Please Help New English Review
For our donors from the UK:
New English Review
New English Review Facebook Group
Follow New English Review On Twitter
Recent Publications by New English Review Authors
As Far As The Eye Can See
by Moshe Dann
Threats of Pain and Ruin
by Theodore Dalrymple
The Oil Cringe of the West: The Collected Essays and Reviews of J.B. Kelly Vol. 2
edited by S.B. Kelly
The Impact of Islam
by Emmet Scott
Sir Walter Scott's Crusades and Other Fantasies
by Ibn Warraq
Fighting the Retreat from Arabia and the Gulf: The Collected Essays and Reviews of J.B. Kelly. Vol. 1
edited by S.B. Kelly
The Literary Culture of France
by J. E. G. Dixon
Hamlet Made Simple and Other Essays
by David P. Gontar
Farewell Fear
by Theodore Dalrymple
The Eagle and The Bible: Lessons in Liberty from Holy Writ
by Kenneth Hanson
The West Speaks
interviews by Jerry Gordon
Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited: The History of a Controversy
Emmet Scott
Why the West is Best: A Muslim Apostate's Defense of Liberal Democracy
Ibn Warraq
Anything Goes
by Theodore Dalrymple
Karimi Hotel
De Nidra Poller
The Left is Seldom Right
by Norman Berdichevsky
Allah is Dead: Why Islam is Not a Religion
by Rebecca Bynum
Virgins? What Virgins?: And Other Essays
by Ibn Warraq
An Introduction to Danish Culture
by Norman Berdichevsky
The New Vichy Syndrome:
by Theodore Dalrymple
Jihad and Genocide
by Richard L. Rubenstein
Spanish Vignettes: An Offbeat Look Into Spain's Culture, Society & History
by Norman Berdichevsky

The Iconoclast

Thursday, 02 October 2014

Thursday, 02 October 2014

The latest here.

If stymied on the edges of Kurdistan, it makes sense for the Islamic State to concentrate further south, around and possibly in Baghdad. For in Baghdad itself, it would be easier for the Islamic State fighters to hide among civilians, and to exploit the American reluctance to bomb in a city where it's hard to distinguish Sunni from Shi'a, and Sunnis supporting the Islamic State from those who do not. A battle for Baghdad, pitting Uber-Sunnis against the Shi'a militia (and possibly some Iranians too) would seal the Sunni-Shi'a enmity, cause further anxiety in both Iran (worried about the Islamic State's murderous hatred of Shi'a) and Saudi Arabia (frantic over the Shi'a takeover of Sanaa, which is attributed in Saudi circles to Iranian help), and use up materiel, men, and money from both sides, each determined not to let Baghdad fall to the enemy. For non-Muslims, an attack by the forces of the Islamic State on Baghdad, and a fight that goes on and on, should be not deplored and attempts made to prevent it, but regarded with quiet satisfaction.

Posted on 10/02/2014 8:09 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Thursday, 02 October 2014

We are now in an era when much of political discourse consists in the shrieking of epithets, as well as the imputation of discreditable motives and (often) of a slavish adherence to extreme or notoriously unsuccessful ideologies. In the rare moments when the war of defamatory sound bites rises to the invocation of respectable or at least recognizable sources, foreign and national-security matters are generally reduced to bandying about the Munich Conference of 1938 and countering with the conjuration of “boots on the ground” as if that were an insane or morally reprehensible concept. And, on the economic side, if debate is pushed beyond the initial platitudes and alarms, what occurs is usually what is claimed to be a contest between the followers of John Maynard Keynes (1882–1946) and Friedrich Hayek (1899–1992).

The political debate has been rather static for all of this new century, since the evaporation of the chimerical Bill Clinton–Tony Blair “Third Way” (a spurious attempt to rally the Reagan-Thatcher Right to soft-left policy options), and Munich, the proverbial “boots,” Keynes, and Hayek have all been reduced to caricatures. The problem with the Munich settlement was not that Sudetenland joined Germany. The British and French could not go to war to prevent the Sudetenlanders from achieving that ambition. Hitler had found and exploited the weakness of the artificial states patched together at Versailles out of the remnants of the Habsburg and other empires. The newly created countries did not possess the legitimacy to ignore or suppress such local aspirations if they were being incited by a more powerful neighboring state.

The grievous faults of Munich were that Czechoslovakia should not have been dismembered so abruptly, without a referendum, and with no time for the Czechoslovak government to evacuate non-Germans or federal military installations from Sudetenland; the resulting four-power guarantee of Czechoslovakia was treated so cavalierly that Poland and Hungary both tore a further chunk out of that country without a peep of objection from any of the signatories (Germany, France, Italy, and the United Kingdom). Most seriously, British prime minister Neville Chamberlain represented the agreement as “Peace in our time” and “Peace with honour,” quoting the great British prime minister Benjamin Disraeli, who had faced down Bismarck at the Congress of Berlin in 1878, and preserved the peace in Europe.

On his return to London, Chamberlain waved a piece of paper that Hitler had signed professing a shared Anglo-German desire “never to go to war with one another again.” More realistic was the fine cynicism of the French premier, Édouard Daladier, who, on seeing the crowds that awaited him at Le Bourget airport, expressed concern about being stoned to death, and when he saw that the people were cheering, said to his entourage: “The bloody fools.” The conduct of Chamberlain and Daladier completely disgusted the U.S. and Soviet governments, and Franklin D. Roosevelt awaited the elevation of leadership that would not, as he put it to the British ambassador to the U.S., Sir Ronald Lindsay, cry, “We who are about to die, salute you,” while beseeching forceful American support. In the Kremlin, Stalin concluded that London and Paris were hopeless and began maneuvering toward the Nazi–Soviet pact that unleashed World War II. It should have been obvious to Chamberlain that only the collaboration of the U.S. and the USSR could subdue Hitler.

“Boots on the ground” has become a frightening cliché. There is nothing wrong with the insertion of forces into a foreign conflict if the national security and international law justify it, the defined goal is attainable at reasonable cost in lives and resources, and there is a plausible and honorable exit strategy. The distinction must be drawn between the toleration of what is inconvenient in the foreign-policy antics of other countries because they cannot be deterred or countered at acceptable cost, and appeasing and facilitating and even pridefully collaborating in odious conduct. The Sudeten crisis did not justify Britain and France in going to war, but association by those powers with that policy was dishonorable. As Winston Churchill said at the time: “You chose shame and you will get war.” Those were not the only alternatives, and, in general, war should be chosen only when shame is the alternative. And military force can be used without, as “boots on the ground” has come to mean in the popular imagination, the indefinite commitment of ground forces in an inhospitable place for an indefinite time, sustaining casualties and material costs that it is impossible to justify.

There has been no substantial American military intervention since World War II that has been entirely successful; all such prior actions except the War of 1812 had been altogether successful. The Korean War rescued South Korea, and was rather successful, but left the world with the albatross of the Kimist hermit despotism in North Korea that bedevils us still. General Douglas MacArthur’s public insubordination was unacceptable, but he was correct that “in war there is no substitute for victory.” Vietnam, if it was worth fighting for at all, should have been tackled in the Fifties as soon as France conceded the end of its colonial ambitions there — when the U.S. would have had serious allies and before Ho Chi Minh had turned all of North Vietnam into a warrior state. Even when Lyndon Johnson did plunge in, it could have been won by training the anti-Communists, cutting the Ho Chi Minh Trail, and pounding Northern military targets. This was the formula that did largely bring peace after the relaunched North Vietnamese invasion of April 1972, when the South defeated the North with only air support from the U.S. (There were still U.S. ground forces in Vietnam, but their role was limited to protecting air bases.)

The Gulf War was very successful in forcing Saddam Hussein to disgorge Kuwait, but in allowing Saddam to remain in power, it was an incomplete victory when total victory was easily in reach. And the Iraq War got rid of Saddam, but instead of putting a less objectionable figure of authority in place with stern warnings to avoid severe misconduct, the decision to rebuild the entire Iraqi state, like the corresponding decision in Afghanistan after the Mullah Omar and his non-paying al-Qaeda tenants had been sent packing, mired the United States and its long-suffering allies in a swamp and left little to show for the great sacrifices that have been made with the best of intentions.

“No more Munichs” must mean no more complicity in foreign aggression — it must not mean that the West will prevent any injustice that occurs everywhere in the world even if it is not significantly affected by it. “No boots on the ground”​ must become a comfort level that the country’s leaders can judge successfully how much force to apply in different crises by calibrating accurately the cost-benefit ratio and ensuring an acceptable exit strategy before getting involved. In general, Presidents Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush Sr. made these vital calculations correctly, and Presidents Johnson, Carter, Bush Jr., and Obama have not. The shocking enfeeblement of once useful allies, especially in Western Europe, illustrates the propensity of under-contributing allies to become mere passengers and the need for the United States, as alliance leader, to keep and exercise control, even if it prudently reduces foreign commitments.

In economics, Keynes and Hayek have become simplistic labels, Keynes for spending out of recessions with deficit financing and Hayek for economic shrinkage of government. In fact, 75 percent of what both of them wrote about economics was bunk. Keynes believed that there was a natural balance in the economy of full employment and minimal inflation. There isn’t. He was right that public-sector spending is a better antidote to economic downturns than self-amplifying austerity, but that is almost the end of it. His theory of the role of reparations in the radicalization of inter-war Germany was almost completely false; his advice to President Roosevelt in the Thirties was, as FDR considered it, patronizing and inaccurate, and the Federal Reserve chairman, Marriner Eccles, a Utah Mormon, gave better advice without Keynes’ condescensions. Hayek was a great political philosopher, emphasizing the role and vitality of individual liberty, but his economic views led to a minimal-growth policy of virtual public-sector abstention from economic activity, a policy that comports many hazards.

The scale of the problem was illustrated by the megalomaniacal Chicago appellate judge Richard Posner, who wrote a book about the 2008 economic crisis in which he boldly concluded that the cause of the Great Recession should be determined by a properly funded commission of inquiry and that he was a “Keynesian,” which apparently meant that an open fiscal spigot was called for. It was predictable from such a perverse jurist, who frequently doesn’t read written pleadings in matters before him, believes the adoption of children should be by public auction, never allows contending counsel in his court to finish sentences, and engages in public slanging matches with Supreme Court justices. This last, unsuccessfully: He had no reply when Antonin Scalia called him a “liar.” (I know about Posner from having had to appeal a ruling of his to the Supreme Court of the United States, which excoriated him unanimously as it vacated his decisions. And that was just on the law; on the facts, Posner was even more mistaken.) But when sound bites and catchwords are the norm even for someone of Posner’s intellectual pretensions, the task of elevating national-security and economic-policy teams that have the judgment that the urgency of today’s problems requires is made much more complicated.

First published in National Review.

Posted on 10/02/2014 5:52 AM by Conrad Black

Thursday, 02 October 2014
The whirligig of time brings in its revenges. The French newspaper, Libération, recently reported on the ravages wrought by wolves among the sheep-rearers in the remoter regions of France. Wolves are a protected species and may not be killed, whatever damage they do. Urban ecologists love them.
Wolves disappeared from France in the 1930s, but re-entered from Italy in the 1990s, perhaps because of the progressive depopulation of the French countryside. There are now believed to be 300 - 400 wolves in the wild in France and they are increasing at a rate of 10 per cent a year.
The article recounted the story of a man, an urban ecologist, who went to live his dream of natural, organic sheep-rearing in a mountainous area of the country. He imported a flock of sheep from New Zealand and hoped to produce wool by old-fashioned means. Among his motivations, he desired to ensure that farming in France was not entirely given over to agribusiness (peasant farmers are disappearing fast from the countryside).
But the wolves have destroyed his dream. They have decimated his flock, and the struggle against them has been unequal. This is not only because killing wolves is forbidden: in fact, to kill them would not be easy because they are seldom seen. The wolves are cunning and soon manage to evade all the permitted measures taken against them. Neither protection by enclosures nor increased vigilance makes any difference; the wolves get their sheep.
The would-be sheep farmer has learned the hard way that Nature is not warm and cuddly; it is not just wild flowers and beautiful landscapes. The struggle for him has been unequal, and he is now giving it up. Even the subventions given by the state to sheep farmers who can prove that their sheep have been killed by wolves that the state protects are not enough to keep him going.
At first I had an inclination to laugh, or at least smile ironically, at the man's naivety, his shallow nature worship. But actually the story has a tragic dimension, for it illustrates the perpetual contradiction of Man's desires, a contradiction that means we are condemned to dissatisfaction.
I respect the man's desire to live a simpler life - he gave much up to try to live it in reality. And who wants a countryside given over entirely to agribusiness? As an urban romantic myself, I am pleased to think there are still wolves in the wild in Europe, though they make old-fashioned sheep-rearing impossible. Contrary to a famous feminist tract, you cannot have it all.        
First published in Salisbury Review.
Posted on 10/02/2014 5:47 AM by Theodore Dalrymple

Thursday, 02 October 2014

From One News New Zealand

Muslim leaders here are worried a push to send the SAS to fight ISIS-linked terrorists could fuel a backlash among the Muslim community in New Zealand.

'Worried'? These sound more like veiled threats to me.

Speaking to Radio New Zealand, Wellington's Kilbirnie mosque's Secretary of the International Muslim Association of New Zealand, Tahir Nawaz, says supporting the fight in Iraq would be a bad idea.

"We are a very good community here, we are very co-operative," Mr Nawaz said. "Once New Zealand troops are sent there, our public attitude could change."

Tony Green the Secretary of the Federation of the Islamic Association of New Zealand believes more western boots on the ground would further radicalise Muslims in the west. "That potentially fuels things because the whole martyr kind of scenario that's been painted by the groups calling themselves IS, that would fan the flames more than anything." When asked if he believed a terror plot like the one in Australia could happen in New Zealand, Mr Green said he thought it was unlikely but there were no guarantees.

HT Christina. Some historic precedent for Kiwi military prowess in the Middle east. From the New Zealand history website.

Members of the Maori Battalion who had fought in Greece perform a haka for the King of Greece at Helwan, Egypt in June 1941.

Posted on 10/02/2014 4:48 AM by Esmerelda Weatherwax

Wednesday, 01 October 2014
Waking very early last Friday morning, I went to look on my computer for the results of the Scottish referendum. I turned to the Guardian website, for the irritation it almost always causes me is the best stimulant to true wakefulness, equivalent to three cups of coffee at least.
I noticed an article by a journalist called Adrian Lee with the following title or headline:
Richard Dawkins has lost it: he's now a sexist pig giving atheists a bad name.
I found this incivility horrible, whether or not one agrees with Professor Dawkins, and that it should pass muster in a newspaper for an intelligent and educated readership a terrible sign of decline in common decency.
This is not a call for political correctness, of course; like anyone else who enters the public arena, Professor Dawkins has no right to be protected from offensive remarks. Nevertheless, he is owed a certain minimal politeness, which the author of the article, or at least of the title of the article (not necessarily the same person, of course), has not paid him.
The Guardian as good as recognised its mistake, and its own bad manners, for the original title soon disappeared from the website and was changed to 'ignorant sexism is giving atheism a bad name.' If the newspaper had openly acknowledged the need to change the headline and apologised it might have been more honourable; instead it seemed more to be re-writing its own history in the fashion of dictators. 
Just as revealing, however, as the bad manners of the headline was its imprecision of language, the sign of another of decline, that in the general level of education. To write of Professor Dawkins that he had 'lost it' tells us nothing. Does it mean that he had gone mad or that he had lost the Mandate of Heaven that, by his own hypothesis, he could never have had? The expression itself is one that is used by men who are violent towards women to explain their own violence, a kind of sub-epileptic fit during which they cannot be held responsible for actions.
There was a time when no British newspaper, let alone the Guardian, would have published a sentence as sloppy and demotic as the following: 'So, I'm not saying this is easy, but I have to say it: Richard Dawkins, I'm just not that into you anymore.' Even Homer nodded, but I suspect that editors do not have to nod any longer to let such language pass.
First published in Salisbury Review.
Posted on 10/01/2014 3:47 PM by Theodore Dalrymple

Wednesday, 01 October 2014

Keith Simmonds has won our crossword competition for September. He will receive a copy of Moshe Dann's new book, As Far As The Eye Can See.

Guilherme Kramer came close, but missed.

The new crossword should be up soon.

Posted on 10/01/2014 1:15 PM by NER

Wednesday, 01 October 2014

Wednesday, 01 October 2014


Posted on 10/01/2014 12:34 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Wednesday, 01 October 2014


Start adding up the civilian casualties that American and other Western bombing causes -- not to deplore it, simply to note it, and note how much more helllishly difficult it was for Israel to attack Hamas rocketeers who always and everywhere launched their rockets from schools, hospitals, and residential housing. The Islamic State has no rockets to launch, and its military vehicles are most often out in the open -- so far they have not imitated Hamas in hiding among the civilians. They will do so, and the Americans should continue to bomb away. Bomb away, and apologize to the Israelis for ever having lectured them.

But, you will respond, haven't the Americans already killed many more civilians in Yemen and Afghanistan, and Iraq, not deliberately but as an inevitable consequence of how wars must now be fought? Yes, you've got a point. They did. They have.

Posted on 10/01/2014 12:02 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Wednesday, 01 October 2014

The heads were put on display at Jarablus.

The story here.

Posted on 10/01/2014 9:50 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Wednesday, 01 October 2014

In October 1522, Machiavelli gave some valuable advice to a colleague about to become ambassador to Spain. He suggested that if it sometimes becomes necessary to conceal facts with words then it should be done in such a manner that no one becomes aware of it. It is obvious that Mahmoud Abbas, now in the tenth year of his four-year term as President of the Palestinian Authority, is familiar with this principle. It was clear he had become a disciple of Machiavelli when he delivered his speech to the UN General Assembly on September 26, 2014.

President Abbas spoke of his commitment to achieve a just peace with Israel through a negotiated solution and an adoption of a diplomatic and political effort by UN bodies. Although speaking from a seemingly peaceful perspective, he was actually acting on Machiavelli’s advice, or speaking under the influence of the Chicago school of philosophy for whom the words of writers may have multiple or layered meanings, often disguised with irony and even self-contradiction. 

Abbas was concealing his true thoughts except from careful listeners at the UN and elsewhere. He began his speech by declaring that Israel had chosen to make 2014 a year of genocide perpetrated against the Palestinian people. Careful listeners knew his seemingly peaceful words covered his true meaning. They knew he was referring surreptitiously either to Hamas, the Palestinian terrorists eager to kill Jews and eliminate the State of Israel, or to the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria which is conducting a Nakba (catastrophe) to destroy the infidels of the world, or to Turkey which has denied the genocide committed since 1915 against the Armenians.

It is important to unveil the real thoughts of Abbas in other areas of his speech. The Fatah Palestinian president pretended to be concerned about Israeli actions during its Operation Protective Edge, a self-defense action against the incessant assault of Hamas rockets and missiles. He mentioned half a million people displaced from their homes and the destruction of homes, schools, hospitals, public buildings, and mosque. But careful observers are aware he was really addressing issues in other areas, in Hamas-occupied Gaza, Syria, Nigeria, and Turkey.

Abbas spoke of a series of absolute war crimes in Gaza carried out by Israel before the eyes and ears of the entire world. He left unspoken the reality that the war crimes had been committed by Hamas by using Palestinian civilians, including children, as human shields and using children to build the underground tunnels, causing the deaths of 160 of them. By implication, Abbas referred to this when he said, “we will not forgive, and we will not allow war criminals to escape punishment.”

In his speech, Abbas alluded to the slaughter in the civil war in Syria and the widespread torture and terror there. His serious audience knew that more than 200,000 people have been killed as a result of the war that has also lead to 6.5 million people being displaced and 3 million refugees. He recognized that these numbers were several times larger than the Palestinians displaced as a result of the Arab aggressive wars against Israel.

Abbas deliberately praised the “honorable Commissioner-General of UNRWA.” He was really reminding his audience that UNRWA has active and extensive ties with Hamas. At least four of its schools and facilities in the Gaza Strip were used to store rockets and were the sites of rocket launching. Indirectly, Abbas affirmed the conclusion of UN Secretary Ban Ki-moon that these facilities had become legitimate military targets for Israeli air strikes. Listeners could remember that 25 of the 27 members of the workers union board of UNRWA were members of Hamas. The Obama Administration could remember that the U.S. is the largest single donor to this biased organization and has provided UNRWA with more than $5 billion since 1950.

Without obviously saying so, Abbas wanted the world to recall the genocide of Christians in Nigeria caused by Islamist terrorists and especially by Boko Haram. To limit discussion simply to the year 2014 of which Abbas spoke, these terrorists have committed acts amounting to attempts at genocide. These acts have included, since February, the killing of hundreds in Christian villages. The Christians were trapped in nets and animal traps and were hacked to death, and buried in mass graves. Further attacks took place in boarding schools in the north Borno state in February, on government offices, by bombs placed in a crowded bus station, and by killings in May and June in other Christian villages.

The serious listening audience was already aware of the most notorious act of Boko Haram, the abduction on April 14-15 of 276 female students from their school in Chibok, primarily a Christian town. Unfortunately, Abbas did not disclose the fate of these young women, whether they had been forced to convert to Islam, when they were made to have forced marriages, or had been sold as slaves.

Abbas obviously also had Turkey in mind when he spoke of genocide. Like many others Abbas is evidently surprised that Turkey still refuses to acknowledge both its murder of 1 to 1.5 million Armenians, though 23 countries and 42 states in the U.S. have recognized the fact, and also its attempt to eliminate the cultural and religious heritage of the Armenians. He is evidently also surprised that Turkey has refused to allow more significant rights to its large Kurdish population of about 14 million.

In this respect, Abbas spoke of occupation and historic injustice. He did speak aloud about Israel as a colonial occupying power, as a racist occupying state.

But he must really have been thinking of Turkey, which invaded the island of Cyprus in 1974. The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, which declared itself an independent state in 1983, now occupies 40 per cent of the island, which Abbas knows is an illegal occupation of the territory of the Republic of Cyprus. To use Abbas’ words referring to another country, so far Turkey has evaded accountability for its crimes.

Abbas spoke of the denial of freedom and independence of people for citizens of Gaza. Here he was clearly alluding to the situation in the Muslim country of Mauritania. Though a law was finally passed in 2007 making slavery a criminal offence, real slavery of 600,000 or 20 per cent of the population, still exists, the highest proportion of slaves in the population of any country in the world. The situation for these descendants of black African slaves is mainly in the form of chattel slavery, with individuals being bought, sold, rented out, or given as gifts.

President Abbas assumed that no one would wonder anymore why extremism, hatred, and terrorism is rising. He did not mention the gruesome beheadings of American and British journalists, but it was kind that he thus drew attention to the Islamic State and its barbarous activities that in Abbas’ language, are ongoing and escalating. He recognized the problems of ghettos on fragmented lands without borders under an army of occupation.

Abbas declared his support for those who stand for human values, freedom, justice, and peace. He did not mention Saudi Arabia specifically by name but Abbas did refer to the racism in the political and media discourse and its entrenchment in the school curriculum and in a series of laws and practices. He did speak openly of “the Israeli occupation… an abhorrent form of state terrorism,” but it was clear that indirectly he was praising Israel when talking of strengthening the values of citizenship, equality, the rule of law, human rights, the role of women and pluralism.

Of course, Abbas spoke openly of the need for peace. He must therefore have been disconcerted by the glorification by his Fatah group of female suicide bombers. Nine women have been honored in this way by the Fatah group. The most recent one is honored for her attack on September 22, 2014 when she blew herself up in Jerusalem, killing two Israeli security guards.

The Obama administration has found the provocative and offensive statements by Abbas about Israel deeply disappointing and counterproductive. Those statements certainly do not make him a partner for reasonable diplomatic discussions and are not the way to create a positive atmosphere in which peace negotiations between Israel and Arabs might occur. Nevertheless, we should be grateful to the seemingly permanently installed President Abbas for all his unstated allusions to the misdeeds of Islamic terrorists that are a threat to Western civilization.

First published in the American Thinker.

Posted on 10/01/2014 8:08 AM by Michael Curtis

Wednesday, 01 October 2014

by Jerry Gordon (October 2014)

On Tuesday, September 30, 2014, Alton Alexander Nolen, a paroled former felon and Muslim convert aka Jah’Keem Yisrael was charged in Cleveland County, Oklahoma, Court with a first degree murder in the alleged beheading of 54 year old Colleen Hufford. He was also charged with the attempted murder of Traci Johnson, both on Thursday, September 25th on the premises of Vaughan Foods in Moore, Oklahoma.  more>>>

Posted on 10/01/2014 7:50 AM by NER

Wednesday, 01 October 2014

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

For many decades Muslim Bengalis have been streaming into Burma. In the 1950s these Muslim immigrants massacred, on several occasions, the Buddhist Burmese in whose country they had settled; these massacres are remembered in Myanmar, but hardly known outside of Burma. These Muslims from what was then East Pakistan renamed themselves the Rohingya, and like the "Palestinians" gave themselves a fictional history for political purposes. The Burmese of today, having endured a lot, and observed the behavior of Muslims not only in their own country but in other non-Muslim countries, and without any of the inhibitions that now so dangerously constrain the peoples of Western Europe from dealing effectively and decisively with their own Muslim immigrants, whose aggressive attempts to promote Islam, and refusal to accept the laws and customs of the Infidels, have lead to such anguish for the indigenous peoples.

Here's what the people of Myanmar propose, intelligently, to do.Other steps being considered have been discussed at NER here.


Posted on 09/30/2014 7:55 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

He appears to think that Wal-Mart (whose truck hit his van) is "blaming" him. That's not it. He should have been wearing his seatbelt, and not doing so made his injuries worse. That's it. But think of how happy teachers of Torts will be to liven up their class on contributory negligence by bringing in the case of Tracy Morgan. Lucy, Lady Duff-Gordon, was good in her day;  a lawsuit involving her has been immortalized in Contracts casebooks, in the section about "best efforts." But that case dates from before 1920, in antediluvian days. Tracy Morgan -- he's what's happening, he's SNL and 30 Rock, he's right now. His star power will get those first-year  students in Torts class finally looking up from the Facebook pages they've been studying  on their computers in class all semester, and they will begin to pay attention.

Posted on 09/30/2014 7:33 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

As reported by our reliably and enthusiastically Islamophile ABC, this morning.

Have none of these people - so naive, so well-meaning, so endlessly gullible - done their homework?  Have none of them ever sat down to read the classic English translations of Al Tabari, or the translations of the canonical "Life" of Mohammed, or even just the Quran...let alone the Hadiths, all available these days online in English?  Have none of them ever exerted themselves to pay attention to any of the many intelligent and articulate apostates from Islam? - Magdi Cristiano Allam, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Mark Gabriel, Daniel Shayesteh, Wafa Sultan, Ibn Warraq (author of "Leaving Islam" and "Why I am Not a Muslim"), Ali Sina, Nonie Darwish (author of "Cruel and Usual Punishment", a study of sharia and how it works), Patrick Sookhdeo (author of "Faith, Power and Territory" and "Freedom to Believe: Challenging Islam's Apostasy Law") and Sam Solomon, author of "The Mosque and Its Role in Society" and "Al Hijra: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration"??  Or even, since many of them are Christian, the many personal testimonies of a more popular sort, for example, Hannah Shah's "The Imam's Daughter", Bilquis Sheikh's "I Dared to Call Him Father", and Sister Gulshan Esther's "The Torn Veil"? - in all of which, we discover what is likely to happen when a Muslim person leaves Islam and converts to wit, that person will find themselves in mortal danger even from their nearest and dearest.  Don't any of them, if they do know about the Islamic rule of "death for apostasy", ever stop to consider that the proudly card-carrying badge-wearing members of an Organisation whose blueprint includes such a rule - a rule that is not at all a dead letter, a rule that is active right now, as evidenced by the appalling maltreatment of Mrs Daniel Wani nee Meriam Ibrahim, in the Sudan, of late  - might not always be the sweet little innocent gambolling lambs that they claim to be? 

First up, Andree Withey and Leonie Mellor reporting on some Christians who are rushing to protect and "stand with" the poor persecuted Muslims in Australia...even while it is appearing more and more likely that the entirety of Iraq's remaining indigenous Christians, its last living link with its pre-Islamic history and culture, will be driven out - or else exterminated - by those scrupulous to-the-letter imitators of Mohammed, the Islamic State jihadis, assisted in many instances by Mohammed's willing executioners, the vast majority of those Iraqi Christians' Muslim neighbours.

"Brisbane mosque service brings Christian and Muslim leaders together".

'Christian and Muslim communities have taken part in an interfaith service at a mosque in Brisbane's south to condemn religious violence.

Did they condemn the maltreatment of Copts in Egypt, Christians and Hindus in Pakistan, Christians in Iraq? - CM

'More than 20 Anglican, Baptist, Catholic and Uniting Church leaders joined Muslim leaders at Kuraby mosque (in the southern suburbs of Brisbane - CM) to make a public stand against intolerance.

Oh, it is so intolerant of the Australian authorities, to heed that tip from the FBI and investigate and then arrest a Muslim man in Melbourne who was sending money to Islamic State, to fund the jihad...that jihad which is decimating Yazidis and Christians, as well as other-sect Muslims!  Oh, it was so intolerant of the Australian authorities to attempt to disrupt that plot to seize and ritually behead Australian infidels!   Oh, it was so wickedly intolerant of those Aussie policemen to shoot and kill the frenzied Muslim man who had just stabbed them multiple times and came near to murdering one of them!  The intolerance! The bigotry!  Shocking!  And how intolerant of the general Aussie public - those who still possess a basic sense of self-preservation - to dare to engage in what might be called "pattern recognition" and look askance, therefore,at those who strut down our streets in what might be called "Muslim gang colours". 

Note: I do not condone vigilante-type violence against Muslim persons and property, here in Australia.  

But I do think that there needs to be a recognition of the real and rational basis of the fear and anger of ordinary Australians, the ones who have put two and two together and figured out that it is they - qua non-Muslim - who will be singled out for death, if there is ever (which God forbid and ASIO prevent) a Mumbai-hotel-style or Nairobi Westgate-mall style jihad swarming attack in our cities; that the Muslim attackers, "sorting" their "bag", would let the Muslims go whilst reserving the non-Muslims for torture, rape and murder. - CM

'It followed incidents including members of the Muslim community being verbally abused (specifics, please: how many? what was said, exactly? are there independent witnesses or CCTV recording of these incidents? - CM) and vandalism at Mosques and Islamic centres in and around the Brisbane and Logan areas (again: I know so far of just one such case that was reported, the painting of a couple of slogans on a wall of a building - CM).

'The Kuraby Mosque was the site of a serious arson attack 13 years ago in the wake of the September 11 terrorism attacks.

And that's the only one.  The ABC has to go back thirteen years to find the sole mosque that has been burnt by any non-Muslim, in Australia, ever.  Thirteen years, in the course of which there have been, inter alia, the Bali bombing (by Muslims), the Madrid train bombing (by Muslims), the Mumbai train bombing (by Muslims), the London bus and train bombings (by Muslims), two train bombings and a railway station bombing  in Russia (by Muslims), the Muslim jihad attack and hostage-taking at the Beslan school in Russia (with torture, rape and murder of helpless children and parents), the Boston Marathon bombing, the Muslim attack on the Westgate Mall in Kenya, the "swarming" attack on Mumbai in November 2008, Mohammed Merah's assassination of French soldiers and of four helpless Jews, three of them small children, in France, and the wholesale destruction of multiple Christian churches by Muslims, in Egypt and Iraq and Syria and Pakistan, just to name some of those that spring immediately to mind.  And in those thirteen years not a few jihad plots, hatched by pious mosque-attending Muslims resident in Australia, who were planning acts of mass murder of infidel Aussies in order to please allah and spread terror, have been - fortunately for us - caught a-borning, and foiled. - CM

'Kuraby Mosque acting Imam Dr Mohamed Abdalla said Australians must work together to prevent extremism.

"We call upon all Australians to respect the rule of law, abstain from discrimination, act calmly and compassionately", Dr Abdalla said.

But do you regard yourself and other Muslims - whose primary loyalty is to Islam, to the Ummah, and who are obliged, insofar as you are fully-instructed Muslims, to strive for the temporal as well as spiritual dominance of Islam, world-wide - as "Australians"?  Do you recognise  Australian non-Muslim law and the Australian infidel state, Dr Abdalla?  Or are you, in this sentence as quoted, in fact addressing Australian Infidels only, not Muslims?  - CM

"It's very important this type of meeting sends, hopefully, a positive message to Muslim youth and otherwise that the leaders of the community are united against violence.

Before reading any further, I would encourage persons new to this subject to read a classic essay by one Wolfgang Bruno, that appeared at the jihadwatch website many years ago, entitled "An Islamic Dictionary for Infidels".   Click here:

Now, once you've read it, go back and read that quoted statement by Dr Abdalla, condemning "violence", and ask yourself whether what Dr Abdalla means when he uses the word "violence", and what the Christians standing beside him think he means, are in fact the same thing. -  CM

'Both leaders of both main religions and great religions of the world are making an unequivocal clear statement that we're against violence, we're against acts of terror, regardless of who perpetrates those acts".

'Regardless of who'.  I wonder whether he is, between the lines, for his Muslim hearers, identifying as 'violence' and 'acts of terror' not only the few individual instances of street-level harassment of Muslims by non-Muslim loose cannon, but also the actions recently taken, on three separate occasions, by Australian infidel law enforcement, to disrupt or put an end to Muslim actual or intended aggression against Infidels and Muslim support for the Islamic State jihadis? - CM

'We hope these young people take heed from these statements and follow the advice of leaders in the community".

I don't trust this man as far as I could kick him. - CM

'Uniting Church pastor David Busch said the purpose of the meeting and statement was to declare they would not allow the actions of a few to create religious, racial or ethnic tensions in the community.

This has got nothing to do with race, Rev Busch. It is about ideology.  Ever heard the term dar al harb?  The Zone of War? That's us, Rev Busch, as defined by classical Islam. - CM

"Any vitriol, hate or menace billed (billed? - CM) directly against innocent people does not reflect the best of our Australian community values", he said.

Rev Busch: I suggest you do some research on the special - and rather restricted - meaning of the term "innocent" as used by Muslims.  You might get a very nasty surprise.  Also, please define exactly what you mean by "vitriol" and "hate".  If someone publicly criticised the Quranic sanction of wife-beating and the Quranic sanction of polygyny and the Hadith which commands that apostates shall be put to death, or stated that they found it horrifying that modern-day Muslims justify marriage to barely-pubescent or pre-pubescent girls by citing the sacralised example of Mohammed's bedding of nine-year-old Aisha, would you condemn them as having engaged in  "vitriol" and "hate"?? -  CM

"In a time such as this we must live by the best of our community values.

"A way of life which some people believe needs to be defended by acts of violence, humiliation or intimidation against vulnerable and innocent people who themselves have disavowed violence (but are you sure, Rev Busch, that the Muslims you think you know are not on board with the jihad to spread Islam and to impose the sharia? - CM) is not a way of life worth defending at all."

Rev Busch, if you want to know what real, rampant violence, humiliation and intimidation look like, perhaps you should look at what is happening to Copts in Egypt, to Christians and Hindus in Pakistan, and to the Christians and Yazidis in Iraq, right now.  I do not condone or call for gross breaches of civility nor acts of damage to property nor attacks upon the person, directed by angry and fearful Aussies against identifiable Muslims.  But I think a sense of proportion needs to be maintained.  The worst that any Muslim in Australia has as yet had to suffer - assuming that the various complaints are real and not rumour, imagined or fabricated - is a mere pin-prick compared to what Muslims are meting out to non-Muslim minorities, in Muslim lands, almost universally. - CM

'Meanwhile a Catholic priest on the Sunshine Coast condemned a protest against a proposed mosque.

'Hundreds of people came to verbal blows (note the ABC's inflammatory language; they could just as easily write - "had a heated exchange of views" or "had a very loud argument" or just "argued loudly" - CM) with the building's supporters at a protest in Maroochydore last weekend.

'Father Joe Duffy wrote a letter of support for the Muslim community's plan to establish the mosque metres from the Stella Maris Church in Maroochydore after the heated protest on Saturday.

Measure him up for his zunnar, or dhimmi belt. - CM

'Father Duffy said he had since received abusive letters (how many? - CM) from parishioners unhappy with his stance.

Abusive? Containing crude bad language and threats?  Or merely - angry, but rationally critical, pointing out basic truths about Islam, its texts, its "prophet" and its history?  Substantial verbatim quotes, please, so we can see which it is.  CM

"Since I was a small child, my parents taught me whenever there's new people that move in next door, always be friendly towards them because you want to get off to a good start, so as far as I'm concerned they're my next door neighbours".

But will they regard you as their 'neighbour", Fr Duffy?  Read Quran 48.29: "Muhammed is the apostle of Allah. Those who follow him are merciful to one another, and harsh to the unbelievers".  Two other translations choose a different rendering for the word rendered as "harsh" - they choose "strong" or "ruthless".  And then there's surah 3: 28 - "Let not the believers (Muslims) take for friends and allies infidels (non-Muslims) instead of believers". That forbidding of friendship with non-Muslims is reiterated in a number of other Quran verses (3.117, 5:49, 5:56 and 5: 57).  And here's Ibn Ishq - "Muslims are one ummah (community) to the exclusion of all men. Believers are friends of one another to the exclusion of all outsiders".  And here is the clear-headed Conor Cruise O'Brien, summing up the nature of Islam as abundantly demonstrated throughout the past 1400 years - "The Prophet Mohamed did not offer his followers a chance to live in harmony with their neighbours.  He taught them to fight their neighbours, if they were unbelievers, and to kill them or beat them into submission. And it is futile to say of those Muslims who faithfully follow those teachings today, that their actions are not "intrinsically related to Islam." - "The Lesson of Algeria: Islam is Indivisible", Independent, 6 January, 1995.  Sooner or later, our nice naive Fr Duffy in Maroochydore is in for a very rude awakening.  it is one thing to love your enemy; it is quite another thing to not even know or realize that they are your enemy. - CM

'Some protesters at the rally (how many, exactly? - CM) threatened to bury dead pigs near the proposed mosque, but Father Duffy said that was absurd.

If it was indeed threatened, it was foolish, because for one thing, the proposed site is right in the middle of a heavily-frequented urban area, and one would run afoul of council regulations about the proper disposal of organic waste. - CM

"That's my problem, because the church and the house next door are almost as one and whatever they do to them, they do to me", he said.

If a pig's head is left on the block, then the council can be called to dispose of it, exactly as is done when a deceased cat, dog or possum is found lying about; and the person who left the dead meat should incur whatever fine is applicable for causing a public nuisance. And that should be all. - CM

"I would hope that people that make statements like that would think about them later because they're just silly".

'No signs of racial tension in Mareeba'.

'Far north Queensland police said there had been no signs of racial tension following the vandalism of a Mareeba mosque.

Racial tension?  What race are Muslims? What race is, for example, Samantha Lewthwaite, born-British lily-white jihad gang moll currently running around in Somalia with Al Shabaab?  Or, by the absence of "racial tension", do the police in fact mean that they are pleasantly relieved that the resident Muslims haven't yet rioted?  - CM

'The word "evil" was sprayed on the building in the wake of last week's counter-terrorism raids in Sydney and Brisbane.

Well? I wouldn't spray the word "evil" on a building - because that is vandalism  and breaks Australian law - but I woudl not hesitate to call Islam itself, as contained in the canonical texts and further fleshed-out by the sacralised life and example of warlord Mohammed - whom Maimonides dubbed Ha-Meshugga, "The Mad" - an evil religion.  After reading Mark Durie's analysis of the dhimma system, in his book "The Third Choice" I do not think that any sane person could conclude that a "religion" that commanded and encouraged its adherents to inflict that degree of systematic humiliation, degradation and sheer physical terror upon non-members was not evil. - CM

'Senior Constable Mark Elliot said police had reviewed CCTV footage but had not identified any suspects.  "There has been some, if you like, good leads come in.  Obviously we haven't completed the follow-up to a number of those yet," he said. "But we would still ask for anyone who may have any information to please come forward. We would like to get to the bottom of it".

I wonder what would happen if the local papers in North Queensland received Letters to the Editor quoting verbatim from the Islamic texts some of the more hair-raising episodes in the Life of Mohammed, such as his approval of the assassination of Asma bint Marwan, his robbing of caravans, and his rapes of captive women, Rayhana and Safiyya, and asking whether or not this conduct should be described as "evil"; and pointing out that this murderous, raping, robbing warlord who made money from capturing people and selling them as slaves, is held up to all Muslims worldwide as "the perfect man" and "an excellent example of conduct"?  - CM

'On Thursday evening a 34 year old man was arrested and charged over the vandalism of an Islamic prayer centre at Rocklea in Brisbane's south.

'A home being used as a place of worship by the Indonesian Muslim community was spray-painted with the words "die" and "Muslims are evil and have no respect for our ways", some time between Tuesday night and Wednesday afternoon."

Vandalising a house is a crime.  And a death threat - "die!" - is a crime.  But what of the other statement, even if inappropriately placed on the wall of a house not belonging to the person making the statement?  Is it an insult? What if it is, broadly speaking, the truth?  If one has read Serge Trifkovic's "The Sword of the Prophet" or has waded through Bat Yeor's immense tomes on dhimmitude, or Andrew Bostom's encyclopaedic compilation of original sources and scholarly articles, "The Legacy of Jihad", or if one spends a bit of time browsing the sermons and other pronouncements from the media of the Muslim world, available at MEMRI, one can hardly avoid concluding that Islam is an evil ideology, an ideology which teaches its adherents - Muslims, the Ummah -  to hold in contempt all other human beings - and the non-Islamic ways, laws and customs of those human beings - and to strive, to engage in Jihad, using all means deemed necessary, including fraud and ultra-violence, in order to convert, to subjugate and humiliate, or to destroy those other human beings and their societies, laws and belief systems.  And we know from history and from observable events today that a great many Muslims do in fact do just as their cult tells them to do. 

But meanwhile, we must listen to yet another dhimmi urging us to be extra specially nice to the poor terrorised persecuted Muslims and show solidarity with them.   Also from the ABC, Jessica Hinchcliffe reporting.

'Queensland Christian Leader Calls For End to Muslim Hate'.

Not for an end to the sacralised Muslim hatred of non-Muslims, as formulated in the doctrine of al wala wa al-bara. Oh no.  What he's worried about is that some Australians - not many - are responding with verbal and low-level physical aggression, to the news that a group of Muslims were ...plotting wholesale ritual murder, or human sacrifice, of Aussie non-Muslims. - CM

'A Queensland Christian leader is encouraging the public to say "G'day" to Muslims and to accept their faith as a sign of solidarity.

"Accept their faith".  Unfortunate wording, that, because foolish as he is, I don't think he's actually asking people to say the Shahada and convert to Islam.   Question: is he aware of the fact that canonical Islam teaches Muslims that they must not greet non-Muslims when they meet them in the street?  Sahih Muslim, 2167: "It was also reported that it is forbidden to say salaam to Jews and Christians, because the Prophet...said, "Do not initiate the greeting of salaam to a Jew or a Christian, and if you meet them in the street, push them to the narrowest part of the road".  - CM

'Pastor Dave Andrews was one of 20 religious ministers who recently met with Muslim leaders at the Holland Park mosque in Brisbane's south.

Where they would have been fed a steaming pile of nonsense and lies and double-talk,  flattery and veiled threats. - CM

'The former Christian missionary, now Anglican pastor, joined representatives from the Salvation Army, Uniting Church, Catholic Church and Anglican Church.

'Pastor Andrews told 612 ABC Brisbane's Steve Austin that the public should not believe the hype that portrays Muslims as extremists.

But how does the ordinary Aussie distinguish the Muslim who is not an "extremist" from the Muslim who is; the Muslim who is lax, or who is perhaps having doubts and is teetering on the brink of full-on apostasy and the embrace of another faith or of no faith,  from the Muslim who has got that old-time religion and is setting out to wage jihad fi sabil allah?  They don't come with labels.  A lax Muslim, or his or her offspring, can suddenly Go Jihad.  And sometimes the most dangerously jihad-minded cannot be detected by the beard and robe and cap or by the black burqa or niqab; for they may shed the gang uniform, shave the beard (if male), take a westernised name, don a suit or elegant haute couture, smiling nicely at those they intend to humiliate and kill.  Time to quote Conor Cruise O'Brien again, from the article I have already mentioned above:  "Fundamentalist Islam is a misnomer which dulls our perception in a dangerous way.  It does so by implying that there is some other kind of Islam, which is well disposed to those who reject the Koran. There isn't."  And then there are the words of Ali Sina, apostate from Islam, in an article called "Exposing the Myth of Moderate Islam".

In that article, Ali Sina argues that "Moderate Muslim makes as much sense as moderate Nazi", and "I would like to remind the readers that virtually all Muslim terrorists come from a secular background.  At one point they were just as "liberal" as Mr Fatah [Tarek Fatah, of Canada - CM] is today until something happened in their lives and they turned to their faith. Every "moderate" Muslim is a potential terrorist. The belief in Islam is like a tank of gasoline. It looks innocuous, until it meets the fire. For a "moderate" Muslim to become a murderous jihadist, all it takes is a spark of faith. It is time to put an end to the charade of "moderate Islam".  There is no such thing as moderate Muslim.  Muslims are either jihadists or dormant jihadists - moderate, they are not."  Pastor Dave Andrews would probably be horrified by these words; but Pastor Dave Andrews surely cannot claim that Ali Sina, an ex-Muslim living under the shadow of the sharia assassin, has no right to speak about Islam, the world and the cult within which he, Ali Sina, was raised, until the day that his intellect and empathy awoke, and he decided that he must leave Islam. -  CM

"We need to go up to Muslim people and say G'day and ask them how they are going", he said. "If we want to be accepted, we need to accept them. If we want to be respected, then we need to respect them".

Dave Andrews: do you know even the first thing about Islam?  Because one of the things that stands out a mile, both from the texts and the history, is that the principle of reciprocity is rejected by Islam, and by Muslims. They demand respect and dish out...contempt.  They demand 'acceptance' and dish out...rejection and exclusion; indeed they demand more than acceptance, they demand that they shall dominate and others, the non-Muslims, shall be grovellingly subservient, indeed should cringe in terror.  Pastor Andrews, if you have not yet read Mark Durie's "The Third Choice", or Bat Yeor's massive lifework, her three books cataloguing the horror - the slow-motion shoah - that is dhimmitude, then you must.   Before you dare to open your mouth again on this subject.  Pastor Andrew, you have lived and worked in India. Have you ever opened an English translation of a famous 17th century Indian Sufi Muslim "saint", one Sirhindi?  For there you will read him saying, in a tone that betrays a heart and soul of solid granite, impervious to empathy, devoid of compassion, a mindset as harsh as that of any SS officer discussing the Untermenschen, that the dhimmis - the non-Muslims living under Muslim rule, in an Islamic state, must be treated in such a way as to always be "terrified and trembling".  - CM

"The general population is freaked out, and when people become fearful they become defensive and the best form of defence is attack.  What we are seeing is fearful people taking it out on innocent Muslims."

But how, in ordinary life, walking down the street, is the average Aussie infidel to distinguish the 'innocent" Muslim - the non-Jihad-minded or verging-on-apostasy, the one who has not taken on board the classic teaching of hatred and contempt for, among others, the Christians, practitioners of shirk (which is the worst of offences, worse than murder) from the orthodox, the actively jihad-minded who might suddenly pounce upon an unsuspecting non-Muslim, as that convert to Islam did just now in Oklahoma, and behead him or her?   All one knows is that if a person is displaying the Gang Colours, that person is a member of the same Allah Gang as is carrying out beheadings - in London, in Oklahoma, and on the grand scale, in Syria and Iraq.  Mr Andrews, this is like trying to persuade chickens that when they see a thing that looks like a fox they have no right to be afraid. - CM

'Pastor Andrews says he has received multiple reports in recent weeks of Muslim people being attacked throughout Brisbane, with many in the community feeling under siege.

And ordinary Australian infidels - Jewish, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, atheist, agnostic, pagan?  What about us? Don't we have the right to feel that we are under siege and that there are fifth columnists in our midst?  What of our soldiers, who have just been told that they ought to reconsider whether they go about in public in uniform...which essentially boils down to telling them that they must regard Australia as a war zone within which the wearing of the uniform identifies them as a target for enemy attack?  What of our policemen, two of whom were just ambushed by a Muslim who intended to murder them?  Are they wrong to wonder, when they meet a Muslim, whether that Muslim too may not harbour murderous intent?  The police did not uncover a plot by a group of Aussie Infidels, to kidnap Muslims and cut their throats and video the proceedings for circulation on the internet.  They uncovered a plot by a group of Australia-resident Muslims, to kidnap Aussie infidels off the streets of our cities - as Kriss Donald in the UK, and Ilan Halimi in France, were kidnapped - and then cut off their heads, exactly as is being done in Iraq and Syria by Islamic State jihadis, to the tune of allahu akbar.   And given that, is not the fear - and the resulting occasional outbreaks of low-level aggression, very low-level by comparison to the murderous aggression engaged in or intended by the Muslims - at least...comprehensible? Is it a sin to fear amd be wary of those who belong to an ideologically-defined human gestalt that, it is becoming plainer and plainer, contains many in its midst who wish all non-members ill?  -  CM

"People in their community are too afraid to go outside.  I have Muslim friends who text me daily about attacks."

I am afraid that, in light of the Hadith in which Mohammed declares "War is deceit", I am wary of these claims of having been "attacked".  These days, all people carry mobile phones capable of recording video. Has he seen authentic video recordings clearly depicting these claimed attacks? - CM

"One woman was grabbed the other day and her hijab was pulled off in Logan", he said.

Does he know her name?  If it happened, this would be a case of low-level assault; are the police investigating?  - CM

"Another woman in a niqab was followed into a house and she was grabbed by her throat, which frightened her.

Again, has a complaint been made to the police?  If this happened, it was an assault and should be reported as such.- CM

"A friend sent me a photo of a serviette that was left under a windscreen that said, "F off from our country you so and so".

Perhaps it happened. Or perhaps it was a hoax; such things have happened, in the past. In Pakistan and Bangladesh there have been multiple blatantly-obvious cases of Muslims "framing" infidels on trumped up - utterly fake - charges of "blasphemy", of insulting Muslims/ Islam/ Mohammed, in order to have an excuse not only to attack the person thus accused, but also in order to unloose the mobs upon the victim's entire community. -  CM

"Muslim people are experiencing this every day at the moment. It is frightening for them."

One serviette on a windscreen. If real and not fabricated, an expression of a - fact-based - feeling of having been invaded by an alien entity that threatens harm.  Meanwhile, the Christians in Iraq - the last remnant of the indigenous pre-Islamic population and culture - have been threatened, and attacked, and raped, and many of them killed, and they have been told to leave their own home region, now under Islamic State control, because it is "Muslim land".  Is Pastor Dave Andrews exercising himself very much on behalf of the Christians of Iraq, who really are facing full-on ethno-religious "cleansing", and genocide, in their own ancestral homeland, at the hands of ...Muslims? - CM

'Pastor Andrews hopes a few small changes may help the Islamic community.

"We hope to create a 'buddy system' for someone to go with a Muslim to the shops or the mosque, so they feel like they can walk freely", he said.

Chickens to escort foxes so that the foxes may feel safe and "accepted".  Question. Suppose the plot to behead had not been disrupted.  Suppose three or four or a dozen or more Australians, all non-Muslim, of various ages, both sexes, had been "disappeared" and then reappeared on the internet, starring in beheading videos posted by boastful Quran-quoting ...Muslims?  Would Pastor Andrews be busy organising for able-bodied men to accompany little old ladies or schoolkids, so that they would not feel afraid to go out, lest they too should disappear and turn up murdered? - CM

"We are also looking at the possibility of cleaning up some of the graffiti as a simple, practical act of showing solidarity.

"One of the great joys of my life is my engagement with the Muslim community. The people I am engaged with are bright, energetic, interesting, committed and peaceful people".

And non-Muslim people are not, or are less so?  Question: re these Muslim people whose praises Dave sings so effusively, are they so bright, energetic, interesting, committed and peaceful because of being Muslim, or in spite of being Muslim?  Has Dave Andrews ever read Quran 3:28 and the classical commentaries upon it, the commentaries which state that a Muslim may only befriend a non-Muslim feigningly and temporarily, and purely for the benefit and convenience of the Muslim?  - CM

'The former missionary worked in India for many years (but seems  to have avoided reading K S Lal - CM) and has been working on the relationship between Christians and Muslims since 9/11.

"I have been working with my Muslim colleagues to build bridges that the extremists continually blow up, that we continually rebuild, to bring our communities closer together", said Pastor Andrews.

Which extremists? Muslims or non-Muslims? - CM

"We want to stand in solidarity, oppose all violence, and commit ourselves in peace.

"We have a general population who have their view of Muslims constantly developed in the most negative terms."

'He believes the situation lies in respect.

"If we want our Muslim brother and sister to support minority Christians, then we in our country have to support our Muslim brothers and sisters", he said.

Won't work, mate. Won't happen.  Islam - classical, orthodox, by the book Islam - does not do reciprocity.  It does not practise the Golden Rule. It is not "do unto others as you would they should do unto you".  Muslims will demand and expect respect from non-Muslims; but for non-Muslims they will show - insofar as they are fully-instructed and sharia-compliant Muslims - nothing but boundless contempt and hatred.  It's a one-way street. Zero sum game.  Dominance and submission. Dominance: for the Muslims, who are taught they are "the best of people", "commanding right and forbidding wrong". Submission, humiliation, degradation, for the kuffar, who are "the worst of beasts". - CM

"What makes it easier is that my Muslim friends are equally outraged about the injustices that are happening overseas".

I wouldn't be so sure about that.  Which injustices, precisely? -  CM

"We have to understand that the majority of the Muslim population (in Australia? - CM) are not like these extremists, they share a vision of the world with liberty and equality (I am sorry, Pastor Dave, but I am not as willing as you are to believe this - CM) and are as appalled of (at?- CM) these crimes against humanity as we are".

I must beg to remain sceptical of that, Pastor Dave. And I do hope that you don't find yourself, one day, starring in a beheading video devised by one of those "bright, energetic, interesting, committed and peaceful" Muslims whose praises you are singing so loudly. - CM


Posted on 09/30/2014 5:46 PM by Christina McIntosh

Tuesday, 30 September 2014


A few hundred people -- Muslims -- showed up, summoned by the official government-supported Imam of the Mosque of Paris, Dalil Boubakeur. A few hundred, out of several million in France. And they were quick to resist the attempt to allow them to distance themselves, by setting up that Islam vs. Islamism opposition. They knew better, and were going to remain loyal to Islam. And these were those claimed as opposing the Islamic State. It's been the same all over the West -- no mass rallies of heartfelt indignation by Muslims, a few throwing-sand-in-your-phase meretricious statements by the likes of CAIR, designed to make non-Muslims think that, yes, indeed, most Muslims "overwhelmingly" condemn the Islamic State and our leaders are not wrong when they keep telling us, in tutte le salse, every-which-way, that the Islamic State is a "complete perversion" of, has nothing to do with, Islam. It's Islam, straight up.


Posted on 09/30/2014 3:40 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

Lest we forget. From the Brooklyn Public Library website:

We have grown accustomed--too accustomed perhaps--to thinking of Brooklyn as the borough that integrated baseball, a borough dominated politically by Democrats, in which liberal and left-wing politics historically have flourished. But a recent acquisition brought home the fact that other points of view--including some many of us would now find repugnant--have gained a foothold here in the not so distant past. The drumbeat of Fascism in the 1930s could be heard all over Europe. It should come as no surprise that Brooklyn in that era also had its share of Fascist sympathisers.

On November 17 and 18, 1934, a gathering of "Friends of the New Germany" aka Nazis, drawn from all over the Eastern U.S., met in Brooklyn. We recently came across a well-preserved program for the event, and acquired it for the Brooklyn Collection.

The groups represented are listed in the program, with "Bay Ridge N.Y." receiving special mention, and Brooklyn at the head of the list, as "Seat of the Leadership District." Many things about the program indicate a well-organized group with firm roots in the community. Who, then, were the Nazis of Brooklyn?

On August  12, 1935 the New York World Telegram reported that there were 1,100 Nazis in Ridgewood, Brooklyn, but "to most of them, the American Nazi movement offers simply another of those sociable Vereins they can never resist joining." There were two main organizations: the Friends of the New Germany, headed by Joseph Schuster; and the breakaway American National Socialists League established in January 1935, headed by Anton Haegele.

According to William Birnie in the same newspaper on August 14, Nazism offered two attractive features to German Americans who might have had no interest in spreading Nazi propaganda: first, they supported the war on the American boycott of German goods and services; second, they offered an extensive program of social and athletic activities.

Brooklyn Public Library--Brooklyn Collection

Several photographs in the program show uniformed groups. Above, Brooklyn's Nazi soccer team took on the Philadelphia Gauleitung. We do not know who won. But soccer was only one of many activities offered by the Nazis. Camp Siegfried in Yaphank, L.I., offered the area's Fascists a place to strutt, march, relax and exchange salutes. On arrival at the Yaphank train station, an enthusiast from Brooklyn would have been greeted by crowds of fellow campers giving the Nazi salute.

Brooklyn Public Library--Brooklyn Collection

Once settled, the camper could enjoy marching in strict formation, stealing fruit from nearby orchards, chasing local residents from Yaphank Lake, or taking a ride on a Ferris Wheel. According to the outraged Justice Neuss reporting to the Brookhaven Town Board, between 3,000 and 5,000 persons visited the camp each weekend.

Camp Siegfried, Yaphank L.I., September 1938. Brooklyn Public Library--Brooklyn Collection.


According to the program, Brooklyn's women's group was "the strongest in the region." 

On March 13, 1938 Brooklyn's long-serving Representative, Emanuel Celler, appeared on a radio program in which he registered his alarm at the spreading of Nazi ideology. Quoting a study in the magazine Ken, he said, "Within the last week (the Nazis) have captured complete control of the old German American societies which for five years put up a stiff fight against the Nazi invasion. In Los Angeles, New Jersey, Brooklyn...Nazi officials took over the united German societies, lock stock and barrel..." Celler urged the passing of a bill in congress to compel all propagandists to register. 

Celler was not the only one to be alarmed. One correspondent to the Brooklyn Daily Eagle wrote: "Why are the German-Americans parading here? Why are they establishing Nazi camps, dressed in full uniform, practicing the Hitler salute?...and when doing so they carry the American flag."

Apr 23, 1938 Charles Weiss, editor of a Brooklyn anti-Nazi magazine, was found badly beaten with swastikas etched on his back. He worked in the offices of the Anti-Communist Anti-Fascist and Anti-Nazi League at 130 Flatbush Ave near the LIRR. Four men "of German appearance" broke in, pinned his arms behind him and demanded that he kiss a small Nazi flag. He refused.

Oct 3, 1938 2000 members and sympathizers of the pro-Nazi German-American Bund met at the Prospect Hall, 261 Prospect Avenue. 200 pickets from the American League for Peace and Democracy, "a leftist group," picketed outside.

March 16, 1939 400 members and friends of the German American Bund attended a rally at the Schwaben Hall, Knickerbocker and Myrtle Aves. Sponsored by the Brooklyn unit of the Bund in Ridgewood, the meeting was held to show motion pictures drawing comparisons between the old and the new Germany. The event included speeches by Karl Nicolai, Brooklyn chairman of the Bund, and Gustav Wilhelm Kunze, national director of public relations. The Schwaben Hall in Bushwick was a particular hotbed of Nazi activity. In fact the final page of our program invites German Americans to meetings at the Schwaben Hall "Jeden Mittwoch" (every Wednesday) at 8:30 P.M. The headquarters of the Friends of the New Germany was nearby at 533 Knickerbocker Avenue, and Hamburg Ave was renamed Wilson Ave after Word War I.

Belcher Hyde Miniature Atlas of Brooklyn, 1912.

The Schwaben Hall, shown as the pink square at the top right of the map, burned down in 1977.


Local businesses of all kinds were not shy to advertise in the program. The particular meeting documented here included musical excerpts, as well as a speech by Gauleiter Schuster. The Star-Spangled Banner opened the event; Johann Strauss's Fledermaus Overture came next, then a few other items followed by the Radetzky March.  After speeches, athletic displays and songs by the youth group, the program ended with the Horst Wessel Song.  

And what happened to the members of these organizations when war broke out? Some surely quietly hid their involvement. But according to Mark D. Van Ells, "When Hitler declared war against the United States four days after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, Bund members found themselves stranded in enemy territory. Federal agents seized Bund records. Many of its members faced denaturalization proceedings and imprisonment."  

Posted on 09/30/2014 2:19 PM by Geoffrey Clarfield

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

by Kenneth R. Timmerman (October 2014)

In a September 19 speech in Florida, for which he was paid the princely sum of $22,000, former CIA Acting Director Mike Morell doubled down on the administration’s fairy tale of what happened in Benghazi.  more>>>

Posted on 09/30/2014 1:47 PM by NER

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

"ISIS, ISIS" and "Let's go on Jihad."

Just the thing to make France and other Western countries want to admit you.


Posted on 09/30/2014 1:03 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

by Dilip Mohapatra (October 2014)


your own shadows

are strangers to you

and mostly disloyal.  more>>>

Posted on 09/30/2014 9:05 AM by NER

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

by Steven Sher (October 2014)

From this overlook, we can see beyond Maale Adumim

to the Dead Sea and as far as Amman.  more>>>

Posted on 09/30/2014 9:01 AM by NER

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

translated by Bibhu Padhi (October 2014)

The evening comes.

Your memory returns

like the day’s last tiredness.  more>>>

Posted on 09/30/2014 8:58 AM by NER

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

by Robin Hirsch (October 2014)


We're off, Argentina kicking off and moving the ball out to the right, just inside their half after recycling it across the back four and Zabaleta launches a 40-yard pass down the inside right channel that skips into Cillessen's hands as he races to the edge of his area. Saved!

At the Cornelia Street Café in Greenwich Village, New York City
perhaps a dozen people
are watching the World Cup semi-final  more>>>
Posted on 09/30/2014 8:54 AM by NER

1 2 3 4 5 Next Last

Guns, Germs and Steel in Tanzania
The Thinking Person's Safari
Led by Geoffrey Clarfield
Most Recent Posts at The Iconoclast
Search The Iconoclast
Enter text, Go to search:
The Iconoclast Posts by Author
The Iconoclast Archives
sun mon tue wed thu fri sat
    1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31