Fitna: Geert Wilders Qur'an phobia

Geert Wilders anti-Islam video, Fitna, hit the web yesterday. It was a rocky debut.

Wilders has been hit with copyright infringement claims. The Danish cartoonist, Kurt Westergaard, responsible for the drawing of Mohammad with a bomb in his turban complained on Dutch TV that Wilders used his work without permission. He's going to sue for copyright infringement.

Dutch director, Rob Muntz, was caught off-guard by the clip showing him interviewing the late Theo van Gogh. Muntz is seeking legal advise. In yet another faux pas, Wilders mistakenly showed a picture of Dutch-Moroccan rapper, Salah-Edin, rather than the Van Gogh murderer, Mohammed Bouyeri. Edin will also be suing.

Fitna is sickeningly predictable on a lot of levels. Surahs from the Qur'an are chosen for their menace as the video moves from scenes of the 9/11 terrorist attack to the carnage in Madrid. Moody music fades as the the lilting call of an imam announces the destruction of the infidel. Ranting Muslims, raving imams, threatening displays , dead bodies, Nazi salutes - a tableaux of fear and loathing. A Muslim child refers to Jews as "monkeys and pigs." The video is a clever exercise in demonization. Goebbels would have been impressed.

Ali Eteraz has an ironic comment on the use of Tchaikovsky's "Arab Dance" for the soundtrack.

Fitna reflects the paranoid vision of a politician who has had some highly incendiary things to say about Islam. Wilders has stated that he wants to ban the Qur'an because he believes it reflects - "the sick ideology of Allah and Mohammed as it is set out in the Islamic Mein Kampf: the Koran."

Many so-called "holy books" contain objectionable content. The Bible celebrates acts of genocide carried out by the "chosen people". The latter-day "chosen people" in the guise of Zionism pose as big a menace to world peace as any Islamist resistance you care to name and unlike Iran, Israel has nukes - it's not a matter of conjecture. Zionism and its policies in the Middle East have arguably been one of the the driving forces behind the extremism that stalks the modern world.

I believe in freedom of speech, so let Wilders video have its day. Who knows, maybe Macleans magazine here in Canada will offer him a publishing opportunity. The man is a wily politician, but he is also an idiot ... a useful idiot, because there is much to be learned from this. You only have to read his "analysis" of Islam to understand the depths of his ignorance. He refers to Islam as "the ideology of a retarded culture." He wants the Judeao-Christian heritage recognized as the dominant religious culture, or Leitkultur, in the Netherlands.

Like most religions, Islam has its fundamentalist wing. Sharia has a draconian side. The persecution of homosexuals and dissidents in Iran, the floggings of women in Saudi Arabia - such reports are well known. Just recently I posted on my blog in support of Mehdi Kazemi, the gay Iranian asylum seeker.

These injustices ought to be challenged by all who care about human rights. However it is wrong to demonize a religion based upon selective negative perceptions. It's a bit like saying that all southern Baptists are hate mongers and bigots because of the activities of Fred Phelps and his followers or the lunatic activities of some pro-life fanatics.

Extremism is a problem and many Muslims agree with this view. When French Muslims were polled, their two main concerns were lack of employment and Islamic extremism. However you don't challenge extremism by comparing the Qur'an with Mein Kampf and smearing an entire civilization. If a Muslim produced a video that showcased the dark side of the Bible and compared it with Mein Kampf, how would Christians react? We would never hear the end of it.

I'm all for targeting the excesses of religion - all religion. But only a jerk makes a video like this. It isn't a strike for freedom of speech. It is a strike for ignorance and fear. These images of tragedies such as 9/11, London and Madrid haunt our collective memory, but packaging them as a tool to use against Islam as a whole is a sick and twisted approach. There are many positive aspects to Islam that a balanced portrayal would include. But Wilders of course is only interested in a message that matches his contempt.

Oriana Falacci is Wilders' hero. In his writing he quotes admiringly from her book, The Force of Reason:

"A moderate Islam does not exist. It does not exist because there is no difference between Good Islam and Bad Islam. There is Islam and that it the end of it. Islam is the Koran, and nothing other than the Koran. And the Koran is the Mein Kampf of a religion that desires to eliminate others- non–Muslims - who are called infidel dogs, and inferior creatures. Read the Koran, that Mein Kampf, yet again. In whatever version and you will see that the evil which the sons of Allah against us and themselves has perpetrated comes from that book."

Wilders thinks that Dutch citizens who counsel forbearance and tolerance in their approach to Islam are cowards:

"The Hague is full of cowardly members.Fearful people who are born cowards and will die as cowards. They find and promote the idea that the Dutch culture is has its foundation in Jewish-Christian- Islamic –tradition. They award a general pardon to liars and criminals."

No the coward is Wilders. It is much, much harder to take the path of steadfast endurance in the face of a great challenge, while not being afraid to criticize as the situation demands. Europeans are engaged in a great debate, a great struggle for the future. Wilders isn't a part of it. He has sidelined himself by subjugating rationality and decency to the priorities of the bigot within.

Tags: Geert Wilders, Fitna, Qur'an, Netherlands, Mein Kampf, Islam

Wow ... genocide!

Tags: Geert Wilders, Qur'an

Hillary Clinton's big Bosnian adventure

In March 1996, Hillary Clinton made a trip to Bosnia. She claims the trip was "too dangerous" to be undertaken by the President. In a speech to supporters, she regaled them with tales of "landing under sniper fire" and running "with our heads down."

This is little more than fiction, and calls into question Clinton's judgment - especially given the fact that there are eye witnesses who have stepped forward to tell it like it was.

The comedian Sinbad accompanied Clinton on the trip. He claims the scariest part was deciding where to eat. Responding to Sinbad's remarks, Clinton dismissed him archly as "a comedian".

However there are others with clear recall who aren't comedians. A reporter who visited Bosnia after the 1995 Dayton peace agreement, made clear that Tuzla was a heavily fortified US air base. Prior to Hillary's arrival, Bill Clinton paid a visit to Tuzla on January 13, 1996.

The Washington Post's, John Pomfret, covered the trip and he is adamant that Tuzla airport is one of the safest places in Bosnia, "under the control" of the 1st Armored Division.

Hillary neither ran nor ducked, not even to avoid a rain shower. In fact, she had enough time on her hands to meet on the tarmac with US and Bosnian officials. An 8 year old Muslim girl, Emina Bicakcic, even read a poem in English for the first lady, and received a kiss in appreciation.

Emina told Clinton - "There is peace now because Mr Clinton signed it. All this peace. I love it."

Now mysteriously, Emina's name has been redacted from the first lady's schedule, released recently from the National Archives.

Faced with the evidence, Clinton has been forced to backtrack. She has been attempting to downplay her remarks by claiming that she misspoke - something she characterizes as "a minor blip."

Not everyone is buying her explanation. Tommy Vietor, an Obama spokesperson didn't pull any punches:

“When you make a false claim that’s in your prepared remarks, it’s not misspeaking, it’s misleading ... It’s part of a troubling pattern of Senator Clinton inflating her foreign policy experience."

Tags: Hillary Clinton, Bosnia, Sinbad, Tuzla, Emina Bicakcic, Tommy Vietor, Obama campaign

Christopher Hitchens' identity crisis

Recent online discussions about Obama and the race factor, prompted me to revisit a Hitchens column ,"identity crisis", that appeared in Slate in January.

Hitchens' objections to placing "emphasis on shade" makes it ironic that he sort of does. In a reference to Obama he says - "And why is a man with a white mother considered to be "black," anyway?"

That's hardly the point. The point is that Obama has chosen to articulate himself as African-American. Nor incidentally is Obama's African-American identity easily pigeonholed, despite Hitchens' best efforts with Trinity United - "a sub-standard and shade oriented place."

Then we we get this:

"Last week happened to be the week that the nation of Kenya—birthplace of Obama's father—was convulsed by a political war that contained ghastly overtones of violent and sadistic tribalism. It would sound as absurd to a Kenyan to hear praise for a black candidate as it would sound to most of my European readers to hear a recommendation of a "great white hope." A white visitor to Kenya might not be able to tell a Kikuyu from a Luo at a glance, but a Kenyan would have no such difficulty."

The odd thing about Hitchens is that despite his protestations against racism and the excesses of colonialism, he uses language that a colonial governor would be entirely comfortable with. Some readers pass this off as a product of his English background. I recall reading his Vanity Fair editorial on the the Uganda genocide and I thought he came off at times like a slightly demented polemicist who ought to have been cast in Raiders of the Lost Ark. Daniella Boston's review refers to Hitchens' "colonial romanticism":

"Hitchens's Vanity Fair editorial -- an "African nightmare" set among "bronze Nubian Nephertiti" beauties and crazed self-professed prophets -- reeks of a colonial romanticism almost akin to the racism found in Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness. Contrary to what Hitchens might have us believe, the tragedy unfolding in Uganda is not some fantastical, antediluvian myth set in his self-concocted 'Dark Continent.' "

Hitchens would have been right at home knocking 'em back in a European club in Nairobi back in the day, pith helmet by his elbow. I can hear him holding forth about the horrors of racism even as a small Kikuyu boy earning slave wages fills up his glass. The transition from rabble rousing Trotskyist to neo-con apologist isn't as mysterious as some might think. On some level Hitch feels at home in an old boys club where his talents are indulged, if not always applauded. He enjoys that type of approbation. Call it an English thing.

It's hard to entirely buy Hitchens pitch on race, as it is to buy his pitch on religion. He claimed the Democrats were 'really' the religious ones, while he was in bed with the representatives of the religious right. His talents as a polemecist don't always succeed in distracting readers from the unsettling contradictions that have come to define him, but that he appears to be blithely unaware of for the most part.

In "identity crisis" he says this of Obama:

"The more that people claim Obama's mere identity to be a "breakthrough," the more they demonstrate that they have failed to emancipate themselves from the original categories of identity that acted as a fetter upon clear thought."

Obama's "identity" isn't soley contingent on race. He doesn't identify with his blackness in a sort of post-60's "us-against-the- oppressor" fashion. While embracing the historical black American struggle for freedom and rights, Obama brings a vision that into play that is inclusive - despite Hitchens' obvious skepticism on the "uniter" claim. In many ways Obama has succeeded in transcending "categories of identity" that have defined others. That's part of the magic that has led to his broad based appeal.

Other image related perceptions that have little to do with race also inform Obama's identity. He gets teased by detractors who think he has a fem side. He is far from your typical armored politico. People have referred to his empathy and grace. These perceptions also figure into Obama's identity and appeal - offering a welcome relief from the macho man persona of the current cowboy-in-a-suit.

Hitchens is being a bit myopic in his handling of this question. I suppose you could ponder why he sees it the way he does, but then we'd end up talking more about Hitchens than Obama.

Tags: Christopher Hitchens, Barack Obama, Slate, identity crisis, Kenya, Trinity United

John McCain's "senior moment" insights

When John McCain opens his mouth about Iraq, he keeps parroting Bush administration talking points.

Given his recent Al Qaeda gaffes, McCain doesn't inspire confidence. When he talks you would think he was referring to some war movie with a divinely sanctioned plot that guarantees America always wins in the end. In the meantime his attitude seems to be that poorly understood details will kinda ... sort themselves out.

He keeps bleating "we're succeeding in Iraq", even though the reality in Iraq doesn't exactly endorse his optimism. In the face of criticism, he added recently "We're succeeding. I don't care what anyone says."

The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace released a sombre report on Iraq that offers much needed realism:

"Despite the presence of over 160,000 U.S. troops in Iraq at the end of 2007 and an improvement in the security situation, Iraq remains an unstable, violent, and deeply divided country, indeed a failed state ... The balance of power between Iran and Iraq has been broken, increasing the influence of Tehran in the Gulf and beyond ."

American deaths in Iraq have hit 4,000 and counting. Iran has acquired a lot more influence in Iraq and throughout the region thanks to Bush. The President displayed breathtaking ignorance of fundamental realities in Iraq. The Bush administration helped to birth a Shia dominated government, thus stage managing closer ties between Baghdad and Tehran, which isn't exactly a part of the Bush vision.

The Carnegie report has this to say of the emerging Iran/Iraq relationship:

"Today Iran and Iraq are more intricately linked than they were in 2002. Iraq's problems, and possible solutions, are so closely intertwined with Iran that it is no longer possible to discuss solutions for Iraq without taking into consideration what Iran will do."

McCain is as inclined as Bush to offer up ill-considered remarks. When he was in Jordan recently, he said that Al Qaeda insurgents were being trained in Syria. After making this error, McCain then dug himself in deeper:

"(It's) common knowledge and has been reported in the media that al-Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran, that's well known."

McCain corrected himself after Joe Lieberman, who was traveling with him whispered in his ear. The Republican candidate running on foreign policy experience apparently failed to grasp that Shia Iran is less than likely to be promoting the interests of Sunni Al Qaeda.

Brit Hume of Fox news called McCain's gaffe a "senior moment". Is a candidate given to bizarre misstatement of the "senior moment" variety someone Americans want to trust with the Presidency?

Tags: John McCain, Al Qaeda gaffe, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, MSM, Brit Hume

I don't care what anyone says

"Cool Islam" and Hadith revisions

Medine is a Muslim rapper from Le Havre. At one time he wasn't such a cool dude. When he was younger he was on-the-fringes of a French society that he viewed as decadent. Not any more. Now Medine is finding a new way to dialogue, a new way to do business.

Medine wants to take advantage of a free economy and liberal democracy to promote his talent and his message. But he hasn't sold out his Muslim heritage. He prays at the required times. He is devout. These days he is more interested in discovering common ground. He speaks of universal principles, rather than dogma. He's about reaching out.

In France young Muslim women are stepping out in new ways also. A BBC article gives us a glimpse into the life of Zahya, as she shops in the area of the Gare du Nord in Paris. She's shopping for a traditional western-style white wedding dress. An imam will preside over the ceremony, but the rest of the wedding will be as western as her life in France.

As Zayha puts it when speaking of her leisure activities - "We go to the cinema, we go to night clubs, we party ... We do the things everyone else does - and more and more openly. Now in the year 2008, we live according to the moment."

There is a new Muslim elite in France that is both competitive and successful. Unlike times past, this isn't happening in the wings, as some marginal example of immigrant success.

Amel Boubekeur, of the School of Social Studies in Paris, has named the new movement "cool Islam." An article she wrote titled "Cool and Competitive" begins:

"In contrast to the austerity of traditional Islamists who recommend asceticism and marginality vis-a-vis western culture as a pure form of commitment, a new Muslim elite is arising bringing with them a new urban Muslim culture from within the Occident."

In speaking of new definitions that are emerging with respect to Islam in the west, Ms Boubekeur makes the following insightful comment:

"...it thus seems that the Islamic identity need no longer be represented as political, ideological and institutional, but as the choice of the individual consumer. Western Islamic identity appears to be departing from Islamism and to be no longer concerned with Islam's political side."

Imam, Tariq Oubrou, insists that Islam must become a Western religion, so that Muslims can thrive within European culture. This is revolutionary talk, and Oubrou is pointed about what needs to happen:

"We can't afford to read our texts to the letter in a static way. We have to take a fresh approach, and ask how the Koran would have revealed itself in this time and place, in this culture - and then apply this new model to our everyday lives."

The imam accepts that this will entail taking a second hard look at Islamic texts, including the Qur'an, and interpreting them in a manner that fits the needs of the modern era.

This reformist impulse isn't exclusive to progressive European imams such as Tariq Oubrou. Turkey has applied for membership in the EU. Steps are being taken to revise the Hadith in the light of contemporary needs . What is being attempted has been described by some observers as the creation of a "new" Islam, designed to accommodate the needs of people in a modern secular democracy. According to Fadi Hakura, a Turkey expert from Chatham House in the UK, the transformation of Islam being undertaken in Turkey is akin in significance to the Christian Reformation.

Some Turkish Muslims have a problem with the word "reform" in describing these changes, because it could imply that there is some problem with Islam's divine sources. So it may be most accurate to say that this is an attempt to make a clear distinction between what is "historical" in the Hadith, and what is "religious." The Turkish writer and columnist, Mustafa Aykol, provides insightful commentary on this and other Turkish concerns in his blog The White Path. It is well worth a visit.

Turkey's Department of Religious Affairs has commissioned a team of theologians from Ankara University, to carry out the revision. The Hadith is the second most holy book in Islam after the Qur'an. It consists of sayings that are alleged to have come from the Prophet.

The Turks see the Hadith as problematic, and claim that many of the statements attributed to Muhammad, didn't in fact come from him at all. Over the centuries the Hadith has been "worked over" by those in the service of conservative Islamic regimes. Hadiths can be found that justify female genital mutilation. At other times hadiths that advocate violence have been preferred over those those that advocate peace.

The Hadith has been used to justify placing constraints on women. There are warnings that women should not be allowed to travel for three days or more without their husbands permission. However this was not a religious prohibition, it related to safety concerns that existed during the time of the Prophet. Over time this ban has been made permanent and has been given religious sanction in some cases, whereas it was a ban that was only meant to be temporary. The Prophet himself is on record saying that "he longed for the day when a woman might travel long distances alone."

A new role is being created for women in Turkey. Theological training is being given to some 450 women, who will take up the position of senior imams or "vaizes". In this capacity they will travel to the more remote communities in the country in order to explain some of the new provisions.

These developments in Turkey reflect a wider concern on the part of many European Muslims that their religion finds a place in western society - 'within' the society, rather than in- opposition-to-it.

The media tends to project a view of European Muslims that focuses upon the negatives - terrorism, alienation, unemployment, crime. When you look more deeply, you find that Muslim communities in Europe are far from static and reactionary in relation to the secular culture that surrounds them. Powerful cultural, political and religious changes are underway. These changes aren't always apparent to outsiders, especially those with preconceptions. Most importantly, these changes in many instances embrace liberal democracy and the free market.

Tags: Islam, European Muslims, Medine, Amel Boubekeur, Tariq Oubrou, Turkey, Hadith revisions, Mustafa Aykol, Prophet Muhammad

The tomb of St Peter: new documentary challenges Catholic tradition

A new documentary, "The Secret of the Twelve Disciples", manages to put a dint in one of the pillars of the Roman Catholic tradition. The documentary features academics who accuse the Church of fabricating its connection with the apostle Peter, in order to create the impression of an unbroken link to Christ.

The Roman Catholic version of events, has St Peter ending up in Rome, where he was allegedly crucified and buried. The documentary describes this belief as "a conspiracy of faith".

There is no scientific basis whatever for the claim that the apostle made it to Rome, and even less proof that he was crucified and buried there. The Catholic Church expects its adherents to go along with this version of events based upon received knowledge, what some Catholic theologians refer to as the "great weight" of tradition.

The Catholic claims become even more suspect when you consider that in 1939, the Vatican stage managed what can only be described an archaeological circus. Pius Xll ordered that an excavation be undertaken by the archaeologist, Antonio Ferrua. However the work was supervised by an associate of the Pope, Monsignor Ludwig Kaas and the workforce used for the dig was none other than the sampietrini, Vatican City workmen.

The eventual report turned out to be be a source of controversy. Worst of all there was no trace of St Peter. Pius Xll then enlisted the services of Margherita Guarducci, a staunch Catholic and classical epi-graphist.

Remarkably Ms Guarducci discovered archaeological wonders that had somehow escaped the attention of Antonio Ferrua. In the jumble of graffiti on Peter's alleged tomb she divined no less than "a mystic cryptography". She even came up with the bones of the apostle, and after some scientific tests (which she arranged), concluded that the bones had been wrapped in cloth of royal purple stitched with gold.

Not surprisingly, Guarducci's findings were greeted with harsh criticism from the scholarly community, if not outright hoots of derision.

The research discussed in the documentary, makes it more probable that St Peter died in Jerusalem. An ossuary has been discovered bearing the inscription Shimon Bar Jonah, the Hebrew name for Peter. Catholic theologians are incensed by this claim. John Medlin of the Latin Mass Society, refers to it as "intellectually challenged". Others have described it as "outlandish" and a "smear".

Maybe there is good reason they are overreacting. The Church has long been in the business of revisionism in order to bring the Christian revelation and message in line with Catholic priorities. However the scientific community today is less intimidated by the authority of the Church, and old claims are coming under new scrutiny.

Tags: tomb of St Peter, Roman Catholic Church, The Secret of the Twelve Disciples, Antonio Ferrua, Margherita Guarducci, Rome

Apostolic succession

Tags: apostolic succession, Pope Benedict, St Peter

Stuff White People Like

Stuff White People Like is a newish blog that has been drawing a huge amount of traffic and comments. It's run by Christian Lander, who is himself a white guy ... a white guy from Toronto even. He moved to LA 2 1/2 years ago. When he started SWPL he was pulling in about 200 hits a day, but the hit count has since sky rocketed to 300,000 daily.

A post on Asian girls ranks in his top 11 posts. The reasons white guys like Asians according to Lander, is partly because of guilt about WW2 internment camps and the Vietnam war. As far as looks are concerned, Landers thinks Asian women appear more desirable because white women are jealous of them. He offers the following evidence:

"Take for instance the fact that Asian women well into their 30s and 40s retain teen / college girl looks without the help of botox, yoga or a trendy diet (future posts). Asian women also avoid key white women characteristics such as having a mid life crisis, divorce, and hobbies that don’t involve taking care of the children (also future posts)."

I can understand why Asian women might find these generalizations annoying. They must get fed up hearing how nice and obliging they are, especially when it's yet another white guy who has them all figured out.

The success of Lander's humor depends to a large degree on a shared perception of white behavior. Are there really white urbanites who think and act en masse with the predictability of a flock of sheep? One enraged commentator on a comment thread at Wired took serious exception to a few of Lander's presumptions:

"It is bigotry, even without saying it for any other skin colors. It is basically blanketting BS across the entire span of caucasians. I can attest, I hate apple, don't care for silermans comedy, and only SOME of the things I like on wired. There are other commi posts that I can't comment on that piss me off, anyway, this is just blanketting statements. Also, I wouldn't go to college for anything, let alone to read books and crap. Yes, I am caucasian. But I can understand asking the question: Why do these funky people like this crap? Then you narrow it down to who likes it and why and you find out that its just a minority of people that get the most attention."

Another post, "Having Gay Friends", is also popular. Lander attempts to show up the hidden motives that come into play when straight white guys hang out with gay friends.

"When a straight person goes to a gay night club, they are reminded of how progressive and tolerant they are. If they are hit on by a member of the same sex, it provides them with a valuable story that they can use to prove to their other friends that they are more progressive and tolerant."

These games go on for sure, but what about straight white guys who are just comfortable being around gay people for no deeper reason than because they are ... comfortable. Is it always about ulterior motives and bragging rights, even for the type of white dude Lander is writing about?

Stuff White People Like is worth a visit. It reminds me a bit of Angry Asian. Part of the appeal of these blogs, is that the writers actually come right out and say what people in most cases, think-but-don't-say.

Tags: Stuff White People Like, Angry Asian, Christian Lander

Ezra Levant as freedom-of-speech champion?

Ezra Levant's griping about the evils of the Human Rights Commission, is a little rich. Levant as freedom of speech champ? Well maybe, if you have a really good sense of humor.

Conservatives who make a big deal about HRC assaults on freedom of speech are less than consistent. When they happen to be the target of speech they don't like, it's an entirely different story.

The frivolous, self-serving lawsuit isn't a hard call for the well heeled who have no problem covering the legal fees. In Conrad Black's case it was almost a reflex action. Of course they argue that well ... unlike the HRC, we're talking about a court of law, rules of evidence etc with the risk of having to cough up legal fees if you're on the losing end. This overlooks the truth that lawsuits of this type are frequently used to shut people up for self-serving reasons that require a bit of finessing by a resourceful lawyer or two in order to stand up in court.

Forget about the lawsuit end of it.The conduct of a number of conservatives online gives the lie to everything they preach when it comes to freedom of speech.

I've had a bit of experience with this myself. At one time I was further to the right with my opinion. I got on the wrong side of some people when I bailed out. The online harassment went on for years and continues. Typical stuff ... spam, bogus pages, article theft. A cartoon blog was hijacked and given the usual spam job along with links. Older posts of mine with more of a conservative slant were shoved up the Google flagpole together with entirely bogus posts in my name. Efforts to profile me online speak to the conservative need to control others' opinion, and I am by no means the only blogger who has run into this.

It never came close to throwing me off my game, but the thing is ... what does this say about the right to change your opinion, and to do so without being harassed? Well nothing, because a percentage of conservatives online engage in this type of activity without any embarrassment.

Ezra Levant is a classic example of the journalistic pharisee in action. The "freedom-of-speech champ" threatened to sue a publication called Fast Forward Weekly. It published an article titled "Lowering the Standard", when Levant's publication Western Standard ceased distribution. It's a sharp, informed article. When you read some of Levant's remarks you get the feeling he is trying to emulate his idol, Lord Coleman of Florida. This quote from a debate with BC rocker, Mathew Good, that was tacked on to the end of the article has a touch of Black's pompous condescension:

“I made the mistake of thinking that you were more than a Laurie David or Sheryl Crow — celebrities with intellectual inferiority complexes, desperate to prove to the world they were more than just pretty faces. I see that your blog is not really about ideas, or debate, but a vanity project — to show that you’re more than just someone strumming a guitar. But it’s fake: anyone who celebrates the closure of a magazine is intellectually closed. You think you’re modern and leftist, but it was the Nazis who celebrated the burning of books 70 years ago. Your cheering of our demise bears a closer resemblance to that nihilism than you know."

When the article was published in Fast Forward, Levant took exception to the contents of an accompanying letter and threatened to sue the publication for libel. The letter was from a former employee of Levant's named Merle Terlesky. Those who have read the letter agree the contents are pretty tame. You have to wonder why Levant felt so extraordinarily exercised to take action, I'm sure there is a whole other story there. But more importantly, it makes Levant's stance on freedom-of-speech issues a bit of a sham.

For Levant and his associates free speech has a localized application. It's all about them. And hey, if you can grab some headlines along the way by republishing a bunch of recycled cartoons with some publicity value, all the better.

Tags: Ezra Levant, Human Rights Commission, freedom of speech, online harassment, Fast Forward Weekly

No fascist

Bjork angers the Chinese with "Tibet! Tibet!" chant

At the close of a performance in Shanghai, Bjork performed the tune "Declare Independence". At the end of the song she began shouting "Tibet! Tibet!", an add-on that wasn't a hit with the Chinese Culture Ministry. A spokesperson said that they would take steps to ensure that Bjork doesn't repeat her one-woman demo.

"If Bjork continued to behave like that in the future, we may consider never allowing her to perform in China."

The Ministry released a statement saying Bjork had "broken Chinese law and hurt Chinese feelings".

"Declare Independence" is a song that Bjork has customized before in order to lend support to other countries' bids for independence, for example Greenland and the Faroe islands.

The Chinese were obviously asleep at the wheel because Bjork's support for Tibet isn't exactly a secret. She performed at several fundraising concerts in the US in the 1990's in support of Tibetan independence.

Most Chinese view Tibet as a part of China and can get resentful when outsiders attempt to interfere. When news of Bjork's protest got out on the Chinese internet, she didn't have many supporters, even among her fans. One said she found the performer's behavior "Disrespectful" and "very selfish."

Discussion boards were full of criticism also - "Why do western stars give a shit about Tibet. Isn't Tibet ours?! Mind your own business!"

The UK based Free Tibet Movement was thrilled by Bjork's remarks. They made a point of contrasting the singer's stand with that of British PM Gordon Brown who decided not to raise the subject of Tibet during a recent visit to Beijing.

Tags: Bjork, China, Shanghai concert, Tibet, Chinese Culture Ministry

Stephen Harper: hides behind the law on Cadman allegations

The lawsuit Harper has filed against the Liberals is just another example of conservatives attempting to use the law to shut down legitimate comment. It's the fascist reflex, which is ironical when you consider how upset they get if a Human Rights Tribunal has the nerve to put the clamps on what they regard as their freedom of speech.

The Liberal finger pointing over what Harper allegedly knew about the Chuck Cadman deal, is low key when you consider what Harper has himself aimed at opponents.

Think back a bit to the years when magazines like the Western Standard were targeting the Liberals during the adscam affair. The mud slinging and accusations flew thick and fast with Western Standard's Ezra Levant leading the charge. The magazine played up a mafia caricature, and referred to the Liberals as "the Libranos". The accusations being hurled were extremely personal and damaging. It makes the Liberal finger pointing in the Cadman affair seem almost polite. The Tories didn't pull their punches. Harper was quick to make damning accusations:

"(Liberals have) been found guilty of breaking every conceivable law in the province of Quebec with the help of organized crime. The Liberal party has no desire to change, no intention to change, and no ability to change."

Stephen Harper doesn't like criticism, even though he can dish it out. He has a smug self-righteous air about him that suggests he can do no wrong. His contention that he knew nothing about the details of the offer to Chuck Cadman prior to the 2005 parliamentary vote, simply isn't credible. I for one believe he's lying.

Harper is a controller. Those who work with him testify to this personality trait. The idea that as opposition leader on the brink of a crucial vote in the house, the outcome of which hinged on the "yes" or "no" offered up by Cadman, Harper was out-of-the-loop on the details of the deal is extremely unlikely.

He knew enough about the details to tell Vancouver journalist, Tom Zyturak, that the insurance policy "was only to replace financial considerations he might lose due to an election ... That's my understanding of what they were talking about." He also told Zytaruk that the Tories who met with Cadman were "legitimately representing the party". Remember we are talking about one of the biggest details men and control freaks to ever set foot in Ottawa - and we're supposed to believe he was walking around clueless on the small print of the Cadman deal?

Nearly a third of Canadians believe Harper is lying. The position taken by the Liberals reflects a common perception among many Canadians.

This is an abuse of the legal system, despite Harper's assurances that any award will be handed over to charity. He was elected to govern and to handle opposition attacks in the time honored fashion, not to seek shelter in the courts. What has become clear about the Harper style is that he seems more preoccupied with playing political games rather than serving the Canadian public.

Tags: Stephen Harper, Canadian government, Cadman affair, lawsuit, Liberals, Tom Zytaruk, Ezra levant, Western Standard

Leadership

Omar Khadr framed: doctored evidence revealed

Toronto native Omar Khadr was 15 years old when he was arrested at an Al Qaida camp in Afghanistan. He was just a kid - a child soldier under the control of a father-with-a-cause.

Khadr is now 21 and an inmate at the US naval base in Guantanamo Bay. The US government claims he threw a grenade during a fire fight that killed a soldier.

It now turns out that the official documents that describe the alleged grenade incident, had been doctored to suit what Khadr's lawyer calls "the reality that was most convenient to the United States government at that time.” In other words Khadr was framed.

This came to light when the documents changed hands as a result of the discovery process. In the original report dated July 20th,2002, a commander had written that the person who threw the grenade had died. A couple of months later a line was altered. The report then indicated that the grenade thrower had survived.

The judge in the case sided with the defense team and granted Khadr's lawyers access to information that the prosecution had previously refused to hand over.

Harper's lack of action in this case is hardly a surprise. If his henchmen had their way they would probably be happy to throw away the key rather than risk rubbing the Americans the wrong way. The government's non-action has been a disgrace. Canada has refused to seek extradition or repatriation despite appeals from Amnesty International.

Omar Khadr appears to be in good health. His trial is set to begin in May.

Tags: Omar Khadr, Guantanamo Bay, trial, Canada, Amnesty International, child soldier, grenade

Seyed Mehdi Kazemi: given temporary reprieve

UK Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, has granted Mehdi Kazemi a temporary reprieve from deportation.

This is great news. A lot of effort went into the fight to save Mehdi from being sent back to Iran, where he may possibly have faced a death sentence for being homosexual. Thanks to all who lent their support.

Last year a number of demonstrations were staged in Europe protesting the execution of gays in Iran. A vigil held in Cologne on the 19th July was organized by baraka and the Gay Homeland Foundation.

Mehdi, a 19 year old Iranian, was refused asylum in the Netherlands. It was feared that he would be deported upon his return to the UK. As I mentioned in an earlier post, a former partner of Mehdi's was hanged in Iran for the "crime" of being a gay man. So there were very good reasons to fear for Mehdi's safety.

All told it is estimated that Iran has executed more than 4,000 gay men and lesbians since the Ayatollahs seized power in 1979.

Chief executive of the gay rights group Stonewall, Ben Summerskill, made a public statement on the affair:

"We are obviously delighted that the Home Secretary has listened to the representations that were made in this case. There are overwhelming reasons why people should not be deported to Iran in the current circumstances, and it is important that Britain is seen as a safe haven."

Thanks also has to go MP for Southwark and Bermondsey, Simon Hughes, who has pledged his support to Mehdi.

Tags: Seyed Mehdi Kazemi, Iran, gay rights, deportation, Ben Summerskill, Jacqui Smith

Geraldine Ferraro gets it wrong on Obama

Former vice-presidential candidate and member of the Clinton finance committee, Geraldine Ferraro, puts down Barack Obama's success in the Democratic race to the fact that he is a black man:

"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color), he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

Truth is, Obama didn't exactly have an easy ride. A Kenyan father and a white American mother may make him African-American, but it also made him an outsider in the eyes of some black Americans. He received part of his education in Asia, not the good ole USA. His name might even be considered a liability when applying for a job in some parts of the country.

The success Obama has enjoyed is due to his ability to rise above the type of pettiness that makes racial characteristics a determining factor. The fact that Geraldine Ferraro played the race card in attempting to explain away his success, says more about her than it does about Obama.

Ms Ferraro appears stung by the criticism. She has been behaving in what can only be described as a childish tit-for-tat fashion, complaining that the Obama people are picking on her because she's white.

"Any time anybody does anything that in any way pulls this campaign down and says let's address reality and the problems we're facing in this world, you're accused of being racist, so you have to shut up," Ferraro said. "Racism works in two different directions. I really think they're attacking me because I'm white. How's that?"

How is making an issue out of Obama's skin color addressing "reality and the problems we're facing in this world?" Maybe I'm missing something here, but I think Geraldine Ferraro is having difficulty admitting that she screwed up. We all do from time to time. It just looks worse when instead off backing off, you dig in deeper.

Tags: Geraldine Ferraro, Barack Obama, Democratic race, racism, race baiting

Catchy new concept

Dow Marmur and Meir Hirsch: two tragedies, two Jewish opinions

It was interesting to note how the media covered the Israeli attack on Gaza, as compared to how it covered the tragic shooting of eight young students at the yeshiva in Jerusalem.

The Israeli incursion into Gaza involved ground troops, bulldozers, tanks, helicopters and F-16's. Over 120 Palestinians were killed, including women and children. How many times have we seen this before? You begin to wonder if the faceless Palestinians who are killed and injured are simply human collateral damage that the world has grown accustomed to sweeping aside in the name of support for the state of Israel. Do we even know the name of one victim? Gazans are dispensable. No names, no faces, no family history - just more unfortunate Arabs caught in the crossfire.

By contrast when a lone gunman entered the Jerusalem seminary and killed eight students, the media cast it as "the moment the peace process died," with politicians right and left full of condemnation and regret. British PM, Gordon Brown, even said it was an act that "strikes at the heart of peace". So what of the Gaza attack? It didn't?

Two Jewish voices provide starkly different analysis of the tragedies in Gaza and Jerusalem.

One of the most outspoken statements in condemnation of the Gaza operation came from the Jews of Neturei Karta. In a letter to the UN general-secretary Ban Ki-Moon, Rabbi Meir Hirsch, spoke for those Orthodox Jews who believe that Zionism is a betrayal of the Jewish faith:

"For sixty years the authorities of what is mischaracterized as the "Jewish State" have been undertaking a vicious campaign of oppression and ethnic cleansing against millions of Palestinians who currently still live in historic Palestine and who are refugees from Palestine in other countries. And they have been committing all these crimes in the name of the ancient and holy Jewish religion!"

Full text of the letter here.

Dow Marmur, rabbi emiritus at Toronto's Holy Blossom Temple, has a column in the Toronto Star on the yeshiva killings. He offers no significant comment about the Gaza operation and the loss of civilian lives - an event that very likely provoked the gunman to enter the yeshiva in Jerusalem. Instead Marmur focuses exclusively on the yeshiva tragedy as though it somehow exists in isolation, unconnected from other events.

Marmur then goes on to take the part of the moderate, referring to Arabs of East Jerusalem who are in possession of identity cards, passports and driving licenses with Israeli plates, as though this means anything at all in real terms. Any close examination of the conditions experienced by Arabs in East Jerusalem and elsewhere in Israel makes it clear that they are victims of systemic discrimination.

Marmur thinks that calls to build fences/walls around Arab neighborhoods in reaction to the yeshiva killings is a bad idea. He says this proposal isn't "moral". However his lack of comment on the real immorality (the gorilla in the room), makes his "moral" high mindedness about fences seem disingenuous. Illegal settlements, criminal "incursions" by the Israeli military, massive and widespread discrimination is the quicksand at the root of Israel's intractable and it seems, never ending problems - fences are merely a cosmetic consideration.

While the yeshiva killing was a tragedy, it wasn't a random act but rather an act linked to decades of injustice and oppression. The recent mayhem in Gaza is part of an ongoing pattern that becomes obvious when you look back over the past few decades. A welcome report by Amnesty International addresses some of the injustices that rabbi Marmur failed to address.

Tags: Israel, Gaza attack, Jerusalem yeshiva killings, Dow Marmur, Meir Hirsch, Amnesty International, Neturei Karta

Seyed Mehdi Kazemi: update

Word has just been received that Seyed Mehdi Kazemi's appeal for asylum by Dutch authorities has been turned down.

Mehdi is a 19 year old gay Iranian, who was 'outed' in Iran when a friend revealed his relationship with Mehdi to the authorities. The friend was subsequently hung on sodomy charges. Mehdi is a member of the EveryOne group. He faces a possible death sentence in Iran for being a homosexual. Until this recent decision by Dutch authorities, Mehdi was being held in the detention center at Rotterdam Airport.

Mehdi will be sent back to the United Kingdom. It is likely the Home Office will deport him to Iran. According to sharia law, homosexual relations (defined as "lavat") is a crime punishable by death.

Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson, spoke out on Mehdi's behalf:

"It seems absolutely clear that any gay or lesbian person sent back to Iran is at risk of their lives," he said. "Such returns must be stopped."

Support has also come from Jean Lambert, a Green party MEP for London. Omar Kuddus of Gay Asylum UK, described the Dutch authorities decision as "a bitter defeat" and has called for an all out effort to stop Mehdi's deportation back to Iran.

This is an urgent matter. Please relay your complaints by signing the petition for Mehdi at Gays Without Borders. You can also express your concern by emailing the British Home Office directly

If you are a British citizen you can petition your local MP directly on Mehdi's behalf. Just go to - Her Majesty's Government/Members and Staff and you will find the required information.

You can relay your concern about human rights violations in Iran directly by messaging the Iranian Ministry of Justice at either one of the following email addresses :

irjpr@iranjudiciary.com

info@dadgostary-tehran.ir

Tags: Seyed Mehdi Kazemi, gay Iranian, deportation, UK, Iran

Muslims in Europe: everyone's favorite scapegoat

The problem in Europe is not "Islamofascism" - a term Christopher Hitchens continues to use without any embarrassment. The problem is fascism. The problem in Europe is not radical hordes of Muslims threatening to take over - the problem is xenophobia, racism, marginalization and unemployment faced by Muslim men and women who far from living in expectations of "Eurabia", are more realistically living in expectation of the penal colony, a very large one with no fences in which they exist as an underclass.

A small percentage of Muslim youth is radicalized along the lines of the British tabloid stereotype. A larger number of Muslim youth is sufficiently marginalized and angry to resort to delinquent behavior, including rioting. However the vast majority of European Muslims consist of families struggling to get by in societies that stigmatize them, however subtly, and relegate them to the fringes.

When I say that fascism, not "Islamofascism", is on the rise I'm not engaging in hyperbole. This is a political reality in modern Europe. Fascists can be found in local councils and parliaments. The percentage of their vote share has been steadily increasing. In Norway for example 22%, in Switzerland 29%. They have played a role in government in both Italy and Austria.

Jean-Marie Le Pen, who pulled in a third of the French vote not so long ago calls the gas chambers "a detail of history". These reactionary elements have long been waiting in the wings hoping for much needed oxygen to bring them back to life. The oxygen fix began to happen after 9/11, with the terror scare and the polarization caused by the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. Right-wing extremists along with the scribes and advocates who are helping to facilitate their rise, are back in business.

You don't need to listen to the rhetoric of the right to realize that there is a new mood of intolerance. Recently the English novelist, Martin Amis, felt comfortable enough to say:

"Muslims are gaining on us demographically at a huge rate. A quarter of humanity now and by 2025 they'll be a third. Italy's down to 1.1 child per woman. We're just going to be outnumbered."

and this:

"There's a definite urge--don't you have it?--to say, 'the Muslim community will have to suffer until it gets its house in order.' What sort of suffering? Not letting them travel. Deportation--further down the road. Curtailing of freedoms. Strip-searching people who look like they're from the Middle East or from Pakistan.... Discriminatory stuff, until it hurts the whole community and they start getting tough with their children."

Ronan Bennet took on the Amis' comments in an article in the Guardian and he shows Amis up for the bigot he is. I've never been very keen on Martin Amis' writing. He is hugely overrated. His father Kingsley, also a reactionary bigot, was nonetheless a much better writer than his pinhead of a son. This knee-jerk commentary confirms every suspicion I've held about Amis-the-lesser. He's a small man with a large chip on his shoulder. Muslims are already suffering and they don't need little parlor fascists like Martin Amis pronouncing upon needed measures to keep them in their place.

Discrimination against Muslims is particularly bad in France where being named Ali or Mohammad could render you permanently unemployable. The Union's European Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC), released a report not so long ago. It pointed out that the chance of people with a Maghrebi name getting a job interview is five times less than people with a purely French name.

The discrimination faced by Muslims in France, especially when it comes to employment opportunities is so extreme, many of the young take work in the UK where skills and qualifications for the most part trump ethnic and or religious considerations. Right wing commentators in N. America often say European Muslims should do more to "integrate" with the host societies. How the hell do you integrate with a society that refuses to interview you for a job and views you as a potential problem or a walking time bomb? Answer - you don't even try. You get more marginalized, more angry and more defiant.

In France it isn't just a question of Muslim immigrants as a block, but of a post-colonial mentality that still clings to old perceptions. The secular organization Les Indigenes de la Republic makes a direct connection between the way France treated "natives" in its colonial lands, and the way Muslim immigrants are treated in France. The situation in France is extremely complex. What appears on the surface to be a "Muslim issue" more often relates to Algerian, Tunisian or Moroccan concerns.

In N.Ireland, the Catholic minority was ghettoized in a similar fashion. Citizens with Catholic names were often discriminated against when they went for jobs. Protestant hardliners demonized Catholics along religious lines using terms such as "papists" and "pope lovers", whereas in actual fact a percentage of Sinn Fein members back in the day tended to be more inspired by Marxist or socialist thinking than religious considerations.

We all know what happened over the decades in N.Ireland. So really it is remarkable that given the discrimination European Muslims have and are experiencing, they haven't moved in the direction of more militant action, not on behalf of jihad but in a demand for a fair shake. Frankly the forbearance and patience of European Muslims in the face of the underdog status that has been hung on them, speaks more to the civilized nature of their culture than to their alleged fanaticism.

According to a Pew Research Center survey, the principal concerns of Muslims in France, Germany and Spain are unemployment and Islamic extremism. Let me repeat ... "Islamic extremism".

Tags: Islam, Europe, new fascism, xenophobia, bigotry, Le Pen, Martin Amis, Les Indigenes de la Republic

The future is ours

Tags: Eurabia, European Muslims, unemployment

Germany : record number of right-wing attacks in 2007

The German activist group, Gesicht Zeigen! (Show your Faces), monitors attacks by right-wing thugs and neo-Nazis. The group was founded by the anti-racist campaigner, Uwe-Karsten Heye, a former spokesperson for Germany's Social Democratic-Green Coalition.

The stats kept by Gesicht Zeigen! show that some 600 people were assaulted by right-wing attackers in 2007. In the state of Brandenburg alone there were 11 attacks on businesses operated by immigrants. It is part of a right-wing strategy aimed at intimidation and the destruction of livelihoods.

Over the last two decades 130 people have been murdered by thugs from various right-wing groups. These include immigrants, asylum seekers and the homeless. The hard men of the right rarely pick fights with those who can fight back, invariably they pick on the weak, the vulnerable and those they perceive as outsiders.

Xenophobia is alive and well in Germany. Heye caused controversy in 2006 when he stated that parts of Germany were no-go areas for foreigners.

A particularly nasty assault occurred in Mugeln in August of 2007. Eight men of East Indian origin were viciously attacked by a mob at a street party, who were heard yelling "foreigners out!"

In another well publicized case in 2007, a gang of neo-Nazis in Halberstadt attacked a group of actors. The victims sustained serious injuries and a number were taken to hospital. Although the leader of the gang returned to the scene of the crime while police were questioning the victims, there was no attempt to arrest him.

In some regions of Germany the extreme right is gaining in strength. The neo-Nazi National Democratic Party (NPD) holds a number of seats in Saxony's state assembly. The NPD won over 9% of the vote in the 2004 state election.

Tags: German neo-Nazis, immigration, Germany, Gesicht Zeigen, Uwe-Karsten Heye, Saxony

Eurabia : fantasy for the paranoid

The internet is full of alarmist cries of "the Muslims are coming! ... the Muslims are coming!". According to a number of best selling alarmists who hide behind a cloak of authorial respectability, Europe is heading toward a Muslim take-over. It's not going to happen. A lot of this hype comes with a very large ulterior motive. Wealthy and influential Jews in America and Europe allied with pro-Israel organizations are not unnaturally alarmed by growing Muslim populations, and the increasing influence of Islam in Europe. Much of the scare mongering comes from this corner.

When you look at the backgrounds of the Chicken Little impersonators issuing the warnings, you will find conservative Republican connections, Zionist connections, dig further and it will become clear that many are themselves Jewish or with pro-Israel sympathies.

Although demographics can be useful, stats can also be abused to support shaky hypotheses. Often a gut level response from someone familiar with European history is a much better barometer of future trends. For some much needed realism try Ralph Peters recent column in the New York Post - it's well worth the read. Peters isn't sucked in by the fantasies being peddled by "experts", who push propaganda behind a veneer of respectable research.

Peters addresses the truth that Europe has a long and sinister history when it comes to staging genocide in order to 'cleanse' the unwanted - be they Jewish, Muslims or simply suspected witches.

The Mark Steyns of this world go on about how the Europeans are decadent, incapable of standing up for themselves any more and are in the process of keeling over to the will of Islam. Don't kid yourself. Euros may not be asserting themselves in the time honored manner at present, but that doesn't mean they have succumbed to decadent indolence.

Europeans are tough, resilient and proud - with all kinds of ethnic and class based prejudices. As Peters indicates in his article, Muslim immigrants are ghettoized and patronized. If they ever look as though they might become a serious take-over threat, you can be sure that the dark side of the European psyche will reveal itself and all bets about "never again" will be off.

Just go to a football game in Europe and see how "soft" the locals are. Football fans in the UK are way more aggressive than American-football fans in the US. Some needle games with riled up fans might even be dodgy to attend. To suggest that the fighting spirit has gone out of Europeans is a fiction touted by people who have a vested interest in increasing tensions and setting off alarms. With incitement and provocation it's not much of a leap to see the same thug culture acting out along ethnic and political lines. This is an idea some conservatives are keen on. In a post discussing the Ralph peters New York Post article, a commentator from Free Conservatives blog, Desert Fox, offers this insight:

"The football hooligans will unleash hell on Muzzies before long, and the ordinary blokes and blokesses will just stay indoors and watch telly."

The reason there hasn't been any serious attacks orchestrated against Muslims has nothing to do with a lack of readiness to engage in dark deeds. Peters makes reference to the fact that Jean Marie Le Pen's National Front pulled in a third of the French vote not so long ago, and adds that Le Pen's party makes the Ku Klux Klan seem like Human Rights Watch.

Those writers and pundits who are engaged in adding to tensions by demonizing European Muslim minorities are playing a very dangerous game indeed. They are helping to create the psychological and emotional conditions for the types of outrages that have blighted the history of Europe. 'Experts' who present themselves as balanced researchers, are the most insidious because they convince a lot of people by playing a crafty numbers game when it comes to future scenarios. They also play on the nostalgia and fears of people of European ancestry, who are understandably concerned about the fate of the old country.

Naturally many of these writers play down violence-as-a-solution and argue they are calling for a more assertive political stance. However the manner in which they portray Muslims makes their defense disingenuous, because their rhetoric is an incitement, no matter how literate and humorous their writing style happens to be.

Prior to the outrages of the Third Reich, there were authors who wrote in a similar vein about Jews while couching their lofty opinion in the cloth of enlightened commentary. We know what happened when that line of propaganda materialized into action. Kristallnacht wasn't a spontaneous attack on the Jews, the will to commit that and later outrages was cultivated by the writers and orators who worked on providing high minded justifications, even as they demonized the Jewish minority.

To suggest that "soft" Europeans lack the will to act against Muslim minorities, is a myth. Not so long ago the world witnessed a regression to Nazi-like behavior in Kosovo. Systematic rape, torture and killing apparently came naturally to a lot of people. Western Europe isn't immune to the type of hatred that drives such atrocities, despite its more progressive culture.

This is precisely why the fuel being added by those who appear interested in fomenting a reaction is so sinister. Muslim families in Europe have dreams and hopes like any other. They aren't just some threatening demographic number, they are citizens/residents with rights under the law. The majority don't see themselves as agents of some take-over in order to birth a fantasy named Eurabia. They are preoccupied with survival issues and the struggles that come with social status that is little better than second class.

The youth riots that broke out in France are viewed by some of the alarmists as early start-up signs of the Muslim uprising that will help to birth Eurabia. This is a distorted reading of the dynamics behind the rioting. Many of these youths have few prospects, suffer stigmatization and were filled with anger because of their marginal position in society. They weren't rioting with Eurabia in mind, or even with Al Qaida objectives in mind.

Nobody is saying it will be easy, or that we won't witness conflicts and likely more rioting in the future. Islamists who advocate violence have to be confronted, but the way to do it isn't to whip up fear and hype a Muslim take-over threat. European society is facing a crisis. It is a time of great challenge and also of great danger. What is required are people of goodwill with positive solutions, not fear mongers and provocateurs.

Tags: Eurabia, Islam, genocide, Mark Steyn, Zionism, Jean Marie Le Pen, Kosovo, Third Reich, ethnic cleansing, Third Reich

Never again?

Tags: Mark Steyn, Nazi propaganda, bigotry, genocide

The Passover trip : and other Biblical hallucinations

It's entirely possible that celebrating the Passover, may be a bit like celebrating progress along the yellow brick road toward the fabled Emerald City. The odds that the exodus was an historical event is highly unlikely according to archaeologists.

In Egypt's northern Sinai Peninsula, archaeologists have uncovered remains that coincide with the timing of the alleged exodus, but there is no evidence to support the Passover story. When asked about possible evidence that might give credence to the story of the exodus, Egyptian archaeologist Zahi Hawass wasn't encouraging ... "Really, it's a myth."

A professor of cognitive psychology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Benny Shanon, has another thesis that casts a different light on the story of the wandering Israelites and the 'revelation' on Mount Sinai. Shanon believes that Moses, if there was such a person, made use of mind altering drugs.

There is frequent mention in the Old Testament of preparations made from the bark of the acacia tree. Acacia bark contains the same molecules found in the powerful hallucinogenic, ayahuasca which is made from one or more dimethyltryptamine (DMT) plants found in the Amazon region. Ayahuasca is usually taken in potion form, although the leaves can be dried and smoked. The effects of the drug are intense and include a type of sensory 'magnification'.

Shanon believes that the Biblical reports of thunder, lightning and blaring trumpets when Moses was up on Sinai receiving the commandments from the alleged "Lord of Hosts", was a drug induced vision experienced by people who were "high" on a powerful hallucinogen.

Shanon points out that those under the influence of the drug often report seeing bright light, and experience intense spiritual feelings. Users sometimes believe they can hear celestial music. The Biblical account of the "burning bush" if it in fact has any historical basis, was likely also a drug induced hallucination.

Perhaps the Passover celebration should include a ritual after-dinner toke.

Tags: the exodus, Passover, Israelites, Moses, Benny Shanon, Mount Sinai

Obama aide Samantha Power resigns over Clinton comment

Samantha Power who acted as foreign policy adviser on the Obama campaign has resigned. She's was recruited by Obama back in 2005. Power is a Harvard professor and a Pulitzer prize winner. She also writes a column for Time magazine.

During an interview with an Edinburgh based paper, The Scotsman, she referred to Hillary Clinton as "a monster". She attempted to withdraw the remarks, but before speaking with The Scotsman she agreed that the interview would be "on record".

Ms Power's remarks came on the heels of Clinton's wins in Ohio and Texas - wins that some have argued were in part a result of negative campaigning, including the use of ads that played on the public's fears about security.

Samantha Power is a talented journalist and academic. Her comment isn't much worse than some of the remarks Clinton campaign people have directed at Obama. When Obama questioned Clinton's refusal to release her income taxes, Howard Wolfson compared him to Kenneth Starr, a much reviled figure among Democrats.

Ms Power issued an apology, addressed to both senators Clinton and Obama.

Opinion has been divided on her decision to resign. Former national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, disagrees with her decision. However given Obama's call for greater civility in the campaign, some fell she had little choice.

Number one

Stephen Harper : the Prime Minister who knows nothing

Does Stephen Harper live in another dimension? This is not altogether a joking question, because we have a leader in Canada who seems to know next-to-nothing about what goes on in his inner circle.

How can you be a leader and yet be so quixotically detached that you don't know your people are making decisions that could effectively damage the credibility of the government and perhaps even precipitate a crisis?

Harper, the personification of the three monkeys, never says anything, hears anything or sees anything that might provide a clue to some of the murky goings on in his government. His sense of smell is off too. The stink has been making people across Canada reach for their aerosol cans.

Despite audio tape evidence and the word of Chuck Cadman's wife and daughter, that suggests the late MP was bribed by the Tories prior to a Parliamentary vote in 2005, Harper claims he knew nothing about it. He even told Tom Zytaruk on tape that he "didn't know the details". This is a leader who hadn't a clue what was actually being said or done when a matter of critical importance to the Tories was being negotiated. Can you call someone like this a leader? Is this what Canada expects from the person now sitting in the PM's office ... zenlike detachment along with continual deflection and denial on critical issues that demand an answer?

When the Mulroney affair put Harper on the hot spot recently, it was a similar story. Suddenly the PM was washing his hands with antiseptic soap, and distancing himself from the affair.

A couple of days ago a memo ended up in the hands of Hillary Clinton, a Democratic candidate in the United States election. The memo was released by someone or something connected with the Canadian government, possibly one of the gargoyles on Parliament Hill.

The memo was like a torpedo aimed at the flank of the Obama campaign. It was released to the Associated Press and it contained the claim that an Obama economic adviser had assured a Canadian consular official that Obama's criticism of NAFTA should be read as "political positioning (rather) than a clear articulation of policy plans."

Clinton used the memo to attack the credibility of Obama and to infer that he was deceiving the American people. The official government memo was released to the press prior to the critical vote in Texas and Ohio, yet the person Canadians elected to lead this country is clueless ... no idea how on earth that could have happened. Maybe it really was leaked without the PM's knowledge, but it still leaves Harper looking as though he is out-of-the-loop and that is becoming a recurring scenario. Is it possible someone else is really running the country?

Stephen Harper is insulting the intelligence of Canadians by playing these smoke-and-mirror games. Canadians don't want a figurehead in the PM's office playing the three monkey charade when leaks, memos and allegations surface that touch upon the credibility of elected officials. They want a leader with the personal fortitude to take responsibility in an honest and forthright fashion.

Tags: Stephen Harper, Canada, Obama memo, Chuck Cadman affair, Mulroney

Mark Steyn spins reality with "America Alone"

*Although this post references "America Alone", it isn't a straight review of Steyn's book, so much as a look at some of the themes in his work that attract negative attention - most recently from CIC and Human Rights in Canada.

I've been surprised by the positive reviews Mark Steyn's book America Alone has received since it came out. The right wing applause is of course predictable, but I didn't expect Hitchens to let Steyn off quite so easily. His review while not exactly glowing, seemed to suggest that Steyn merits an A or at least a B+. Hitchens must be going a bit soft with advancing years.

I dislike organized religion, but I don't dislike actual people who happen to be organized along religious lines unless they try to push their religion down my throat. The problem with Steyn's use of language in reference to Muslims is that even though he tries to set up a "we all get it" type understanding with his readers, quite a few times I not only didn't get it but found his presumptions high handed and annoying.

In his work over the years Steyn has made use of terms such as "gook" and "yellow peril". The problem isn't simply the terminology itself, but rather the way in which Steyn deploys offensive terms. He plays semantic games, uses other people's words in an effort to spread his bile without having to take direct responsibility for it.

The "breeding like mosquitoes" reference came from a Norwegian imam originally. The "sheepshaggers" reference was also derivative. When it comes to the risky stuff, Steyn isn't above channeling the words of others believing it will allow him to wriggle off the hook. It won't. His overall intentions are clear despite his smoke-and-mirrors game. What it basically adds up to is that he is gutless and contemptible - a writer who clearly is profoundly prejudiced when it comes to Islam but who shies away from saying the risky stuff without disclaimers.

In his most recent outing he makes laudatory reference to the "white women" of America who produce more babies (1.85 or thereabouts) than Canadian or European women. What has "white" got to do with anything? It doesn't even reliably denote a race. Does this imply that American women with non-caucasoid skin pigmentation produce offspring of a less desirable sort? Steyn walks into these self-made traps that betray where he is really coming from, and then attempts to slither his way out of them by way of disclaimers of the "I am not a racist" variety.

Anyone humorously made reference to "yids" or "kikes" recently in an article, or speculated about the "Jewish peril" ... Jews propagating "like mosquitoes" ... Jews as "sheepshaggers"? I bet not. Anyone who makes free with those terms in Canada will have B'nai Brith on their case ... hell you might even get charged with a hate crime.

Muslims though are fair game, at least according to some. Steyn and Macleans magazine editors were appalled that the Canadian Islamic Congress and human rights apparatchiks didn't just grin-and-bear-it when faced with an excerpt from "America Alone" that was perceived by some Muslims as negative profiling. What spoilsports! When Steyn does bigotry we're all supposed to get it. Right?

For all his wit, Steyn is a bigot. He's not an out-and-out racist as some have accused him of being. That's too obviously crass. His view of Muslims is a caricature. It reminds me of Orliana Falacci's paranoid portrait of Islam in The Rage and the Pride.

Steyn's futurific Eurabia, circa 202o, requires vigorous use of the imaginative faculties. In the space of the few intervening years European civilization has collapsed. This has happened in part because of an influx of Muslims who arrive, not to perform bomb making duty, but if Steyn's demographic projections are to come true ... to hump incessantly, night and day, in a sort of baby-making frenzy. Naturally, this being Steynland, the Muslims humping in the bedrooms of European nations are all presumably sharia adhering fundies with big beards and a fabulous sperm count.

I was surprised to learn that Steyn was a former DJ. He made his way in journalism with little or no formal education. Not that being formally educated necessarily makes you less liable to deploy data in careless ways, but it certainly brings a research quality into play that Steyn at times glaringly lacks. I really don't care how often he makes me laugh in the course of a paragraph, if he gets it wrong, he gets it wrong, and far too many reviewers have let him off the hook on what is simply shoddy thinking.

A while back in the article US can sit back and watch Europe implode, Steyn claimed that the EU would be 40% Muslim by 2025, which is a nutbar projection - even with increased immigration and olympian humping of marathon proportions. In order for Steyn's thesis to play itself out, in the space of the 12 or so intervening years before the dawning of "Eurabia", the Muslim population would have to skyrocket upwards from the present figure of 20 million to around 200 million. Who is he trying to kid? Nobody it seems, because his flock of starry eyed believers suck this stuff right up.

Steyn, Hitchens and a few other Brit educated scribes of a certain age all suffer from Albionitis. They remember a different England and although they would never come out and say it - it's a sort of a "bloody foreigner" petulance that they vent by talking endlessly around the basic truth that they are pissed off white men who dislike being bumped off their little thrones. Their long winded gripes are in large part about profound resentment that it would be bad form to express as such. Of course they would never admit that, but their writing reeks of it.

Mark Steyn aims to please with his eloquence and wit. I'm sure nothing thrills him more than knowing that the power brokers in the corporate suites are chortling over his latest witty remark about those dreadful backward Muslims who are out to take over the world. At times when you read Steyn, you get the feeling he has never outgrown the need to show-off as a way of obtaining validation. He's become the sort of jester-scribe of the conservative establishment. Maybe it all goes back to the need to be a crowd pleaser during his disc jockey days.

Steyn's views on Islam in Europe insults the intelligence of anyone who understands that the situation is much less comic-book, much more complex. It's one thing to take on religion, but it's another thing to cook up a dodgy scenario and make it the subject of a book intended to enlighten and inform. I often wonder if the people who buy Steyn's line, only read him on these topics. There is a lot of excellent opinion out there that provides in-depth analysis that is a lot more balanced and fact-based, minus the comic relief. Satire is often used to shore up implausible arguments, something Steyn is very adept at doing.

I would never try to argue that Muslim immigration hasn't posed a huge challenge for Europe, or that multiculturalism isn't a flawed experiment. Some of Steyn's analysis with respect to the emergence of a more militant form of Islam around the globe is right on the mark. However his European scenario has most to do with his idiosyncratic view of things, his closeted prejudices and of course the internal pressure that doubtless comes with having a few million fans waiting-in-the-wings for the next round of shocking predictions larded with witty insights.

In his review of the book for The New Statesman, Johann Hari offers astute in-depth analysis along with the occasional cutting remark along the lines of:

"Every delusional statement is sweetened with such a screwball one-liner; like Ann Coulter, Steyn writes in a demonic demotic that makes you chuckle even as you retch."

What is most interesting about the Steyn phenomena, is the number of otherwise sharp and informed members of the intellectual classes who gear down their critical faculties when cruising the pages of America Alone. I guess many are afflicted with a primal fear about the dread Muslim masses, and are prepared to give kudos to a writer who dares to go where others fear to tread.

Steyn has been wrong about lots of things, so I wouldn't place any bets on his Eurabia projections. He thought the invaders of Iraq would be greeted like saviors and when the insurgency started up, claimed it would fade out in a few weeks. But hey, the guy is funny ... focus on that.

I was at one time further to the right in my thinking than I am now, and I liked some of Steyn's earlier work. Since 2005, I have been engaged in a gradual defection from my former position, and I now regard people like Mark Steyn as more dangerous than your basic hate monger. He seduces a lot of readers into buying into a position that is divisive and that feeds into the worst in human nature. When you look at some of his biggest fans and where they are coming from this becomes clear.

When you take the logic of his argument to its conclusion, you have to ask what the solution is. Mass deportations? Genocide? Mayhem? Steyn may never advocate "final solutions", but those fired up by his arguments very well might.

He seems to have no grasp of the middle ground. There is an emerging cultural understanding that doesn't take inspiration from either the flag of St George or sharia. It just doesn't happen to suit Mark Steyn's personal prejudices or the "interests" he serves. But then sometimes people need to know when to cut their losses and get out, and in many cases it won't be immigrants of Muslim descent with a positive contribution to make doing the packing, it will be people like Mark Steyn and his ilk. Good riddance!


Link to a follow-up article of mine also - "Macleans, Mark Steyn and Rex Murphy."

Tags: Mark Steyn, America Alone, Eurabia, Macleans, human rights, Canadian Islamic Congress, religion, Islam

Operation Fertility ( Mark Steyn's worst nightmare)

Tags: Islam, Europe, birth rate

Hillary wins : without winning

Negative campaigning, smears, bloody-minded entitlement and ice cold ambition behind a hot smile is obviously a winning combo because Hillary "I-am-the-nominee" Clinton has clawed her way back into the fight. It helps when the media experiences what seems like collective remorse about claims of "unbalanced coverage". It also helps when you use fear as a weapon, as the Clinton campaign have been doing with some of the most fear oriented political ads that have hit the airwaves in some time.

It wasn't the resounding triumph some are claiming, Obama won Vermont handily and Texas was neck-to-neck fight to the end. The wins don't put her much further ahead in real terms. Fact is Obama has won double the number of primary and caucus states as Clinton, and he's out in front in the popular vote. On the delegate end of things, he is also far ahead of his rival.

A number of pundits have speculated that even if Clinton wins all remaining 16 contests, she will still be short on the delegate count. If down the road the Superdelegates side with her and throw her the nomination, there is a strong possibility of civil war in the Democratic party. This thing could get very messy. It might even make Chicago look like one big party.

Four more years of the Clintons in the White House? Is that what Americans really want. I will put down serious money now that it isn't. We haven't really seen the widespread anti-Hillary sentiment kick in yet, but it will in the Presidential race. If Hillary Clinton is nominated - McCain will have wind in his sails.

Tags: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Democratic campaign, fear ads

Bill O'Reilly : Compares a Huffington Post comment with Goebbel's propaganda

Bill O'Reilly is always reliably himself. Always reliably smug, flash, complacent, accusing, cynical, smirking - depending on what piece of raw meat has been tossed into his cage on a given day.

He creates the impression that he's nailing it all down when he talks, even though he may be using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. He's fly when it comes to playing on popular fears and prejudices - knows what buttons to push to generate a reaction. None of this though has anything to do with being fair and balanced, it has to do with O'Reilly, his agenda and his ego. Calling his line of commentary "fair and balanced" is a joke.

O'Reilly's approach to any given subject depends on the degree of prejudice it whips up in him. He thinks nothing of using the Nazi or KKK reference to smear opponents. Stretching a far-fetched comparison to the max isn't a problem for O'Reilly. It doesn't matter how idiotic the comparison is so long as it produces the required sensation value.

The other day he had a go at Arianna Huffington, the woman behind the first rate Huffington Post (HuffPo), a news website that features some of the best opinion on the web.

O'Reilly got heated because a commentator on one of HuffPo's many, many comment threads, made some disparaging reference to Nancy Reagan. The remark included the wish that she suffer terribly before dying.

In the build-up to his attack, O'Reilly dragged up Nazi attempts to demonize the Jews. He then went on to suggest that the comment about Nancy Reagan made HuffPo no different from the Nazi propaganda employed by Joseph Goebbels, Reich Minister for Enlightenment and Propaganda. This knee-jerk comparison would draw accusations of "moron" in the company of sane people, but O'Reilly carries on like this on the public airwaves and then has the audacity to describe his brand of lunacy as "fair and balanced".

You can check out a great many conservative blogs and find comments that drive the mercury in the hate barometer higher than the level registered by the Nancy Reagan comment. But even so, most reasonable people would think twice before accusing the blogger of being a Nazi. Sometimes it takes a while for a blogger to catch up with hate comments left by trolls, especially if it's a large site with many comment threads covering a host of different topics.

Channeling one of the darkest periods of modern history in order to make a point about a random comment on a blog thread isn't just unbalanced - it is the type of overkill that draws attention back to O'Reilly. You seriously wonder, notwithstanding his brand of media smarts, if the guy is right in the head.

O'Reilly should be careful about using the Nazis as a smear tactic because it draws attention to his style of journalism, which is more brownshirt in inspiration than fair and balanced. His tactics could come straight out of the Nazi playbook. He routinely distorts the facts, blurs reality and caricatures his opponents in an effort to ram home his smear-of-the-day ... which is precisely what the Nazis did.

Maybe Bill's feeling the heat these days. A new wind is blowing in America, and his brand of polarizing journalism is starting to seem kind of old.

Tags: Bill O'Reilly, FOX, Huffington Post, Goebbels, Nazis

I love this guy!

Tags: Bill O'Reilly, Fox, Joseph Goebbels

Why Ireland should say no to the Lisbon treaty

As Ireland prepares for a referendum on the Lisbon treaty in June of 2008, polling indicates that some 60% of the Irish are undecided. Opposition to this treaty doesn't imply opposition to Europe, so much as opposition to a Brussels elite and a mammoth European institution that is out-of-touch with realities on the ground.

Unlike other member states which have ratified the treaty in their national parliaments, the Irish constitution requires a referendum on the type of amendments being proposed by the treaty of Lisbon.

Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, and his Fianna Fail party have their work cut out for them over the next few months. Ahern is an EU cheerleader. He has issued rather high handed warnings to those keen to use the Irish referendum to flex their democratic rights in opposition to the treaty of Lisbon.

In an effort to convince the public to go for ratification, the government plans to mail bilingual booklets (in English and Irish) to every household - some 2.5 million all told.

There are a number of reasons why the Irish are absolutely right to have serious reservations about this treaty.

It effectively hands significant power over Irish affairs to Brussels. The treaty will subjugate the Irish people to the will of a political entity that they will not be in a position to influence via the usual democratic mechanisms. According to Spanish foreign minister, Miguel Angel Moratinos, there is an "unspoken agreement" among EU leaders not to hold any further referenda because they believe that public consultation is being used against the EU. This blatantly undemocratic stance is particularly worrisome when you consider that Article 48 of Lisbon gives the EU powers to amend its own treaties without any process of national ratification. The EU council will be able to make amendments on the basis of unanimity.

Article 9 states that the European Council will change from an inter-governmental institution to a European Union institution. Moreover it would seek to "promote its [the Union’s] values, advance its objectives, its interests”. These values, objectives and interests would essentially be determined not via the ballot box but by EU law.

New areas of EU law-making will extend to civil and criminal law, justice and policing, immigration, public services, energy, transport, tourism, space, sport, culture, civil protection, public health and the EU budget. If this treaty is passed, increasingly the direction of Irish affairs will be determined by the directives of a non-elected Brussels Commission.

When you look in detail at what is being proposed by the treaty, it becomes evident that what is emerging is nothing more nor less than a corporate entity, separate from and superior to, the member states - in other words a European superstate. This is a view that supporters of the treaty seek to tone down. In the words of Giuliano Amato, the Italian president - "It is psychological terrorism to suggest the spectre of a European superstate."

Detailed objections to the treaty are outlined in the weekly An Phoblacht, in a point-by-point article by Eoin O Broin. It makes an interesting read because it highlights major areas of concern from the Sinn Fein perspective.

Reservations about the growing power of the EU aren't restricted to the Irish. Former President of Germany, Roman Herzog, puts it this way:

“People have an ever-increasing feeling that something is going wrong; that an untransparent, complex, mammoth institution has evolved: divorced from practical problems and national traditions; grabbing ever greater competences and areas of power; that the democratic control mechanisms are failing – in brief, that it cannot go on like this.”

It's wrong to characterize opposition to this treaty as anti-European. In fact the contrary is true. Those who oppose the treaty are expressing democratic solidarity with the people of Europe. A no vote is a protest against the erosion of the principles of democracy within the EU and the empowerment of a small elite. Nicolas Sarkozy is on record saying that if this treaty was placed before the people of Europe in a truly democratic fashion, it would fail. I believe Sarkozy is correct in this assessment.

The Irish are a proud and a free people, who have paid in blood for their liberty. It is my hope that the people of Ireland will seize the initiative and answer "no" - not to reject the EU, but rather to secure an EU that is more, rather than less democratic.

Tags: Ireland, Lisbon treaty, Bertie Ahern, Fianna Fail, Sinn Fein, EU, Brussels, referendum, Sarkozy, Roman Herzog