1. Check out this globe and mail ‘report’ on the shooting in Brussels. Although it was published only minutes ago it also has no actual information about the attackers despite the eye witnesses and the cameras and they don’t even mention how odd that is. What is interesting is that they mention an attack on 2 Jewish people in France that took place right after the Belgium attack. The comments are also quite revealing. Antisemitism in Canada seems to be the new normal. Many people also take the opportunity to talk about islamophobia, as if muslims were being attacked and were not attacking everyone else all over the place.
2. Muslim Terrorists Stab Jewish Man in Tunisia
Passerby stated that the assailants yelled, “the nation of Mohammed is coming back to take revenge” shortly before the attack.
(I guess that makes three attacks on Jews this weekend. Coincidence I’m sure)
5. Allen West speaks to person present in Benghazi during attack
6. A Heated Debate: Are Climate Scientists Being Forced to Toe the Line?
After joining a controversial lobby group critical of climate change, meteorologist Lennart Bengtsson claims he was shunned by colleagues, leading him to quit. Some scientists complain pressure to conform to consensus opinion has become a serious hindrance in the field.
7. MTV Partners With CAIR Despite Islamist Agenda
MTV is including the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity with a history of radicalism, in its “world-class coalition of expert partners” for a campaign to combat discrimination and inequality. CAIR has a history of tarring its opponents by calling them “anti-Muslim” or “Islamophobes.”
The multi-year “Look Different” campaign will use celebrity activism, television shows and social media to influence the over 500 million households that MTV is available in. While well-intentioned, MTV unfortunately chose to include CAIR, an organization with an extremist history that tars every opponent as an anti-Muslim bigot.
Thank you Fjordman, UK Pete, M and all who contributed today.
I have harped on about the following issue a couple of times already but it seems too important a point to let go just yet.
The entire point of a government, security services and media is to protect and inform the public. The fact is that two men went into a museum and arbitrarily shot people to death. The fact that the museum was a Jewish one is largely irrelevant as the people they shot could have been anyone. The media not only did not give a description of the attackers, even once it was known that both of them were still at large and very likely on their way to another target, but covered for whatever government agency denied the information.
Furthermore, no one, and I mean no one, would spend good money on a security system that just gave fuzzy stills of someone’s hat. They have photos and videos of the perp I am certain, which are better than what we saw. I don’t think they even make cameras that bad anymore. And it was repeatedly stated that there were eye witnesses but no one thought to ask them for a description of the perp and none of the news agencies, not BBC or CNN even mentioned that there was no description of the mass murders currently at large in Belgian streets. An omission that is too large and across too many organizations to be accidental. This has to be policy.
So I ask the public. What is the point of having a government who deliberately misinforms you in order to protect the image of exceptionally bad policy they are too afraid to back down from, or a security service more concerned about the reputation of the ideology that motivated the attack than they are of preventing another one, and a mass media who work three shifts to avoid informing the public on matters that are quite literally life and death.
The time to learn basics about information, logic, reason and responsibility of these agencies is surely here. We as the public need to inform each other, and assist each other in understanding what criteria is for actual information. Because at the moment we do not have a news media. We have general anesthesia.
Eeyore for Vlad.
The description
suggests this was a professional hit.
Is it possible that the victim’s were chosen because their nationality was revealed by use of their passports at their hotel or similar circumstance? . . .Israeli Couple Among Jewish Museum Shooting Victims
1/ I hope that’s an organized gang of Jew-hating commenters at the Globe & Mail and not a representative sampling of Canadian attitudes. But the logic of developments in Western countries being wrecked by multiculturalism would seem to lead toward anti-Semitism growing more prevalent.
Even if Jews weren’t blamed in some quarters for multiculturalism, or for Israel defending itself, even if there were no inherited bigotry or subterranean reservoir of envy at Jewish intelligence and academic and worldly success, there would be this, surely: resentment of the desire of many or most Jews to maintain a separate identity through in-marriage.
It seems to me that the Canada I grew up in basically coped with that. People might know some Jewish son who had been effectively disowned by his family for marrying a non-Jewish girl, or Gentile parents less than thrilled about having Jewish grandchildren. I see that according to the U.S. National Jewish Population Survey 2000-2001, in the 1970s, 28% of Jews were intermarried, that is, married to non-Jews. It looks like it’s now closer to half. I assume the numbers are similar in Canada.
Without trying to assess whether this is wise or foolish, or good or bad, when suddenly countries are flooded with a high variety of ethnic/religious/racial groups bringing with them all their own tensions about in/out-marriage, the future would seem to look bad for Jews no matter how the situation evolves.
If everyone decides to marry everyone else, except the Jews, who mostly still only want to marry each other, Jews will really stand out, and be resented. If society frays and fragments with inter-ethnic tension, or utterly balkanizes and becomes dysfunctional, people will look for scapegoats.
And on top of that, and insanely, Western countries have imported huge numbers of Muslims.
« Un voisin a vu un barbu de type européen »
Non, je n’ai pas vu de voiture, et puis je suis arrivé après la fusillade. Mais un riverain, un voisin que je connais bien, m’a confié avoir croisé le regard d’un homme muni de deux sacs noir qui pourrait être le suspect. Cet homme, un barbu de type européen, en tout cas non maghrébin d’après ce voisin, est parti par une petite ruelle voisine. Ce voisin refuse que son identité soit révélée et réserve son témoignage à la police. Je comprends sa discrétion. Demain, c’est doublement jour de vote en Belgique, il y a les élections nationales et les européennes. Ce n’est pas la peine de jeter de l’huile sur le feu. Même s’il est vrai qu’on assiste chez nous à une résurgence de l’antisémitisme.
http://www.lejdd.fr/International/Europe/Un-voisin-a-vu-un-barbu-de-type-europeen-668156
La blonde in her video tried to vote at her local voting station, here’s her video (in French). Guess what no ballot papers for the FN.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hkxqxTri32o
French (undemocracy) at work…
Guy and Gals.
I know that this might seem off topic, but please take note of the farce that took place in France.
It might happen in your own country or has already happened recently (in Greece for sure). It just happens to affect parties that are Euro skeptic or anti mass immigration!!
It is a democratic farce if voters had to print out or drive to other polling stations to vote right wing! So the 25% is only for those who were able to vote FN!
Not only, one party did not have the regional authorisation to have their ballot papers validated!
“Les bulletins de Force Vie n’ont pas été validés par la commission de propagande en région Centre et seront donc considérés comme nuls s’ils sont utilisés par des électeurs…Vive la démocratie!!!!”
http://www.leprogres.fr/haute-loire/2014/05/25/haute-loire-la-participation-meilleure-qu-en-2009
Anne-Claude Ranson, President of Eleutheros, association which seeks to defend and promote freedom of conscience, of choice and practice of the Christian religion in France, says now to the newspaper Le present:
A number of people, including former Muslims, met yesterday with us, as soon as family and friends know about their conversion to Christianity, intimidation, pressure, threats or even sometimes concealed persecution or that could pass as an accident. Indeed, the right to apostasy in Islam is not recognized for Muslims: when we are born Muslim, must remain so throughout his life. In Sharia, the penalty is death. Even the French Council of Muslim faith (CFCM), created in our secular Republic, as an interlocutor with the Government, does not recognize this right in its Charter. At the time of its creation, our Government, after a first version where this freedom was mentioned, has finally endorsed that the second version proposed by the CFCM in which full freedom of conscience and right to change religion is implicitly refused to any Muslim. That is why, among those Muslims who convert to Christianity, many prefer to silence this conversion.
On the other hand, it may be noted also within couples ‘Christian-Muslims’ where , intolerable pressures are applied to the Christian spouse to convert to islam and that the children of these unions are automatically Muslims. Similarly, the Christian isolated in “Muslim” suburb can experience other ‘mishaps’ intended to chase him out of the neighborhood. […]”