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
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

Saturday, 16 June 2007

Thanks to Alan for this news from The First Post:

Plans are under way in Russia to launch a global television network that would provide Jews with the kind of influential voice that the lavishly funded Al-Jazeera channel has given to the Muslim world.

The banker/politician behind this ambitious venture is Vladimir Sloutsker (right), a prominent Muscovite who heads the country's Jewish Congress. He firmly believes that Jewish communities around the world are facing challenges that can only be addressed through the proposed new channel; "in conditions of instability, there is a tendency to blame (this) on the Jews". Although Sloutsker is too canny to spell it out, the rampant anti-Semitism flourishing in his native Russia today is clearly on his mind.

Posted on 06/16/2007 5:31 AM by Mary Jackson

Saturday, 16 June 2007

Arise, Sir Salman. From the BBC:

Ex-cricketer Ian Botham and novelist Salman Rushdie have both been knighted in the Queen's Birthday Honours.

[..]

Rushdie went into hiding in 1989 after his fourth novel the Satanic Verses provoked riots and calls by Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini for his assassination. In 1998, the Iranian government said it would no longer support the fatwa, but some groups have said it is irrevocable.

The 59-year-old said: "I am thrilled and humbled to receive this great honour, and am very grateful that my work has been recognised in this way."

Humbled my eye. Rushdie is the King of Smug. I tried to read Midnight's Children once and gave up after about thirty pages. Unreadable, pretentious twaddle. Rushdie, I suspect - and perhaps the remainder of that book and all his other books are brilliant - is one in a long line of "ethnically interesting" overrated mediocre novelists. But you don't kill people for that. His right to produce a terrible novel that angers Muslims should be unquestioned, just like his right to produce any other kind of terrible - or good - novel.

People get knighted for all kinds of silly reasons. Rushdie's knighthood will provoke Muslim rage, and so should be welcomed.

Posted on 06/16/2007 4:55 AM by Mary Jackson

Friday, 15 June 2007

A lecturer in public policy at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government claims there is a double standard by which Muslim clerics are criticized for not condemning Islamist terrorism when "rabbis are not condemning the violent settlers' movement."

Jessica Stern's lecture and those of other participants sought to promote "new thinking against violent extremism and radicalization," according to papers circulated at the conference by the EastWest Institute, a think tank hosting the event in Manhattan.

Dr. Stern opened her remarks by saying that, while it may be true there is presently more violence being committed in the name of Islam than in the name of other religions, "all three major monotheistic religions have produced violence."

She then drew a parallel between what she characterized as violence in the name of Islam and violence in the name of Judaism and Christianity, as well as in official responses to such violence on the part of leaders of all three faiths.

"I've heard a lot of bashing of Muslim clerics for not stepping up to the plate and condemning extremist violence," she said. "But Catholic priests are not stepping up to condemn those who kill abortion doctors…[and] rabbis are not condemning the violent settlers' movement." --from this news item

Jessica Stern is one of those people who ends up, somehow, at places such as the Kennedy School, who are billed -- on the basis of some line-item in a swollen resume -- as "terrorism experts," and who every time they open their mouths reveal that they have never felt the responsibility, the duty, to learn about Islam, and to find out what it is that makes this belief-system so very different from the others with which, as "religions," it is so carelessly connected, so thoughtlessly lumped.

There are others at the Kennedy School who have hardly distinguished themselves, including one or two quite good at wearing their Compassion (International Division) on their sleeves, so much so that while the actual effects of their work were as limited as the Man-of-Ready-Sentiment Nicholas Kristof's on Darfur, but the effect on their own careers perfectly wonderful.

And Jessica Stern, prating away, has latched onto a good thing, and a title on the door -- "terrorism expert" -- the coincidence of which with any real expertise on the matter of Islam and the natural, almost inevitable connection of Islam to terrorism as one, if not the most effective, instruments of Jihad, turns out to be purely....coincidental.

Those who have managed to ease or climb their way into certain positions, can dine off for the rest of their lives on a few haunting phrases designed to, and too often evoking, salaam-salaams: The Kennedy School....Harvard. But there is no there there.

Posted on 06/15/2007 7:04 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Friday, 15 June 2007
Thanks to Alan for pointing out the best report.
From This is London the website of the London Evening Standard.
Seven members of a terror cell run by Al Qaeda "general" Dhiren Barot have been jailed for a total of 136 years.
The group were vital to Barot's deadly plans to attack the UK and the US, Woolwich Crown Court was told.
Barot was jailed for life last year for plotting to kill "hundreds if not thousands" of people using explosives-packed limousines and a "dirty" radiation bomb.
Sentencing the men at Woolwich Crown Court, Mr Justice Butterfield said: "Barot was the instigator of this terrorist planning, he was by some considerable distance the principal participant in the conspiracy.
"Each one of you was recruited by Barot and assisted him at his request."
"Anyone who chooses to participate in such a plan ... will receive little sympathy from the courts."
Shaffi was convicted of conspiracy to murder after a month-long trial which ended earlier this week.
The other six pleaded guilty in April to conspiracy to cause explosions likely to endanger life.
Muslim convert Barot planned co-ordinated attacks on symbolic buildings in three different cities on the eastern seaboard of the US, including the New York Stock Exchange and the World Bank, the south east London court was told.
Blueprints for these attacks were then refined and developed into plans for a series of attacks on buildings in London and the capital's transport systems.
Possible targets were the Heathrow Express or an explosion on a Tube train whilst in a tunnel under the Thames, it was said.
In spring 2004, the UK plans were completed and Barot went to Pakistan.
The timing suggests the purpose of the trip was to present his proposals to the al Qaeda leadership for support and funding, said Johnathan Laidlaw, for the Crown.
But in the summer of that year, the four-year conspiracy came to an end with the men's arrests.
Clockwise from top left: Junade Feroze, Mohammed Naveed Bhatti, Zia Ul Haq, Abdul Aziz Jalil, Dhiren Barot, Omar Abdur Rehman, Nadeem Tarmohamed and Qaisar Shaffi
Barot's team gave him the help he needed to make it possible for him to operate in this country and produce the terrorist plans.
"They were amongst his trusted few. They were his support team," Mr Laidlaw said.
"We do not suggest it was just these seven men - there may have been others - but these men were the most prominent amongst that team."
Picture from the BBC. 
Posted on 06/15/2007 4:06 PM by Esmerelda Weatherwax

Friday, 15 June 2007
My duties take me up and down, around and about, within and without and today I was in the Whitehall area and decided to take a look at whatever was happening outside No 10 Downing Street.
The Muslims rise up against British Oppression demonstration was not a spoof. However from what I saw it was a bit of a damp squib.
What was happening was that there were two groups of demonstrators on the pavement of Whitehall opposite the entrance to Downing Street, outside the Ministry of Defence Building. For those who don’t know the area, Downing Street is now gated and public access is by appointment only. The days when an aspiring Prime Minister aged 8 could be photographed on the step of No 10 are long gone.
To the left were the Muslims Rising against British Oppression. To the right, separated by Richmond Terrace, were the members of the National Front and I bet you didn’t realise they still existed. In between were the police.
The National Front fielded about 50 demonstrators who held Union Jack flags.
The Rising Muslims numbered a couple of hundred. A police officer I spoke to expressed the opinion that the coaches from Luton, Birmingham, Derby and beyond “Hadn’t turned up”
They were almost outnumbered by the amount of tourists and office workers who had stopped to take photos and inquire what it was all about.
The niqabed women were in groups to the sides. The men, some of whom also had their faces covered were in the middle. One of them had a loud hailer, or microphone, or some kind of amplifier. The sound quality was very bad and from where I stood I couldn’t make out a word. He might have been shouting “Rise up against British Oppression!” He probably wasn’t shouting “Come on you Reds”.
There was some chanting in unison. The National Front gave a verse of Rule Britannia.
My camera is not good enough to show the placards in detail. They said
BRITISH POLICE GO TO HELL, which made an ex-marine standing near me particularly angry.
SHARIA IS THE ONLY SOLUTION.
SHARIA THE BEST SOLUTION FOR OPPRESSION. (Sharia oppresses 99% of all known infidels. Actually that was a joke, in poor taste I know but it was one of those afternoons)
CHRISTIAN CRUSADE AGAINST MUSLIMS. (I wish)
RELEASE MUSLIM HOSTAGES.
BRITISH POLICE TARGET MUSLIMS.
And so forth.
There were black flags with Arabic writing.
The police were keeping good order – there were officers in reserve and a helicopter overhead.
I couldn’t stay long but everything was peaceful for the period I was there.
 

 The National Front end of the demonstration.
 They were not many deep, single file in places. You can see the Sharia banner and some of the black flags. The statue behind them is of Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein. His views were not recorded.
Posted on 06/15/2007 2:51 PM by Esmerelda Weatherwax

Friday, 15 June 2007

Hugh - could you provide any evidence of your claim that the BBC World Service is under the control of, or reports to, the Foreign Office. I doubt you can, as it's completely untrue."-- from a reader

“Completely untrue” is it? Hmmm. Then I, who knew Huw Weldon, must have been misinformed. And equally misinformed must be a good many Englishmen, and among those misinformed Englishman must be counted Nigel Chapman, the Director of the BBC World Service (the operational, day to day overseer of operations, the one who makes sure Israel is properly maligned and Islam protected for listeners to the BBC, is third-from-the-top-of-the-tottering-totem-pole John Simpson):

"The BBC's core values of accuracy, fairness and impartiality underpin all its journalism, irrespective of the language or the medium we use to reach our audiences. Diversity of points of view It is also very important to broadcast a diversity of points of view on a subject, and to monitor this spread of opinion over time. Of course, no individual programme can capture every relevant shade of opinion, but the output, as a whole, must strive to do so; that way, the audience can make up its own mind about who it believes and why. The ambition is clear. Attaining these goals is not easy and requires thought, vigilance and a determination to monitor standards rigorously. Impartiality There should be no axes to grind or hidden agendas in the BBC's journalism; indeed, unless it is already involved in a story as a participating organisation, it has no point of view. Our job is to report the facts, provide context and analysis and thereby give our audiences the means to form their own view. We strive to hear from the many shades of opinion already present across the world. Ensuring a similar range of views was part of our remit, too, during the coverage of war in Iraq. Some people question our commitment to these values, arguing that being funded via Grant-in-Aid from the Foreign Office precludes our being able to broadcast without fear or favour. Independence Our right to editorial freedom and independence of Government is embedded in the BBC Charter, and in the World Service's Agreement with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO). The founders of the World Service in 1932 had the foresight to see the value and long-term necessity of such independence, and all parties respect it. It's one of the reasons why the World Service is trusted and relied upon worldwide and places it in a unique position in international broadcasting. Our values These journalistic values are an unshakeable part of our heritage, and the heart of our mission today. Everyone who works at the BBC is aware of how precious these values are and, whatever the challenge, we strive to uphold them. And if we make mistakes – as all humans do – we admit them and correct them as soon as possible. Upholding our reputation for accuracy, fairness and impartiality must be at the heart of everything we do and, I would argue, of any journalistic organisation that wants to be taken seriously across the world." --Nigel Chapman, Director, BBC World Service

Aside from the self-serving nonsense about how fair and balanced the BBC is, how willing it is to admit mistakes (it fights tooth and nail to avoid releasing information about its pro-Arab anti-Israel bias), which is so much bunk, there is this, the key sentence for our purposes:

“Some people question our commitment to these values, arguing that being funded via Grant-in-Aid from the Foreign Office precludes our being able to broadcast without fear or favour.”

I repeat: the Foreign Office funds directly, and has a great influence, even control over, the BBC World Service and what it broadcasts, both topics and tenor of the coverage. It is not I, but you who, in assuming this is not the case, apparently believe something that is "completely untrue."

And it is easy enough to find out what almost ever educated person in Great Britain knows. You only had to google "Foreign Office" and "BBC World Service" before making such an absurd charge against me.

Posted on 06/15/2007 1:14 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Friday, 15 June 2007

After that, the squirrel went into the 72-year-old man's garden and massively attacked him on the arms, hand and thigh," the spokesman said. "Then he killed it with his crutch."

Which letter? Oh, you know.

Sometimes, but not often, I wish my mind didn't always work like this. It's a kind of Tourette's syndrome.

Posted on 06/15/2007 1:06 PM by Mary Jackson

Friday, 15 June 2007
Aaron Klein reports at WND: JERUSALEM – After the Hamas terror group's takeover of U.S.-backed Palestinian security compounds in Gaza and seizure of large quantities of American weapons, the Bush administration is contemplating sending more weapons to the Palestinians and is asking Israel to make security concessions to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Israeli and Palestinian diplomatic sources told WND today.

According to the diplomatic sources, U.S. and European Union officials are making plans to transfer emergency aid to Abbas' Fatah party to secure its grasp on the West Bank after Hamas this week took complete control of the Gaza Strip, including all Fatah security compounds, many of which contained American weapons. The proposed aid to Fatah in the West Bank entails providing both funds and heavy weaponry, the diplomatic sources said.

In the wake of the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip, U.S. government spokesmen said yesterday the Bush administration will work to prevent the violence from spilling over to the West Bank, which borders Jerusalem and is within rocket firing range of Tel Aviv.

Diplomatic sources said the U.S. is expected to urge Israel to make concessions to the Palestinians in the West Bank so Abbas can claim achievements at a time his rule is being thrust into question. Israel will be asked, among other things, to dismantle anti-terror West Bank checkpoints and unfreeze tens of millions of dollars in tax revenue the Israeli government has held from the Palestinians for fear the money will be used to fund terrorism, the sources said.

The diplomatic sources said the U.S. is attempting to separate the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip from the West Bank. Abbas has more of a grasp in the West Bank, but he could lose the territory to Hamas if fighting broke out there...

Hamas' Al Aqsa Television yesterday and today broadcast footage of Hamas gunmen brandishing American assault rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, rocket launchers and ammunition the U.S. reportedly provided to Fatah over the past few months. Hamas fighters also showed what they said were 10 American-provided armored personnel carriers the terror group said it seized from U.S.-backed Fatah security compounds it took over Tuesday....

Posted on 06/15/2007 12:16 PM by Rebecca Bynum

Friday, 15 June 2007

"Their attitude toward governments is strictly adversarial. Every man is expected to get away with as much as he can and trust extends to one's family and clan alone. When they come to the U.S. Muslim doctors start medicaid fraud mills and even those who run small groceries frequently launder money, deal in fake cigarette tax paper, etc etc. Parasites on an 'infidel' state. These aren't the 'bad apples'. These are the 'good Muslims'."-- from a reader

American soldiers in Iraq have noticed this absence of any national feeling, and a desire by individual "Iraqis" (better: Muslims in Iraq), for themselves, their families, their clans and tribes, but never for something larger, and certainly not for something called "Iraq" even if they may prate about how "wonderful" that "Iraq" once was (the Sunnis, especially, thinking of the Sunni despotism) or will be (the Shi'a, especially, thinking of their new, never-to-be-given-up power).

Not infrequently, American soldiers have told me, they noticed that this or that "Iraqi" or group of "Iraqis" would be furious that American aid was to be given to people different in some way -- outside the clan or sectarian or ethnic group -- from themselves, and almost appeared to wish to block such aid if it had to be shared with their enemies. An extraordinary attitude.

As for the behavior of Muslims in the West, why should they not fiddle the system of the Infidels? After all, it is only just, only right, that they take whatever they can from the Infidels, and cheating the government of an Infidel nation-state is not cheating, from a Muslim point of view, at all - nor is cheating Christians, Jews, Hindus and others who, in effect, are living on borrowed time -- until that moment when Muslims become stronger, and more numerous, and can impose their will, as they have, in the Muslim view, not merely a right, but a divine right, to do so.

Not every single Muslim, obviously, feels this way. But opinion polls and information of all kinds that goes far beyond the merely anecdotal evidence (though that anecdotal evidence is not to be dismissed), and simple common sense about what Islam teaches its Believers to believe, and which a great many of them clearly do believe, tells us that many of them -- a great many -- do indeed think this way, and act, when they can get away with it, upon it.

Posted on 06/15/2007 10:56 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Friday, 15 June 2007
Posted on 06/15/2007 10:39 AM by John Derbyshire

Friday, 15 June 2007

"The BBC apologized this week for referring to Jerusalem as Israel's capital, and promised not to repeat "the mistake," following a complaint by four British organizations.

Arab Media Watch, Muslim Public Affairs Committee, Friends of Al-Aksa and the Institute of Islamic Political Thought sent a joint complaint to the BBC after a presenter on its Football Focus program on March 24 mentioned that Jerusalem was Israel's capital and "historic soul.'"--from this news item

What was the mistake? Jerusalem is Israel's capital. It is the place where the Knesset meets, the President has his house, and the Vice-President. Jerusalem is also the "historic soul" as the keen presenter put it, of Israel. Where is the Western Wall? Where is the Old City itself, with that Western Wall? And where, despite Arab depredations, remain so much of what is central to Jewish history and Jewish life?

The fact that in 1948 the Arab Legion managed to seize the Old City, and hold onto it until the Six-Day War, does not make Jerusalem less a center, the "historic soul," of Israel. And the fact that since the Six-Day War, Arab blackmail, based on a quite unnecessary fear of offending what are essentially gas station owners who need have no favors done them beyond paying the posted price for their gas, the Western world has forgotten the legal, moral, and historic claim of the Jews to Jerusalem, has proceeded to believe that the Arab claim, which is based not on history but on the belief that a single phrase in the Qur'an (Jerusalem is nowhere mentioned in that Qur'an), about the "farthest mosque" (al-masjid al-aksa) must be located in Jerusalem, right on Temple Mount (which is where, after some initial squabbling, Muslims of the time of the Umayyad Caliphate based in nearby Damascus, as a symbol of the power of Islam and the conquering Muslims, decided to place it, in the city holy to Jews and Christians, right smack on the site most important to Jews).

It is a matter of regret that Western countries did not immediately recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and gotten it over with forty years ago. It is too bad, but it reflects not history, nor a historical judgment, but merely cowardice and laziness. One can compare this inattention to real history, with the alacrity with which, after the Six-Day War, the Western world, or much of it, accepted the hastily-created "Palestinian people" out of what had always been -- not least among the Arab diplomats and leaders -- merely the "Arabs" of the area, who suddenly acquired not merely a name, but a hasty "construction of 'Palestinian' identity" out of people identical in language, culture, religion, in every way, to those other Arabs around them, but who took on this purely verbal cloak to disguise, for obvious propagandistic reasons, the Arab war against the Infidel state of Israel which is nothing but a classic Jihad, the Lesser Jihad.

The BBC can apologize all it wants to the Arabs and Muslims who have it in thrall. This is merely of a piece with its entire editorial policy, and its speakers and speakerines, of a piece with the head of its World Service, John Simpson (who, or possibly which, google along with "Jihad Watch" to find out about his enthusiastic delight in the antisemitic conspiracy history of one Lonni Brenner). And it is of a piece with the hideous crap the British and world public have been fed about the Middle East, and that has aroused the fury not only of those with a particular sympathy for Israel, but of all those who are still capable of seeing through the manipulation by and of the media -- such people, for example, as the celebrated Soviet dissident, long resident in Cambridge, England, Vladimir Bukovsky, who finds the BBC Stalinoid.

A very few of the individual reporters who spewed their venom, have been transferred away from the Middle East. There was Barbara Plett, who wept when Yassir Arafat died (for more on Arafat, see the account of Magdi Allam in the just-published "Viva Israele"). There was Orla Guerin, who, herself married to the mob -- that is, married to a 'Palestinian' who told her all she needed to know, and which she was intent, every day, on helping the larger public know as well -- reported on the Arabs and Israel, her accounts of the 'Palestinians' in their self-inflicted wretchedness and hate and cultivated primitivization reflecting a diseased sympathy, and she got to be even too much for the BBC, which has now switched her to southern Africa, while Barbara Plett reports from Afghanistan and Pakistan. But so many others remain in place, including those whose voices became immediately hostile when the word "Israel" was mentioned, and whose "interviews" with Israeli officials became exercises not in mere skepticism, but hectoring abuse, while the assorted "Palestinians" and "Arabs" were treated with kid gloves, and all kinds of local open supporters of terrorism, including an open supporter of Hamas, were welcomed on the BBC, introduced with respect, and allowed to speak their piece.

That's the BBC.

See also Publicly Funded Dhimmitude

Posted on 06/15/2007 10:00 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Friday, 15 June 2007

BERLIN (Reuters) (hat tip: Jonah Goldberg)- An aggressive squirrel attacked and injured three people in a German town before a 72-year-old pensioner dispatched the rampaging animal with his crutch.

The squirrel first ran into a house in the southern town of Passau, leapt from behind on a 70-year-old woman, and sank its teeth into her hand, a local police spokesman said Thursday.

With the squirrel still hanging from her hand, the woman ran onto the street in panic, where she managed to shake it off.

The animal then entered a building site and jumped on a construction worker, injuring him on the hand and arm, before he managed to fight it off with a measuring pole.

"After that, the squirrel went into the 72-year-old man's garden and massively attacked him on the arms, hand and thigh," the spokesman said. "Then he killed it with his crutch."

Posted on 06/15/2007 9:50 AM by Rebecca Bynum

Friday, 15 June 2007

"Never said you weren't perfect. Just American. That isn't your fault." --Mary Jackson

Yes, you’re right. I am an American. And it isn’t my ”fault.” I did nothing to deserve it.   How American am I?  As American as George Balanchine, Vladimir Nabokov, and Igor Stravinsky. As American as Vladimir Horowitz, Nathan Milstein, Gregor Piatigorsky, Arturo Toscanini. As American as Otto Loewi and Konrad Bloch and John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern and Richard Courant and Kurt Godel and Hans Bethe and Leo Szilard and Edward Teller. As American as Marcel Duchamp and Max Ernst and Walter Gropius and Marcel Breuer and Josef Albers and Jakob Rosenberg and Erwin Panofsky. As American as Enrico Fermi and Emilio Segre and Stanislaus Ulam. As American as Joseph Schumpeter and Franco Modigliani. In other words, as much an admirer of the American political and legal system, for its unrivalled blend of common sense and genius, as these refugees from the Nazis and Communists were. And therefore, as much an American as George Washington and John Adams and Thomas Jefferson and John Quincy Adams and Abraham Lincoln, as American as Herman Melville and Nathaniel Hawthorne and Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau and Mark Twain and Noah Webster and Daniel Webster and Henry Clay, as much an American – not more so but not less – than E. B. White and James Thurber and Nathanael West and Leo Rosten and S. J. Perelman and Bel Kaufmann, and as Millicent Fenwick and Fiorello LaGuardia and Jacques Barzun, and as American as someone I know who just became a citizen last week, a new citizen who would hardly mind the fact that this little outburst that your statement provoked is beginning to resemble, in its sentiment and possibly unwonted sentimentality, those old elementary-school “I Am An American Day" events in a big-city school, in the first few decades of the 20th century, with the teachers manfully trying, and succeeding, in Americanizing, that is making into Americans, their foreign-born young charges, and succeeding because those young charges did not bring with them creeds both alien and hostile, flatly contracting the legal and political institutions that were, that one hopes are and will remain, America’s claim to fame.

You sized me up exactly right. I am – despite a few foreign bits and pieces I can’t stop myself from using here and there -- most definitely an American.

And the little speech I realize I have just delivered would fit perfectly, despite some anachronistic elements, at an I Am An American Day celebration, at some quite possible P. S. 77, round about June 14, 1932, and which, not having yet been born, I was unable, much as I would have liked to, to deliver in person.

But now, at long last, I have.

Posted on 06/15/2007 7:44 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Friday, 15 June 2007

Rome, 13 June (AKI) - The works of twenty-one contemporary artists from around the Mediterranean basin went on display in Rome on Wednesday exploring through experimentation and tradition the identity of the region. "L'Uomo del Mediterraneo" runs in the Vittoriano complex until 8 July. "This exhibition is an utopia, of bringing together united in dialogue the countries of the Mediterranean, with their wealth of history and culture, too often divided by tragic conflicts" explained Maria Teresa Benedetti who along with Alessandro Nicosia curated the show which is part of the Lazio between Europe and the Mediterranean Festival. --from this news item

For more on this European confusion between geography and culture, and the dreamy belief that a mere sharing of the Mediterranean basin provides a link that can overcome, or should be allowed to let Infidels think can be overcome, the clear tenets of Islam, according to which the central division of humanity, the one that counts, is that between Believer and Infidel.

Paolo Mazzarro of the province of Lazio may not understand this. But many people in Italy do, and many more, thanks to Oriana Fallaci especially, and now to Magdi Allam (whose new book "Viva Israele" is as stout a defense of Israel that could possibly come from someone still unwilling to make a complete break with Islam, or to recognize that it is Islam itself that will never allow Muslims -- save for a handful such as Magdi Allam -- to recognize the legitimacy of Israel, and what's more, the legal and moral and historic rights to the land Israel now possesses, including, most obviously, what we have been carefully taught since 1948 to call the "West Bank."

But the division is not merely that of a body of water. The division is that of an ideology, a total belief-system so strong that it overcomes all natural human sympathies (say, that of children for parents, brothers for brothers, parents for children), and offers a Complete Regulation of Life, and Total Explanation of the Universe, that is completely unlike any other belief-system that we call a "religion" -- even if Muslim propagandists keep insisting on this "three-abrahamic faiths" business to keep the Infidels unwary and full of interfaith naiveté until such time as the Muslim beachhead has been so solidly established that, in the Muslim view -- and I hope and believe they are very wrong -- cannot be undone.

This "deux-rivisme" is stronger in France than in Italy. You can find more about what has been written on the theme by googling “Jihad Watch” or "deux-rives" or "deux-rivistes" (or "deuxrivistes" to more obviously evoke "arrivistes"). An idiotic idea, whether it comes from the provincial government of Lazio or anywhere else.

Posted on 06/15/2007 7:38 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Friday, 15 June 2007

Here, transliterated, is the Pushkin couplet about "Prince Dunduk" sitting in the "Academy of Sciences":

"V akademii nauk
Zasedaet knyaz' Dunduk."

It can be applied to any number of portentous sinecurists at Centers for Advanced International Thisandthat, Middle East Institutes, and every sort of thoughtless think-tank, staffed with nubile secretaries and a tireless staff of clever fund-raisers, making sure that the boys, no matter what kind of stuff they produce, can keep on being seen as "experts" producing really important and non-obvious stuff. You don't believe me? Well then, just look at those expanding resumes, just look at how many times so-and-so was quoted in the media, just look at that magnificent series of Op/Ed articles and thirty-second or two-minute appearances by him on television -- truly impressive scholarship!).

Prince Dunduks? Like the sea, they're all around us.

Posted on 06/15/2007 7:29 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Friday, 15 June 2007

Unfortunately, as is usually the case with Libby coverage, it's all passion and no substance.

To read what's being reported, one would think:  "It's just a simple matter of being reasonable.  Scooter has a right to appeal.  And if he wins the appeal, he might not have to do any time.  So why not just hold the detention off until the appeal is decided in a year or so."

Sounds totally reasonable.  And it's also totally wrong. 

With lots of support from conservatives, Congress several years ago was determined to make sure convicted felons were taken off the street.  (Based on similar concerns that weak liberal judges were not cracking down hard enough on crooks, law-and-order conservatives similarly supported the very same draconian sentencing guidelines that resulted in Libby's 30-month sentence.)  Basically, congress — with broad public support — has removed judicial discretion because we no longer trust judges to be judges. 

I hate this new system (which came into being in 1984 and has gotten worse since).  Yes, judges occasionally make outrageous rulings (those are the small percentage of rulings we hear about).  But, most of the time, left to their own judgment, they act pretty reasonably.  Our statutes, however, no longer leave them to their own judgment.  We're noticing that today — although we are blaming Walton rather than the statutes; and, if we were honest with ourselves, we know we'd be furious if we learned that a judge imperiously ignored the controlling statute in a typical case not involving someone we know and like.

Whether a convicted defendant is entitled to bail pending appeal is controlled by Section 3143 of Title 18, U.S. Code.  The statute contains a clear presumption that a convicted defendant who has received a jail sentence will be incarcerated pending appeal ("the judicial officer shall order that a person who has been found guilty of an offense and sentenced to a term of imprisonment, and who has filed an appeal ... be detained") (emphasis added).  The presumption in favor of incarceration may be overcome, as relevant in this case, only if the judge finds that "the appeal ... raises a substantial question of law or fact likely to result in (i) reversal, (ii) an order for a new trial, (iii) a sentence that does not include a term of imprisonment, or (iv) [a reduced sentence that would amount to less than the time it will take to prosecute the appeal]" (emphasis added).

Applying that statute, Judge Walton was required to deny bail pending appeal unless he thought Scooter's appeal was likely to succeed.  But, of course, if he thought there had been an error grievous enough to warrant reversal, he wouldn't have sentenced Scooter in the first place — he'd have set aside the jury verdict on his own and either acquitted him or ordered a new trial.

Today's ruling was absolutely to be expected.  The judge was not going to make a ruling implicitly suggesting that the trial over which he presided was error-ridden. 

The interesting part starts now.  Now that Judge Walton has officially entered his judgment of conviction (which technically happens when sentence is imposed) jurisdiction will transfer to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.  Thus, in very short order, Libby will file an expedited appeal challenging the Judge Walton's detention order on the ground that there are appellate issues on which he is likely to succeed.  If he wins, it gets interesting because the appellate court would be signalling that it perceives some problem with the trial or sentence.  If he loses, that will mean the denial of bail was no big deal because Libby's appeal is virtually certain to fail anyway.

That's where we're at.  It's not about Judge Walton being a reasonable or unreasonable guy.  It's about what the law says.  I don't like the law.  I doubt Scooter's appeal will go anyplace, but I think the Republic would be just fine if he could avoid jail until his appeals are exhausted.  But that's not the way our system works anymore.  I think it was better when we used to let judges be judges.

Posted on 06/15/2007 7:03 AM by Andy McCarthy

Friday, 15 June 2007

"Meanwhile, corrupt Iraqi officials are pocketing the pay of thousands of 'ghost' policemen and soldiers who exist only on paper, a senior US officer claimed yesterday." -- from Rebecca's post of this news article

These phantom Iraqi warriors on the American payroll put one in mind of Gogol's "Dead Souls." The names of serfs, if still on the official rolls, even though those serfs might be dead, were worth something to Our Mr. Chichikov. Here I cannot remember what the benefit from the government was, but Gogol's premise required that there be one. And so he travelled around, picaresquely and picturesquely picking up, for a song or a swan song, those "dead souls" ("dushi”) who, though worthless, in Chichikov's calculated scheming turn out to be worth something.

In the case of Tarbaby Iraq, those non-existent army or police for which you and I, dear reader, are paying help give that large and growing population of corrupt Arabs more and more and more.

We are paying, as part of that $880 billion that has been spent or fully committed to the venture in Iraq. That is more than the cost of all the wars, save World War II, ever fought by the United States. And it is going to aid more corrupt officials, as our money has aided them in Egypt, with Mubarak's Family-and-Friends Plan; in Jordan, with the Son of Plucky Little King and his mediagenic wife and of course Good Queen Noor and her "act-of-faith" feelgood propaganda on behalf of Islam and the Arab cause; and as it has of course aided the "Palestinians" and their noble, self-abnegating representatives such as Arafat, and Suha Arafat, now of Paris and the stores of the Faubourg St.-Honore, and Mahmoud Abbas, and all the other Slow Jihadists who want that Infidel money to keep on coming.

And nowhere has the waste been greater, nowhere has the American money been thrown up in the air like confetti, than in Iraq. There it has been spent to buy the hearts and minds of so many Iraqis -- those "contractors" who never performed, or performed shoddily, but always decamped with incredible sums. Just ask the American soldiers who saw this happen, or who, because they were low down on the totem pole, were forced to endure the spectacle without protesting. It has been spent also on those supposedly true-blue, you-can-really-count-on-them gunga-dinnish "Iraqi" officials and officers, who have been happy to smile at the Americans, happy to give them intense, liquid-brown-eyed looks of intense sincerity, who made up names -- hell, how would the Americans ever be able to tell one Arab name from another, how would the Americans be able to tell anything about a place like Iraq, where "war is deception," and so, come to think of it, is peace?

Dead Souls. American taxpayers are in Iraq so many chichikovs, paying for those dead souls, and a whole lot more. But in the case of Gogol's book, Chichikov is the one who is doing the fooling. In the case of Iraq, it is we who are being fooled, by all sides in Iraq -- the Sunnis (three or four different factions), and the Shi'a (four or five different factions), and even by the Kurds (two factions).

Victory, or more exactly, a satisfactory return on the investment already made, can be achieved, but only if and when Americans decide to leave Iraq. Such a version of victory can be achieved, in a way that only seems paradoxical, if American forces leave Iraq. The American presence holds sectarian strife down, strife that need not be encouraged but should not be suppressed through American efforts. Instead of compromise and sweet reason, those raised up in Islam, in societies suffused with Islam, will naturally show a readiness to resort to violence, and an unwillingness to make real, as opposed to feigned, compromises. Mutual hostility and aggression naturally arises from those raised in societies, and a view of outcomes that is limited to victors and to vanquished. That is where another work of Russian literature comes in: “War and Peace.” For in “War and Peace,” wily General Kutuzov helps bring about the destruction of Napoleon’s Grande Armee during the late fall and early winter of 1812, not by engaging his troops in major combat, but by refusing to do so, by falling back, by even abandoning Moscow, and then setting fire to Moscow, so that the natural forces, the forces of “General Winter” that Napoleon could not possibly defeat, could help to rout the French troops and the Prussian troops. They were insufficiently prepared to survive a Russian winter and discovered that Moscow was not a refuge, but an empty, fire-ravaged place.

And it is exactly the same strategy -- exploiting the sectarian and ethnic hostilities that are as unavoidable, as “natural” as the severe Russian winter that helped defeat Napoleon, and of which our generals, and civilian leaders, ought to be taking full advantage. What the Americans are doing now in Iraq is exactly the opposite, for they are attempting to dampen all signs of sectarian and ethnic strife. They are behaving in a way that is akin to a counterfactual situation, in which General Kutuzov, back in 1812, instead of falling back from Moscow, had stayed to hand out fur coats and Russian caps to the invading soldiers of the Grande Armee.

Who would have thought that Russian literature would be of such help in elucidating the problems of Tarbaby Iraq? We began with the relevance of Gogol’s “Dead Souls” to the phantom soldiers being paid real salaries by the Americans, and ended with Kutuzov in the “war” chapters of Tolstoy’s “War and Peace.” Perhaps there is something else to be found, say, in Pushkin, to explain the failures of policy. Yes, I’ve thought of it just now, but it is not nearly as famous as either “Dead Souls” or “War and Peace.” It’s a little couplet, mocking some well-known officious highranking fool, a certain Prince Dunduk, who is described as being admitted to the “Akademiya Nauk” (Academy of Sciences). Unfortunately, the couplet loses a lot in translation. But you get Pushkin’s point and, I hope, mine.

Posted on 06/15/2007 6:43 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Friday, 15 June 2007

“President Abbas has exercised his lawful authority as the president of the Palestinian Authority, as the leader of the Palestinian people,” Ms. Rice said. “We fully support him and his decision to try and end this crisis of the Palestinian people and to give them an opportunity for — to return to peace and a better future.” --Condoleeza Rice

Today Gaza, tomorrow the whole Dar al-Islam.

That is what the Truest of True Believers, those of Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Jund al-Sham, Fatah al-Islam, FIS, Jemaa Islamiyaa, Sipaha-e-Sahaba, and a thousand groups, and ten thousand groupuscules, and tens or possibly hundreds of millions of believers all say, and work for.

And so, for entirely different reasons, do we Infidels say the same thing but with a slight addition:

Today Gaza, tomorrow Iraq, the day after tomorrow the whole of Dar al-Islam. Riven by internecine warfare that will only divide and demoralize Islam.

Whoever wishes to see Fast Jihadists fighting Slow Jihadists, or Sunnis against Shia, or Arabs against non-Arab Muslims, or oil-rich Arabs and Muslims against poor Arabs and Muslims who now demand that the manna from Allah be shared equitably, should look today at Gaza. Is the display of mutual venom and aggression between Slow Jihadists and Fast Jihadists instructive for Infidels, and terribly worrisome to the propagandists and apologists for the "Palestinian" cause, or isn't it?

It is.

Learn from Gaza. The right lessons.

Posted on 06/15/2007 6:36 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Friday, 15 June 2007

Nazi and war-criminal, given a special award for his participation in "Operation Kozara." Present at the roundup of the Jews of Salonika in the center of town, surrounded by jeering Germans (and their wives too, who took delight in the spectacle) before being sent off to certain death.

Somehow Kurt Waldheim crawled his way to the top of the Austrian heap -- his resistible but unresisted rise clear  testimony to the truths that prompted the  writer Thomas Bernhard's famous disgust for his native land and many of its citizens (as much up to their neck in Jewish blood as the Germans were, but pretending to be "Hitler's first victims"). And as a slick and greedy diplomat he rose high, high enough to become, appallingly, the appalling Secretary-General of the U.N., where he helped to oversee its transformation, with its growing subservience to the Islamintern International, into the world's preeminent center of antisemitism and anti-Americanism, and utterly useless for helping to solve real problems, beginnig with the revival of the Jihad, and ending with the destruction, which should have started to alarm people decades ago, of the environment.

Posted on 06/15/2007 6:07 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Friday, 15 June 2007

During my retreat from the urban and suburban, from computer and telephone, from enthusiasms and toward the abiding, I had the pleasure of reading Vigen Guroian's The Fragrance of God, a collection of essays chronicling an earthman's lifelong love of gardening.  An excerpt:

I learned my ecology in wood and vegetable patch. But I am as uncomfortable with the deep ecology people who want to persuade me that I am an interloper in "Nature" as with the other folk who look upon "mere nature" as raw resource for raising the GDP. The way I understand the biblical story, God drew Adam from out of the earth. And Adam "grew" in the Garden together with flowers and trees of all kinds. We humans belonged to nature right from the start. We are not interlopers, and insofar as we are exiles from Paradise, we are obliged to heal our broken relationships not only with one and another and with God but also with the rest of Creation. God wants us to cultivate this world and offer it up as a gift of our thanksgiving that he may bless in the consummate crowning season:

I will make them and the region around my hill a blessing: and I will send down the showers in their season; they shall be showers of blessing. The trees of the field shall yield their fruit, and the earth shall yield its increase. They shall be secure on their soil; and they shall know that I am the LORD.

Ezekiel 34:26-27, NRSV

One thinks of Israel, modern Israel, and its vast "gardens," farms conventional and hydroponic which stop precisely where the Muslim world, its lonely deserts inside and out, begins. If Adam took a piece of Paradise with him in his exile, did Muhammad in his? The evidence says no.


Abandoned Lighthouse, 2007 by Robert Bove
Morris Is. lighthouse, Charleston, S.C.

Posted on 06/15/2007 5:27 AM by Robert Bove

Thursday, 14 June 2007

Don't worry. Rashid Khalidi, Rami Khouri, Fawaz Gerges -- it is so hard to tell their voices and propaganda lines apart -- will be on NPR any minute now, explaining not only why the whole mess in Gaza is "America's" and "especially Israel's fault" but will also helpfully provide the specific causes.

Now you may choose one or more of those Causes they will adduce:

1) the withholding of "Palestinian" tax revenues by Israel
2) the "boycotting" of the "Palestinians" by the temporary halt in the disguised Jizyah of foreign aid by America and other Infidel countries
3) the failure to supply Fatah with every conceivable kind of advanced weaponry, including tanks and helicopters and a state-of-the-art air force would, come to think of it, come in handy as well
4) the failure to remain completely convinced that the "Palestinian" struggle really is, as such propagandists as Kouri and Khalidi and Gerges like to repeat, COMPLETELY "nationalist" and has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with Islam or Al Qaeda, which is a far-away group, somewhere in Afghanistan, of radical extremist hijacking-a-great-religion extremist radical Islamist extremists, who also happen to be radicals

And now choose one or more of the proffered "solutions":

1) Now, more than ever, the Americans must seek a new policy and direction in the Middle East, one which puts much more pressure on Israel for if Israel is not pressured, than Al Qaeda will manage to take over everything even though it only represents a tiny handful of extremist radical hijackers-of-a-great-religion

2) Now, more than ever, the Americans and Israel -- for its own good -- must create a "Palestinian" state on the West Bank, and load it up with so much advanced weaponry that nice Fatah, good Fatah, well-meaning Fatah, "moderate" Fatah, will never have to worry about Hamas, or bad old Al Qaeda, again -- and once again the "Palestinians" will return to being, like all the other Arabs and Muslims, those innately friendly and trustworthy friends of the United States, those allies and even staunch allies, that they always were, and would be still, just as soon as the pesky problem of Israel is solved. Israel, after all, should mean nothing to the West.  After all, haven't the Arabs and Muslims always scrupulously observed the rights, protected the rights, of Christians all over the lands where Muslim Arabs dominate? Why should Christians worry about Muslim control of the Holy Land?

So that's the lesson to be drawn from the fight between the Slow Jihadists and the Fast Jihadists. Pile the money and weaponry high on the Slow Jihadists. You can work with them. As for Israel, it now has an even greater moral duty than ever before to help create that "Palestinian" state that is, as we all know, for otherwise it would not be referred to as such, the "solution."

Posted on 06/14/2007 4:50 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Thursday, 14 June 2007

From Westport News with thanks to Jerry Gordon:

In her [Greens Farms Academy] valedictorian speech, Georgetown-bound Alexis Herman from Westport reflected on discovering one's own identity by exposing oneself to new and different cultures. Herman stressed that this exposure is very important, "Learning about the world without experiencing it is incomplete," she said. "It is crucial to continually seek out what is foreign and different."

Herman described her experiences travelling to different parts of the world such as Jordan, Egypt and Biloxi, Miss. During her time in Jordan, Herman recalled an incident with a Jordanian schoolgirl who slapped Herman for wearing shorts, something indecent for a female to do in their culture. Herman was left stunned, yet tolerant and understanding that it was a "clash between two cultures, rather than one between myself and another girl," she said...

I'm clashing myself. Biloxi, Mississippi included in her list of "different parts of the world" along with Egypt and Jordan? There are more black people down here in the south, that's true. And we do speak a bit differently, that's also true, but to be lumped in with the Middle East? Oh, that's right, this girl is going to Georgetown, no wonder.

Posted on 06/14/2007 4:10 PM by Rebecca Bynum

Thursday, 14 June 2007
Posted on 06/14/2007 3:54 PM by Rebecca Bynum

Thursday, 14 June 2007

Abbas to Dissolve Palestinian Authority Government in Wake of Hamas-Fatah War

Meanwhile Rashid Khalidi, long-time propagandist for the Arabs and quasi-academic engaged for decades in the "construction-of-the-Palestinian-identity" project, on NPR blames America, blames Israel, and while for years he has been denouncing the horrible, monstrous, completely intolerable "Israeli occupation," now insists that the Israelis, as the "occupiers" (Israel gave up all of the Arab areas of Gaza in 1994, and it ever since has been under Arab, "Palestinian" control, and the Jewish villages that were voluntarily relinquished have not been part of that imaginary "Israeli occupation" for several years), should come back in and "assume their responsibilities."

In other words, Rashid Khalidi, like the Arabs ("Palestinians") in Gaza, wants Israel back, to establish security, and a modicum of decency --indeed, insists that Israel has a "duty" to do so, when for the past few decades the same Rashid Khalidi, and the same local Arabs ("Palestinians") wanted Israel out.

Please. Try to ignore logic. Try to ignore common sense. Try to forget all you know about this conflict, all you know about the history of the Middle East, all you know about the history of Islam, the tenets of Islam.

Stick with Rashid Khalidi, and try to believe -- he wants you to believe -- Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast.

It's not much to ask, is it? And besides, he's the "Director" of the "Middle East Institute" at Columbia University. He wouldn't try to fool you, would he?

Posted on 06/14/2007 2:49 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald

Thursday, 14 June 2007

"[L]and records unearthed by Paul Sperry, author of "Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington," show that exactly one year after 9/11 — as its dues were drying up — CAIR signed over the deed to its Washington headquarters to a United Arab Emirates-based foundation headed by the ruler of Dubai.

Sheikh Mohammed Al-Maktoum's foundation put up almost $1 million for the property, and recently pledged $50 million more to help CAIR build larger headquarters, replenish its legal war chest and fund a nationwide pro-Islam propaganda campaign."
-- from this piece in Investor's Business Daily 

Mohammed Al-Maktoum, of the Al-Maktoums who rule Dubai, with its luxury skyscrapers funded in large part by tens or hundreds of billions of dollars in Iranian money? The same Dubai to which George Bush and so many of the Great and Good, in both parties, wanted to entrust responsibility for the security of our ports? The same Dubai that thinks it can attract Westerners (and even the rich from the former Soviet 'stans')? That Dubai?

Well, the Al-Maktoum family has a little bit of explaining to do. Why does it routinely threaten with lawsuits those who criticize members of the ruling family? (See the case of Rachel Ehrenfeld, who dared to write about one member of the Al-Maktoums). And what about the little business of horse-racing and the treatment of jockeys and trainers? People in the Blue Grass country want to know if it is true that the Al-Maktoum care more for their horses then they do for their human employees?

What if it becomes clear that in the confrontation with Iran the Iranian-owned buildings in Dubai become, quite properly, targets of Infidel bombs? Would that prospect cut down on the attractiveness of the market for apartments in Dubai, and hence into the undeserved colossal wealth of the Al-Maktoum family?

And if you were a True Believer in Islam, what more obvious target for the takfiris than the luxury and implied decadence of those skyscrapers and even a Western rock-star or two -- would not Dubai be high on your Things-to-Do List of places to attack?

Of course it would.

I wouldn't be buying an apartment in Dubai, I wouldn't be making any investments in Dubai, I'd be getting just as far from Dubai as I could, for at least the next, oh, fifty years. There is trouble coming. And whether from Infidels intent on undercutting and pressuring Iran through the infliction of economic damage, or from True Believers intent on driving the "false" Muslims (see how Hamas characterizes the Slow Jihadists of Fatah, see how Al Qaeda in Iraq describes the Shi'a) out of the region.

The Al-Maktoum may think they are riding high, high on their racehorses, and high as those skyscrapers being erected all over the place. But they are headed for a giant fall. And while the characteristic Al-Maktoum method is to threaten with a law suit to silence all of its critics, those who have money don't need to listen to the moral criticism of the place, but only to their own common sense.

What was said about Saudi Arabia applies to all the rich Arab sheiklets:

"Money can buy everything, except civilization."

And the Saudis and the Kuwaitis and the Emiratians should be exposed, every step of the way, and stopped where possible, for the money they are spending on CAIR, like the money they spend on campaigns of Da'wa (Hizb ut Tahrir, Tablighi Jamaat), or on mosques and madrasas, or on direct and indirect financial support to the likes of Eugene Bird (a former American consular official), James Akins (a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia), John Esposito (a present-day entrepreneur working in the vineyards of "Muslim-Christian Understanding" which is to say, working as an apologist for Islam), Raymond Close (a former CIA station chief in Riyadh, who took "early retirement" in 1977 to go into business with two well-connected Saudis, and from then, through his BCCI dealings and similar louche activities, has never looked back). There's a hundred articles, and two dozen books, and the material for several independent Congressional investigations, in the story of this money pouring in to further Islam and the cause of Islam -- in other words, about where that money goes, and what it buys, to further the Jihad which is the central duty, of Muslims, to "struggle" to tear down all obstacles to the spread of Islam until Islam everywhere dominates, and Muslims rule, everywhere.

The article about CAIR above contains in its title the word "Paymasters." The article asks the question: Who are the paymasters of CAIR? And now we know.

But we also need to know who are the paymasters of all kinds of groups and people. One would like to know, for example, just what Arab money is received by Eugene Bird and his absurdly-named Arab front-group, "Council for the National Interest. " Who's paying Eugene Bird, and who is paying for those full-page ads, that must cost $100,000 a shot, in The Sunday Times? You might say -- oh, it's just true-blue American patriots, you know, like Eugene Bird himself, or the founder of the group, Paul Findely, whose remarks on the wonderfulness of Islam and the Arabs, and the horribleness of Israel, were last on public display, in an article he published, just a little inappositely, in September 2001.

Let's have Congress look into the "Council for the National Interest." Let's start with Bird, and proceed from there. And there is a reason why we must do so. Since 1973, the Arabs and Muslims have taken in some ten trillion dollars from oil and gas sales. They did nothing to deserve that money, no real work, no entrepreneurish, nothing. It is all the result of an accident of geology. And while we may regret it morally, we must do everything to diminish the size of those revenues, which supply the world-wide Jihad with its critical Money Weapon. There are ways to do this, ways to diminish the revenues, or to force those revenues to be spent in other ways. One could, it has been repeatedly suggested at this website, end the disguised Jizyah of foreign aid by Infidel taxpayers, paid through their governments to Muslim states and groups, and instead repeatedly raise the issue of why the Saudis and Kuwaitis and assorted rulers of the Emirates have not shared Allah's munificence with their fellow, not-quite-as-lucky members of the Umma al-Islamiyaa,

But another part of this is to expose, expose to public view, expose to ridicule, expose to the full force of whatever laws can be passed to prevent giving aid and comfort to the world-wide Jihad (there are ways to draft such legislation so that it will pass constitutional muster), all the Western hirelings of these Arab and Muslim paymasters.

It takes two to tango. There are the paymasters. And there are the hirelings. Both need to be exposed.

Posted on 06/14/2007 2:35 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald


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    

Subscribe
Via: email  RSS