A Type of Beauty

Life can sometimes be terribly cruel, as we see from the biography of Cervantes, as an example: Muslims cut off one of his hands. He went on to write Don Quixote, true, but had he been left with both hands, he might have written two books. Yes, life is sometimes cruel. I hope, though, that your life will improve noticeably soon. To achieve that I recently got two things to improve my writing and your life: I got from a graduand at a local college a cap I can wear so I can write far smarter copy; and I got a beautiful typewriter so I will write more beautiful prose, finer poetry, and even more famouser headlines. I look very smart in my new cap, but the typewriter is a thing of real beauty. Below is a bit about it and its parents.

E.B. Hess co-founded The Royal Typewriter Company, in Brooklyn, New York, and moved it to Hartford, Connecticut in 1908, according to the Federal Writer's Project (Connecticut. By Federal Writers' Project. Published by US History Publishers, 1938.)

Company: Royal Typewriter Company , New York , USA. First year of production: 1906

The Royal typewriter entered the market in 1906. It would grow to be one of the leading brands that would dominate the market together with the Underwood and the Remington. That alone should be enough to earn a place in a museum.

[I]n 1914 the upright Royal 10 appeared... the classic model with beveled glass sides that would grow to be one of the market leaders.

http://www.typewritermuseum.org/collection/index.php3?machine=royal1&cat=kf

The Royal 10 is another giant in the typewriter market. Like the Underwood 5 it is one of the machines that essentially marked the end of the history of typewriter development. Machines like the Royal 10 continued to be built for many decades, with most changes limited to cosmetic alterations.

The Royal 10 was introduced in 1914. It had two bevelled glass panels on either side of the machine. A later version only had one glass panel on either side. It is not clear at what point exactly that change was made....

http://www.typewritermuseum.org/collection/index.php3?machine=royal10&cat=kf

Yes, dear reader, it's a poor workman who blames his tools. I gave that up and simply bought a new machine. I think you must be deeply impressed already. I know I am. Funny how life can be. I used to type with two fingers, but I quickly ran out of two letter words, which forced me to learn to type with four fingers. That got me into lots of trouble, I know not why. But now, with five fingers, I can type all sorts of cool words. This new typewriter also ensures that I'll write beautifully. On the other hand, there are five more fingers! Life is good.

N.B.

As a courtesy to you, dear reader, a blurb below on a typewriter history book. This has to be one of the most expensive 124 page books on typewriters in history. I haven't read it: http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/the-typewriter-sketchbook/1370470

A collection of richly illustrated articles relating to the early history of the typewriter (1870-1920). With biographies of great American inventors like James B. Hammond, Frank Lambert (who also invented a water meter and talking clock) and Louis Cantelo. Pictorial chapters on the history of office work, related to 19th Century mechanization. The book provides many hours of happy browsing and a wealth of information relating to the earliest days of the typewriter and the rise of women in the office. Some articles were previously published in the Virtual Typewriter Journal (2004-2006). Re-published after editing and with more photos.

****

Up-date, 13 April 2011.

The following two links come to us via Glenn Reynolds, known and loved as InstaPundit, the creator Star Trek. You have fans the world over, Mr. Reynolds, and I am one.

http://www.omnivoracious.com/2011/04/penguin-typewriters-are-here-to-remind-you-about-the-classics.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/31/fashion/31Typewriter.html?_r=1

A gentle reminder that my book, An Occasional Walker, is available at the link here:

http://www.amazon.com/Occasional-Walker-D-W/dp/0987761501/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1331063095&sr=1-1

And here are some reviews and comments on said book:

http://nodhimmitude.blogspot.com/2012/04/dagness-at-noon.html

In-Joke of the Year

Charles Johnson and the Little Green Lizards.
A telling definition of "Chuck Johnson" from Urban Dictionary.

Chuck Johnson

Verb: Related to Godwin's law and Godwinisms. To "Chuck Johnsons" is to label a person, group, or philosophy with the reductio ad Hitlerum tag as means to close down debate.

Chuck: Transitive verb, meaning to: a) toss, throw. Noun: Short for Charles

Johnson: Refers to the owner of the news aggregating, formally conservative, anti-jihad site and now anti-creationism pro-Darwin website, Little Green Footballs. Which has become synonymous with personality cults, blogtatorship, and calling previous colleagues and acquaintances of long and respected standing, fascists, Nazis, Racists, or ID'er (derogatory term for a belief in creationism. For simply having web links or opinions on their own personal web pages which he/CJ disapproves of.

To "Chuck a Johnson" can also be used to describe over use of the delete/banning function on web forums to those who hold contrary opinions.

Charles Johnson biggest censorship ass-hat 2008.

[As seen at:]

http://infidelbloggerawards.blogspot.com/2008/11/announcing-winners-of-1st-annual.html

1) Person A. calls person B. a fascist on the basis of flimsy evidence or hearsay derived from an individual with known antagonistic political view points or malicious agenda.

Person B. replies: "Don't chuck Johnsons at me."

Or points out to fellow bloggers/posters that: "A. is chucking Johnstons," and in effect has evoked Godwin's law, thus destroying the thread and any chance at meaningful debate.

2) Blog owner deletes and bans regular posters/contributers for disagreeing with his pet hates or hypocritical changes in ideological position.

Person A: "Look he is chucking Johnson's everywhere."
Person B: "I know, I don't recognize the place now so many people have been banned. And the threads are so full of deletions it's impossible to follow the argument; he/she sure threw a lot of (Chuck) Johnsons."

by Stinky-Winky on Feb 24, 2009

http://www.urbandictionary.com/confirm.php?code=43673bfab6

Thanks to various commentators at Jihad Watch for the photo and the copy above.

The HAMAS Letter for Senator John Kerry

I just happened to be in Gaza a few days back and sure enough, I bumped into John Kerry, failed presidential candidate. I asked how he's doing and what he's up to, the usual polite stuff I say to failed presidential candidates I meet on the road. He said, and I kid you not:

Give me a ticket for an aeroplane
Ain't got time to take a fast train
Lonely days are gone, I'm a goin' home
My habibi just wrote me a letter.

I said, "Excuse me, senator, don't you have a billion bucks on you of your own that you squeezed from you wife? Can't you use your own money?"

Well, I'm not too smart when it comes to this kind of political stuff. Senator Carry had a letter, slipped to him on the sly by the U.N., from HAMAS that he was delivering to Osama Barka, and since I was the only tax-payer handy, he felt it was my duty to pay for his ticket home. Yeah, I can see the sense of that now that I think about it. He said:

I don't care how much money I gotta spend
Got to get back to my habibi again
Lonely days are gone, I'm a goin' home
My habibi just wrote me a letter.

Yup, I'm feeling much better about the Democrats in power. They deliver.

Senator John Carry, courier to the stars.

http://www.metrolyrics.com/the-letter-lyrics-the-box-tops.html

A common word between Roger Scruton and Reality

George pushes around a shopping cart full of trash and he sleeps outside in the snow. He watches the Illuminati. He works for the CIA. I, much to my surprise and delight, am one of his controllers. I didn't know George works for the CIA. He does. He tells me he does. He says: "I'm working for the CIA." If he says so, who am I to complain? I feel safer already.

Bob Unruh for WorldNetDaily, February 3, 2009.

Reports that at least 10 Christians were abducted and killed for their faith – sometimes by beheading – during 2008 has pushed Somalia into the Top 10 among nation's that aggressively persecute Christians, according to a new report from Open Doors USA.

The organization today released its 2009 World Watch List, which cited [North] Korea – for the seventh straight year – as the nation that persecutes Christians more intensely than any other around the globe.

But Somalia rose from 12th in 2008 to 5th this year because of the growing level of attacks there, according to the report which noted two of the worst three nations, Saudi Arabia and Iran, are nations governed by Islamic Shariah law, and seven of the Top 10 nations fall into that category.

Paul Estabrooks, the organization's minister-at-large, told WND that those Islamic nations "certainly are impacted significantly by Shariah." [...]

Open Doors said Afghanistan, Somalia and the Maldives are fourth, fifth and sixth, with Afghanistan moving up three spots because of an aggressive effort from Taliban officials during 2008.

In seventh is Yemen, Laos is No. 8, Eritrea, a newcomer to the Top 10, is No. 9 and Uzbekistan No. 10....

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/024713.php

George is working for the CIA. I'm the Man on the Moon. And IsIam is a religion of peace.

Witness the 2007 letter ["A Common Word...."] to religious leaders in the West, signed by 140 distinguished Muslim scholars, calling for dialogue among the faiths and for mutual respect as the foundation of coexistence.

Roger Scruton, "Forgiveness and Irony: What makes the West strong." http://www.city-journal.org/2009/19_1_the-west.html

Words are agreement between speakers and listeners. Yes, Yahweh told Adam to go around and name thigs, but that's all a matter of evolution. Words are not given from direct command by God. Adam decided, and we decide later. Jesuits will explain all this to us later. Words only mean what we decide they mean.

"A Common Word between Us and You"
Muslims Call for Interfaith Peace

On October 13th 2006, one month to the day after Pope Benedict XVI's Regensburg address of September 13th 2006, 38 Islamic authorities and scholars from around the world, representing all denominations and schools of thought, joined together to deliver an answer to the Pope in the spirit of open intellectual exchange and mutual understanding. In their"Open Letter to the Pope" (Link Below), for the first time in recent history, Muslim scholars from every branch of Islam spoke with one voice about the true teachings of Islam.

Now, exactly one year after that letter, Muslims have expanded their message. In "A Common Word Between Us and You," 138 Muslim scholars, clerics and intellectuals have unanimously come together for the first time since the days of the Prophet to declare the common ground between Christianity and Islam. Like the Open Letter, the signatories to this message come from every denomination and school of thought in Islam. Every major Islamic country or region in the world is represented in this message, which is addressed to the leaders of all the world's churches, and indeed to all Christians everywhere. ...

http://www.saudi-us-relations.org/articles/2007/ioi/071018-open-letter.html

A common word between us. George says he works for the CIA.

Last October, the international media establishment was abuzz over a letter sent by 138 Islamic scholars representing the elite of the worldwide ulema to Pope Benedict, entitled "A Common Word between Us and You", in response to his papal address at Regensburg in September 2006. The letter extols the common bonds between Muslims and Christians, and their common belief in the love towards neighbors. It further declares that "justice and freedom of religion are a crucial part of love of the neighbor." Many Christian leaders have responded by welcoming this effort and affirming the Islamic scholars' letter.

The letter was the product of the Royal Aal al-Bayt [ i.e. the Royal House of the Saud Family] Institute for Islamic Thought in Amman, Jordan, and its chief scholar, [my emphasis] Sheikh Said Hijjawi, was one of the 138 signatories (#49). In fact, according to the introduction, the letter was presented by the Institute to the Islamic scholars gathered at a conference held at their facilities in September 2007.

[....]

While saying they want to build on common ground, the Muslim scholars (amid copious Qur'an quotes) never mention Qur'an 5:17, which says that those who believe in the divinity of Christ are unbelievers, or 4:171, which says that Jesus was not crucified, or 9:30, which says that those who believe that Jesus is the Son of God are accursed, or 9:29, which mandates warfare against and the subjugation of Jews and Christians. Why should they mention these unpleasant passages in the midst of trying to build bridges? Because they are precisely the obstacles to such bridges. It seems reasonable to suggest that verses like these would need to be addressed in some way, even if only to give them some benign interpretation, if there is to be any true and honest dialogue.

Most telling of all perhaps may be the fact that the title of the document, "A Common Word between us and you," comes from a Qur'anic verse (3:64) calling non-Muslims to Islam: "Say: 'O People of the Book! Come to common terms [a common word] as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah.' If then they turn back, say ye: 'Bear witness that we are Muslims.'" Mainstream Islam considers the Christian doctrine of the divinity of Christ to be example of the association of "partners" with Allah -- thus this verse is saying, Discard Christianity and become Muslims, and we will have achieved a common understanding between us and you.

Robert Spencer, February 26, 2008

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/2008/02/020105print.html

A common word between us. You say CIA, I say schizo. Let's call the whole thing off.

Australian Anglican cleric, Dr. Mark Durie, in a [9] blog post last week [HT: [10] Andrew Bostom]. Rev. Durie, a noted scholar on comparative theology who spent years studying the culture of the Acehnese in Indonesia and is fluent in Arabic, also is a fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities and senior associate of the Department of Linguistics and Applied Linguistics at the University of Melbourne. He previously served as the head of the Department of Linguistics and Language Studies there.

His analysis of the 16 apostasy fatwas that were posted on AlTafsir.com by Sheikh Hijjawi, who previously served as the Grand Mufti of Jordan and mufti in Oman, finds that they consistently rule that "there is no freedom of Muslims to choose whether to believe in Islam, and no human rights for Christians who have left Islam." Durie notes that Sheikh Hijjawi's apostasy fatwas cite a number of verses from the Koran and hadiths of Mohammed in support of his rulings.

And for those Christians and Muslims who are not killed, the fatwas condemn such to a living death as a non-person. Rev. Durie translates some of the punishments to be imposed according to Sheikh Hijjawi's fatwas:

* His marriage is annulled by virtue of his apostasy.
* He cannot inherit the wealth of any of his relatives — whether they are Muslims or not — because the apostate is legally regarded as dead.
* None of his actions after apostasy has any legal validity (as the apostate is a legal non-person).
* An apostate cannot be remarried, whether to a Muslim or a non-Muslim.
* He cannot be a guardian for anyone else, so he loses custody of his children, and an apostate father has no say over his daughters' marriages.
* An apostate must not be prayed for by Muslims after his death and must not be buried in a Muslim cemetery.
* If a male apostate comes back to Islam and wishes to resume his marriage, he must remarry his wife with a new ceremony and provide a new dowry for her.
* The apostate's wealth and possessions are to be entailed upon an heir. If the apostate repents and returns to Islam, he receives his wealth back. If he dies while still an apostate, his wealth is inherited by his Muslim heir, but only the amount which he had at the time of his apostasy. Any wealth which accrued after he had left Islam is considered Fay (and thus the collective property of the Muslim community).

Needless to say, the implications of this finding in light of the singular leading role played by Sheikh Hijjawi and the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute in drafting and promoting "A Common Word" could very well be catastrophic for the attempted efforts to convince the international Christian community of their sincerity and amity. Rev. Durie arrives at this very conclusion:

It does not seem to be the case that the signatories of "A Common Word" understand concepts such as justice, loving one's neighbor, and "freedom of religion" in the same way that most Christians would. The Chief Scholar of the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute, who was a highly prominent signatory of the Common Word letter, is calling for Christians who have converted to Islam to be killed, or else they should be deprived of their rights and treated legally as "dead men walking." Indeed, because these fatwas are available over the internet, the former Grand Mufti and the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute are effectively calling for the death of Christians day after day, and will do so until this material is taken down from the site.

The implications were apparently not lost on Sheikh Hijjawi or the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute either. Just hours after Rev. Durie's blog post had appeared, the apostasy fatwas were promptly removed (the fatwas had [11] appeared here). In fact, the entire AlTafsir.com website was down for most of the following day, perhaps in an effort to scrub the site of this damaging information.

That the Institute has removed these fatwas without any acknowledgment of the previous presence is yet another incident in a seemingly endless procession of evasions, duplicity, and outright hypocrisy by the so-called religious leaders in the Islamic world.

[....]

http://blog.americancongressfortruth.com/2008/11/19/redux-what-the-islamic-scholars-forgot-to-tell-the-pope/

Imagine there's not Heaven, above us only sky. All the world could live in peace and we can all eat ice-cream without getting fat and dying of heart attacks. Let's agree on at least that much, shall we?

Bridges of Islam County: A Love Story

Gee, I wonder what's on television today. I'd like to learn all about Islam. I hear that it's the Religion of Peace. Hmmm. Let's see, there's the multi-culti station called Bridges, all about mutual understanding and how nice is Islam. That should perk me up and make me feel all worm and furry about Islam.

Let's click here to see what's up: http://www.bridgestv.com/

"This website is temporarily down for maintenance."

Oh heckeroonies! I remember now. The owner just beheaded his wife.

Looks like the Islamic Cooking Show for this guy. "Halal butchering." Sounds delightful.

Walk on the Wild Side: Vancouver.

Here's the city at it's most raw, most dangerous, most thrilling. For this I escaped the idiocy of rural living. I took a walk, and this is what I saw.

In my search for the soul of the city, I saw school busses playing hookey.


I saw a warehouse in which boxes and bales and barrels brought from all points of the world came to rest on shelves so men could break them down into parts and parcels to mete out to the masses, goods and favors.

I delved deep into the vortex of the city, finding in my journey an abandoned cement mixer.

This high wuthering height of Humanness, so far from the storm blasted heath of my youth, it makes me proud that we withstand.

It's adventurous, it's dangerous, its a Dag Day in the big city, I do think so.

The Brilliance of Islam

Modernity gives the world the automobile, and the Jihadi gives the world the car bomb.

U B U 2 U

Even now in the middle of a very long and eccentric life I find myself sometimes wincing and grimacing over the unbidden rise of memories from random experiences that just won't go away in spite of whatever discipline I use to keep them away. Some ugly memories are scars that won't fade. One such nasty memory is of a repulsive young woman at a dance hall whose tee-shirt bore the caption: "I wouldn't wanna be you."

I can appreciate the idea of not wanting to be you. Regardless of who I might be, I'd rather be me than not. I don't want to be you. Fair enough. But I don't want you not to be you. Islam, for all its obvious faults, at least understands that no one is ever going to be the Perfect Man, he being, according to Islam, Mohammed, not to be repeated, only imitated. Islam, for all its totalitarianism, doesn't attempt to make anyone into the kind of person "we all should be." Islam settles for orthopraxy, for outward ritual behaviour. For the totalitarian Leftist, this is not enough. He not only rejects you as you but demands that you conform to his vision of the Ideal Man as you. It's one thing not to want to be me; but it is something creepy to not want me to be me. That's me The Individualist writing. I value Privacy. Muslims and the Left value Publicity. No, I wouldn't want to be you, but that's not a problem for me. It is a problem for the communitarian.

For the communitarian, the idea of Another not being a conformist in all ways, body, mind and soul, is an outrage against Nature. Communitarians, Statists, Muslims, collectivists of all sorts, they hate individuals and individualism. Usually this is of no concern to most of us. Unfortunately, there is a growing movement of middle-aged hippies in government and areas of social control, e.g our universities, who are fanatical in their drive to make all others "not themselves." We must all be One.
I'm rereading Matthew Arnold today. I read Arnold as a young man, ( not, at the time, realizing that in the doing I was preparing myself for marriage in middle-age,) from a sense of duty rather than passion. Today, for me, he raises the question of the benefits of Culture, by which he means High Culture of the mid-Victorian era. He writes of others as in need of the education they lack, an education which makes their philistine lives "hole and corner." Like most people, he doesn't like people not like himself. He writes of others: "Consider these people, then, their way of life, their habits, their manners, the very tones of their voice; look at them attentively; observe the literature they read, the things which give them pleasure, the words which come from their mouths, the thoughts which make the furniture of their minds; would any amount of wealth be worth having with the condition that one was to become just like these people by having it?"1.

Good grief! Would I want to be a man like him? Not for all the money on Earth. Wouldn't even want to be Elvis. Nor does Arnold, for all his obnoxious snobbery, intend anyone to think others should be him or like him. In that he is ultimately far superior to the average Leftist. Arnold's snobbery begins and ends with himself. He did not kill anyone in a futile and hubristic attempt to make a New Man. Such cannot be said of the Death Hippies who today rule our many nations of Modernity, lands of Sweetness and Light, where ignorant Leftards clash on sight.

Who then is the Humanist? He who doesn't want to be you is probably fine with not being you. He who doesn't like you is probably fine with that too. It is he who doesn't want you to be you who is the man we must not tolerate. I wouldn't be someone else for all the money on Earth. Nor would I want to make another not himself even if that someone is someone I'd gladly hang from a lamp-post. People have rights, innately, and the most basic right is to be their own Lords. Sometimes others are so disgusting I can't shake the horror of the vision of them; but that's my problem, not theirs. I can live with it. Can our collectivist Culture Curators? Can we live with them?

1. Matthew Arnold, Culture and Anarchy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1869; rpt. revised 1933 and19 50; p. 52.

In a famous speech in 1961, Che Guevara denounced the very "spirit of rebellion" as "reprehensible."

"Youth must refrain from ungrateful questioning of governmental mandates" commanded Guevara. "Instead, they must dedicate themselves to study, work, and military service." And woe to those youths "who stayed up late at might and thus reported to work [government forced-labor] tardily."

"Youth," wrote Guevara, "should learn to think and act as a mass." "Those who chose their own path" [...] were denounced as worthless "lumpen" and "delinquents." In his famous speech Che Guevara even vowed, "to make individualism disappear from Cuba! It is criminal to think of individuals!"
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/arti...

Day Against Anti-Semitism and Terrorism (DAAT): April 19

We've considered organizing a demonstration in support of Geert Wilders of the Netherlands to take place in late April of 2009 to make clear that the Modernist element of our nations are determined not to allow the further erosion of our civil liberties. Below we see that Howard Rotberg is organizing a demonstration against jihad and Left dhimmi fascist anti-Semitism on 19 April 2009. These issues are one and the same. So too are numerous other issues that relate to fascist encroachments into the world of Modernity. Below is Howard's call, as printed by Truepeers at Covenant Zone, for a demonstration. We'll follow this with up-dates as they progress:

Day Against Anti-Semitism and Terrorism (DAAT): April 19: March for Israel and Freedom: Change the narrative on the streets

Important news from Howard:
Day Against Anti-Semitism and Terrorism (DAAT) - April 19, 2009 « Howard Rotberg: Second Generation Radical:

This year Yom HaShoah, or Holocaust Remembrance Day, falls on April 21, 2009.

The obscenity of Durban II - a hatefest of anti-Semitism in the guise of an anti-racism conference is scheduled right on Yom HaShoah, taking place from Aprtil 20 to 24 in Geneva.

I wrote about Durban I in my novel The Second Catastrophe and compared it, in its historical significance to the Wansee Conference during the Shoah.

There has been a severe increase in Islamic anti-Semitism following Durban I, which of course helped legitimize it.

Recent marches, supposedly in protest of the Gaza War have shown the anti-Semitic taunts, slogans and signs by the Muslim and leftist participants.

The internet is full of videos, and articles, about the horrible things being said and shouted at Jews, and the inevitable spill over into violent attacks on Jews and Jewish institutions.

The United Nations, of course, is not a solution, but in fact is a major part of the problem.

European nations, so disgraced by their actions and non-actions during the Shoah, today with Muslim populations ranging from 5% to 40%, see nothing wrong with the most hateful anti-Jewish speech and actions emanating from disaffected demographics, both Muslim and non-Muslim.

It is clear that the greater the Muslim population is in Europe, the more hostile life becomes for Jews. Many French Jews are convinced it is time to leave. English Jews are frightened.

As Barack Obama says one of the main themes of his Presidency will be to show the Islamic world how much America "respects" it and wants a "partnership", now is the time for Jews and their friends, worldwide, to stand up and say no to respect of anti-Semitic attitudes and actions. The Holocaust denial, and the use of Arab education systems, media and clergy to spread anti-Jewish sentiment is unacceptable.

We must demonstrate our view that this is unacceptable.

We must demonstrate on April 19, 2009, and show the world that we support the right of Israel to live in peace and not be threatened with genocide by Iran or its proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah.

We must demonstrate and show Obama that respect is given to those who "earn" respect; otherwise the attempts at respect are misinterpreted as weakness and submission to the alien values of Islamist supremacy.

This year as Iran closes in on the completion of its development of nuclear weapons that it has pledged to use against Israel, and as Israel is the one country in the world that is chastened for defending its citizens against terrorism and bombing directed solely at civilians, it is time to ACT!

Our intentiion is to mobilize hundreds of thousands of people world wide to take to the streets in solidarity with the world's Jews including the nearly six million Jews of Israel. We must not allow another six million to perish.

We shall soon have a web site up and running devoted to the organization of this important event. We solicit the support of every human being who recognizes that the Jews of this world have always sought to improve this world. The contributions of the Jews to this world are out of all proportion to our numbers.

Now is the time to demonstrate, before it is too late.

NEVER AGAIN means that at the very least we should march on April 19th and show the strength of our numbers and the strength of our morality.

Moral equivalency, cultural relativism, and political correctness is EVIL. The world must choose - life over death, peaceful co-existence over genocide, goodness over evil.

April 19th is the time that the average Canadian and American can stand up for what is right and voice his or her displeasure with what is so obviously wrong. We are not "racist" in our attitudes on Muslims, but neither are we so racist against Jews that we shall tolerate blatant acts of anti-Semitism and incitement by Muslims.

Acts by a liberal democracy to protect its civilians from murder by totalitarian entities are NOT equivalent to acts by totalitarians against their own people and neighbouring civilians. Those who claim such equivalency are perverse.

To the Muslims --come join us in our peaceful country, but only if you reject violence and racism against Jews, only if you reject terrorism and suicide bombing, and only if you can stand strong against the minority in your religion that is seeking to impose a fundamentalist and supremacist agenda to defeat Western liberalism, instead of participating in it.

March with us in the most important demonstration ever to ensure that our children and grandchildren will live in freedom and dignity.

These demonstrations are NOT against individual Muslims but only against totalitarian entities in the Middle East, and those confused Muslim spokesmen in North America who seek to impose alien values on a liberal democratic society.

Howard also notes:

Farewell, dear readers, as I leave you with nearly 170 posts from last August, many containing essays of mine.

The shunning of my work by the mainstream Jewish organizations continues.

The situation for Jews continues to deteriorate. I somewhat naively felt that my writing and my ideas could make a small difference in this terrible world.

But in our world, it is marketing, it is images, it is sound bites, it is PR that rules....

And so, as I take up the position as Chairman of the April 19, 2009 Day Against Anti-Semitism and Terrorism, I feel that I moving on to another stage in the battle; and make no mistake, a battle it is.

We shall take to the streets; we shall be peaceful, we shall be non-racist, we shall be respectful of all laws and regulations, but we shall be in the public eye, we shall be in the "face" of the public; and we shall get our message across - anti-Semitism in the guise of anti-Israelism is wrong and is unacceptable. Those who use double standards against Israel will be exposed. Those who think that freedom of speech is only a one-way road will be overcome; those who come to America to create sharia law and isolation and ghettos of jihadist militancy shall be addressed.

This is the natural evolution of my thinking as a Second Generation Radical.

Never again.

Reprinted from Truepeers at Covenant Zone.

Diane Francis, National Pravda

I was buying a copy of Pravda one morning and as I took out my money to pay for it, an old peasant woman leaned over and spat on my paper. I tried to swap it for a clean copy but the shop clerk wasn't having any of that. I was stuck with it.

Diane Francis, "Newspapers: rescue us too," National Post. 29 Jan. 2009.

[....]

The media business model has been imploding globally and the fallout has grave ramifications for democracy, business transparency and, selfishly, grave impacts for those like me who practice journalism.

The old model has been that news, both print and broadcast, is subsidized by advertisers who want to peddle their wares to our readers or viewers. Now the audience is fragmented across the Internet and other media platforms, a negative factor in addition to the current credit crunch.

Every network and newspaper in the world is suffering. So we all are casting about for a better business model while fighting to keep our audiences and advertisers happy.
[....]

While over-stated, there is some concern in journalistic quarters, such as those I occupy, about this higher purpose or the protection of democratic freedoms.

There is some validity to this anxiety. Frankly, specialty channels, reality TV and the blogosphere are very entertaining but they are hardly bastions of our freedoms, values nor are they purveyors of facts that have been well-tested and curated by professional content-providers who occupy editors' and producers' chairs.

All of which has led me to conclude that perhaps, for a change, France may have come up with the absolutely best business model for my business: Nicolas Sarkozy has given France's newspapers a €600 million subsidy over three years—including a free subscription for every 18-year-old Frenchman—on top of the €280 per year it gives them now. He's also directed governments to step up their advertising.

Britain is considering similar measures for regional papers and there's talk even in the U.S. Meanwhile, Canadian taxpayers support the CBC and perhaps should prop the rest of us up too.

Just kidding? Only sort of.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/francis/default.aspx

Somehow someone who wrote this opinion piece above seems to like the idea of a hostile public being forced to pay for state-sponsored propaganda. Nice trick if one can get away with it. Ah, some do. As Ms. Francis points out, it happens even in Canada. Here's my point: If I have to buy the Canadian version of Pravda, please don't spit on it. I use it wrap my lunch in.