Dhimmi Fascist Priority and the Fraktion Geert Wilders, Fraktion Wafa Sultan
Last evening as my comrades and I spent an evil evening debating committed dhimmis and assorted Left fascists a the local library while capo-dhimmi Ilan Pappe strove hard to bolster the conspiracy theories of the dhimmi weltanschauung, Wafa Sultan and her family were in hiding due to death threats from jihadis.At the library last evening a few hundred dhimmis showed up to show off themselves as morally superiour to all other Human beings; showing themselves to be committed to correcting pretended injustice against Muslims in so-called Palestine. Big of them. And now, Wafa sultan and family inn hiding, where are the dhimmis? Back at Starbucks sipping lattes and speaking too loudly about there adventure to the library where they listened rapt to the capo de capo of dhimmi Israeli Communist Party members, Ilan Pappe. And Wafa Sultan who speaks on Muslim television to Muslim death lovers?
Wafa Sultan, with her family, is in hiding:
http://actforamerica.com/news/
Shameful it is. Fraktion Geert Wilders? Where art thou? Fraktion Wafa Sultan, where hidest thou?
Wilders: Balkenende Must be Terribly Embarrassed
THE HAGUE, 29/03/08 - Party for Freedom (PVV) leader Geert Wilders considers that Premier Jan Peter Balkenende "must be terribly embarrassed" about everything he has said in the past about his anti-Koran film Fitna.
Balkenende repeatedly stressed in recent weeks that the film could lead to attacks and deaths. When the media asked him if he was not exaggerating, the premier even replied last week that the word 'crisis' could turn out to be a euphemism.
[....]
TV programme EenVandaag held a poll Friday among its permanent opinion panel of 10,000. A large majority (82 percent) consider that there has been "a great fuss about nothing." Only 20 percent now expect riots over the film, compared with 52 percent recently.[....]
http://www.nisnews.nl/public
Yes, the dhimmis no no shame. Wafa Sultan confronts the fascist ulema on Muslim television, and she is under threat of death and in hiding, as is Geert Wilders. On display are hundreds of dhimmis in Vancouver, Canada. What does it mean?
Try this:
Oslo: 'Kill Muslims' grafitti
"Kill Muslims" and "Norway is for Norwegians" were some of the graffiti messages that Ibrahim Salem (30) saw on house walls and entrances last week. Throughout the weekend several blocks on Welhavens street in the center of Oslo were painted over with graffiti. The messages were clearly racist. Foreign names on buzzers and postboxes were written over and painted with swastikas.The area residents had gotten used to such racist hate messages, according to Ibrahim. He says that this has happened 20 times in the six years he's lived there. He asks to clean the walls, and the graffiti reappears after several weeks.
He [said] in the past he was content with getting it cleaned up, but this time he's scared of the messages calling for murder. In the past they wrote things like 'go home', he says, but now come they come directly with threats. He says his 8 year old son was very scared when he read it. He doesn't dare be here anymore, so Ibrahim sent him to his mother who lives elsewhere in Oslo. Many of the children living in the area were also really scared.
Ibrahim reported the graffiti but feels he doesn't get much understanding from the police. The doors in several blocks are not hard to open. He says they don't sleep well at night, what if they come back and burn down the house?
Dagbladet hadn't managed to contact the police.
Elsewhere in Norway, recently some people tried to reproduce one of the Muhammad caricatures on the walls of a shopping center in Sandnes. It's the first time this has happened in the neighborhood, according to the center's manager Cato Helmersen. He hadn't seen the actual graffiti. He says graffiti is something that happens from time to time. There are different types, but they paint over it.
Source: Dagbladet (Norwegian), with pictures
From Esther at http://islamineurope.blogspot
While the death Hippies preen for each other and how off their hipness at libraries featuring capo-dhimmis like Pappe the sub-strata of the West seethes. All well and fine for the idiot pseudo-liberal poseurs to show off and attend any latest performance, but there are those who aren't pretentious pseudo-sophisticates. There are the raw and brutal lumpen who are not fooling themselves into thinking they are much to brag about in their veils of political fashion. While it's a game for those with admission fare to the circus of fools at a Pappe hate-fest, there is genuine hate going on in the slums, even in Oslo. Those who don't deal in realities, those whose understanding of Humanness ends at the painted porch of the latest happening art gallery might well find themselves at the point of a switchblade in the evening, confronted by the feral and the murderous who are not into the latest fads. Push the lumpen proletariat and see how cool that is. Ignore them to your peril.
Wafa sultan stands up to proclaim decency and right in the face of fascist Islam. For that she and her family in America are in hiding from jihadis, supported as the latter are by the dhimmis who swoon in delight at the daring Pappe. The lumpen of the nations will soon enough put a stop to that, and they will attack children, little kids sleeping in slums, buildings burning while the dhimmis frown and scold. It is our foolish petit-bourgeoisie who create the horrors to come, the rioting and murderous lumpen reaction. Rather than stand with the Wafa Sultans and the Geert Wilders of the world's democrats the dhimmi fools dine on tomorrow's losses. All the while that the dhimmis play pretend and art of dialogue, all that time the lumpen festers and grows in rage.
When the fed-up lumpen charge in the gloom against those Other, then we'll see the dhimmis divide, half converting to Islam and the other half cringing in fear and open cowardice. It will be the Fraktion Geert Wilders, Fraktion Wafa Sultan on the front-line saving those innocents among the innocent Muslims who might escape this dhimmi-made rage only by good luck.
Ion Dragoumis:
"Each person must imagine that they have to save their nation. Each person is born a potential savior of their nation; even though few know they have been born as such, that they can be saviors, if they want. We must imagine that I alone am responsible for saving the nation, and that if I do not save it, no one else will. Nor must I look at what others do; instead I must imagine that only I have the great obligation to save the nation."
Fraktion Gert Wilders
We had a meeting of minds at the Vancouver Public Library this evening, Saturday, and we also met some of the -- the people. We met some of the hundreds who lined up to give money to listen to Ilan Pappe, a dhimmi slime with a sparkling reputation among dhimmi slime. I held my temper, and well, I think, till I couldn't do so any longer, and then I made a hasty exit, taking my fury with me for a long walk in the sleet and the unseasonal snow. The chill did not cool me. I am not a cool person, spitting as I passed by in the slush five middle-aged businessmen passing a joint each to each as they staggered through the central business quarter of the city. I'd stormed out of the library, incapable of enduring more without a loss of temper.
We met and engaged in some discussion a small group of people who either couldn't afford the price of admission to Pappe's lecture or who couldn't find a seat in the over-packed room to listen to him, to clap so loudly that those of us on the upper level of the building could hear it through the din of chatter around us, clapping for dhimmitude and for the vicariou thrill of hearing the daring speech of a dhimmi proclaiming, declaiming, the celebration of philobarbarism for the effeminate. I'm not able to endure such torture without feeling a need to... I cannot say. Not today or not now, the picture of cowards demanding the excoriation of Geert Wilders, the hounding of Wafa Sultan, the cringing dhimmi trails of Christian clerics running to the Muslim masters of their dream-worlds to play at vicarious rape phantasies. The axe, the axe, the hand of da'w reaches out and I call for the axe! The anal presentations and the simpering squeals of the dhimmis begging not to be raped too hard, to brutally, "Oh please, not too hard, but hard on Wilders and Sultan and those who deserve it...." I have no liking for this lot of scum.
The Municipal Council of Churches in Utrecht has sent an open letter to all mosques in the town in which the Council distances itself in advance of the broadcast of the movie “Fitna” by Geert Wilders. It says that this film depreciates the freedom of religion in the Netherlands, which was so difficult to acquire.
www.trouw.nl/laatstenieuws/ln_geestelijk_leven/article935038.ece/Utr
Where, friend, is the Fraktion Geert Wilders?
I'll return next with a synopsis of the travails of Wafa Sultan, now in hiding with her family due to jihadi death threats in America.
Where lurks the filibuster nation?
We met and engaged in some discussion a small group of people who either couldn't afford the price of admission to Pappe's lecture or who couldn't find a seat in the over-packed room to listen to him, to clap so loudly that those of us on the upper level of the building could hear it through the din of chatter around us, clapping for dhimmitude and for the vicariou thrill of hearing the daring speech of a dhimmi proclaiming, declaiming, the celebration of philobarbarism for the effeminate. I'm not able to endure such torture without feeling a need to... I cannot say. Not today or not now, the picture of cowards demanding the excoriation of Geert Wilders, the hounding of Wafa Sultan, the cringing dhimmi trails of Christian clerics running to the Muslim masters of their dream-worlds to play at vicarious rape phantasies. The axe, the axe, the hand of da'w reaches out and I call for the axe! The anal presentations and the simpering squeals of the dhimmis begging not to be raped too hard, to brutally, "Oh please, not too hard, but hard on Wilders and Sultan and those who deserve it...." I have no liking for this lot of scum.
The Municipal Council of Churches in Utrecht has sent an open letter to all mosques in the town in which the Council distances itself in advance of the broadcast of the movie “Fitna” by Geert Wilders. It says that this film depreciates the freedom of religion in the Netherlands, which was so difficult to acquire.
www.trouw.nl/laatstenieuws/ln_geestelijk_leven/article935038.ece/Utr
Where, friend, is the Fraktion Geert Wilders?
I'll return next with a synopsis of the travails of Wafa Sultan, now in hiding with her family due to jihadi death threats in America.
Where lurks the filibuster nation?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)