Category Archives: Political Correctness
Hate in the classroom: anti-Semitism in Canada’s high schools
“I don’t have to listen to you; you are not a person, you are nothing, you do not exist as a person.” “Don’t speak to me, don’t look at me, you are not human, you are a Jew.”(taunts by a student attending an Ontario high school aimed at his Jewish teacher).
From The National Post
Toxic classrooms
Confronting anti-Semitism in our high schools
Barbara Kay, National Post Published: Monday, November 30, 2009
What follows is an edited excerpt from testimony delivered at a hearing of the Canadian Parliamentary Inquiry into Anti-Semitism this month.
My attention has been drawn to the disturbing phenomenon of overt Jew hatred in high schools, especially those with high populations of students from countries where Jew hatred is officially sanctioned in the law of their countries of origin.
As a case in point I offer one particularly disturbing story, because I believe it points to wider issues of concern for the educational system and for our society. It involves a Jewish teacher in an Ontario French high school whose name I cannot reveal because she fears physical retaliation.
“Miriam” had taught in French language schools in the 1970s and 1980s in schools with large Lebanese Christian populations without incurring any anti-Semitism. In her current career she works amicably with Muslims. A child of Holocaust survivors, Miriam is demonstrably neither racist nor anti-Muslim.
In 2001 Miriam started teaching at a school largely populated by children of refugees, mainly from Djibouti and Eritrea, countries where there are no Jews but where hatred of Jews is deeply entrenched in the culture.
During the academic year of 2002-2003 Miriam started to encounter anti-Semitic taunts from students, such as “Does someone see a Jew here, someone smell a Jew? It stinks here.” When she reported this and similar insults to the principal, the principal did not follow up. Indeed, the principal seemed more concerned about the students’ sensibilities than hers.
The principal instructed teachers not to offend their Muslim students; they were not to look students in the eye, they were not to gesture with the forefinger to bid them approach and they were not to interfere with male students who were physically aggressive to male teachers.
During the invasion of Iraq, moments of silence were held in the classroom. Cultural presentations involved only Muslim culture and no Canadian content. Students were allowed to leave assembly during the playing of the national anthem.
The crisis of this story occurred when Miriam admonished a student for wearing a Walkman in class. The student screamed at her: “I don’t have to listen to you; you are not a person, you are nothing, you do not exist as a person.” When Miriam demanded he accompany her to the principal’s office, the student followed her down the hall yelling, “Don’t speak to me, don’t look at me, you are not human, you are a Jew.”
Although the student was ultimately suspended for 10 days, his parents expressed puzzlement about the punishment since, they patiently explained, the teacher was after all Jewish. They complained about the severity of the punishment to the school board. Continue Reading →
Franken-mentary on Islam in Spain
I saw this short BBC clip that really pissed me off. They seemed to imply that Spain would be better off under another 700 years of brutal racist oppressive sharia law and Islamic rule. So I thought I would counter their post modernist BS with some facts. I really don’t see why the BBC should take people’s money by force and use it to lie to them about important things without at least we, the people, having the right to rebut.
Europe unites to deplore Swiss ban on minarets
TIMESONLINE…The Swiss and European establishment united today in deploring yesterday’s decision by Swiss voters to outlaw the construction of minarets but conservative leaders warned that the referendum showed genuine fear over Islam on the continent.
Swiss officials, media and business leaders voiced shame over a vote that they say will stigmatise the country’s 400,000 Muslims and stain Switzerland’s name in the Muslim world. In contrast, hard right leaders in France, Austria, Italy and the Netherlands hailed what they depicted as a triumph for the people against the elite.
Le Temps, Geneva’s establishment newspaper, said: “The vote was inspired by fear, fantasies and ignorance.” Damage to the country’s international standing would be spectacular, it said. “Vengeance [ aka fear], boycotts [ aka fantasy], retaliation [aka ignorance] … this clash with Islam could cost dearly.”
Tagesanzeiger, the Zurich daily, said that the vote, staged on the initiative of the nationalist Swiss People’s Party (SVP), showed the country’s deep division between outward-looking modernisers and a traditionalist backlash. The 57 per cent approval of the minaret ban would “strengthen the international isolation of Switzerland even among western nations,” it said.
The Swiss Government, which opposed the vote, reassured members of the faith that “this is not a rejection of the Muslim community, religion or culture.” The Conference of Swiss Bishops also criticised the result, saying that it “heightens the problems of cohabitation between religions and cultures.”
Amnesty international and other rights organisations said that the change to the Swiss Constitution breached guarantees on religious freedom in the European Human Rights Convention. The Swiss Green party said that it may lodge a complaint at the Strasbourg court of Human Rights.
Swiss Muslims, who come mainly from the Balkans and Turkey, reacted with sorrow. “The most painful thing for us is not the ban on minarets, but the symbol sent by this vote,” said Farhad Afshar, leader of the Swiss Coordination of Islamic Organisations. “Muslims do not feel accepted as a religious community,” he said.
Anger was swift from more militant wings of the Muslim world. “This is the hatred of Swiss people against Muslim communities. They do not want to see a Muslim presence in their country and this intense dislike has made them intolerant,” said Maskuri Abdillah, the head of Nahdlatul Ulama, Indonesia’s biggest Muslim group. He urged Muslims not to take “revenge” for the decision.
Egypt’s Mufti Ali Gomaa denounced the ban on new minarets as an insult to all Muslims. “This proposal … is not considered just an attack on freedom of beliefs, but also an attempt to insult the feelings of the Muslim community in and outside Switzerland.”
Beyond Switzerland, the vote was criticised by centre and leftwing leaders. Bernard Kouchner, a leftist who is French Foreign Minister, said that he had been shocked. Switzerland should reverse the decision quickly, he said. “If you are not allowed to build minarets, that means that religion is being oppressed.” Can someone please show me an Muslim dominated country where religions other than Islam are not oppressed?
However spokesman for Mr Sarkozy’s centre-right Union for a Popular Majority, took a different line, saying that the vote showed the degree to which radical Islam was alarming Europe’s citizens. Xavier Bertrand, the party leader, said that he was “not sure that minarets are needed in order to practise Islam in France”.
In Germany, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrat (CDU) party reacted with similar caution. To criticise the Swiss ban would be counterproductive, said Wolfgang Bosbach a senior CDU MP. It reflected a fear of growing Islamisation “and this fear must be taken seriously,” he said.
France’s far right National Front welcomed the outcome, saying that the “elites should stop denying the aspirations and fears of the European people, who, without opposing religious freedom, reject ostentatious signs that political-religious Muslim groups want to impose.”
In Italy, the anti-immigrant Northern League, said: “Switzerland is sending us a clear signal: yes to bell towers, no to minarets.”
In Switzerland, Yvan Perrin, vice-president of the SVP, the largest party in the federal Parliament, said that the vote was a lesson to the elite. Swiss companies should not worry about suffering from a backlash from Muslim countries, he said. “If our companies continue to make good quality products, they have nothing to worry about.”
Theo Van Gogh, and a fascist Dutch state.
The Dutch government has so much to be ashamed of in the events described herein.
I have been aware of it since I first read about it on Klein Verzet (The Little Resistance) some time ago. Perhaps two years or more. Where to begin? I would say with the murder of Theo van Gogh, an event which was profoundly hurtful to a good size segment of the Dutch population, perhaps a segment that until then had been unaware of Islam and its true nature.
One man, a Rotterdam artist, Chris Ripke, (who’s studio is right next door to the Mosque in the Insulindestraat [the Turkish Iskender Pasa Camii Mosque) decided to do a fairly innocuous protest. He went to Rotterdam, and painted a small mural of an Angel, some Koranic text about peace at the bottom, and the words:” Though Shalt Not Kill” in Dutch across the mural.
A man representing the nearby mosque was of course, offended by the Christian sentiment on the mural and called the city and demanded it be removed. In point form, the city obliged and perhaps most horrifying of all, the police told all media present for the removal of the mural they may not film it and had their film taken away in keeping with the Dutch police of ‘non-escalation’. A few days ago, someone sent me a link to a video on youtube of this whole event. Apparently someone decided not to comply with the police request thankfully, and a group of us worked hard to translate and subtitle this as we feel as many people as humanly possible need to see this and understand its importance. Although this event is old, the presence of this tape is new to me and almost certainly new to the English speaking world. Here is the English subtitled video:
Removal of angel Mural, Rotterdam 2004 from Vlad Tepes on Vimeo.
Please pass this link around to anyone who cares about freedom of the press, freedom from Government interference in what we may or may not know, and freedom from what is referred to in s video as ‘The Political Police” something I bet very few Dutch people even know exist but clearly have a massive impact on what they may or may not know that takes place within their own nation and cities.
Here is a link to the Klein Verzet story on this. Below, a segment of it:
From Klein Verzet:
What a difference a few years make. When we started this blog, the Dutch had a reputation comparable to the Danes. But now it seems that the Netherlands has joined the madness of the UK, France, Sweden and Norway, in their mad dash to destroy the spirit of the native people, for diversity’s sake. Or, as Mark Steyn puts it:
In the Netherlands even the most innocuous statement can get you into trouble. To express his disgust at Theo van Gogh’s murder, the artist Chris Ripke put up a mural outside his studio showing an angel and the words “Thou shalt not kill”. But the cops thought this was somehow a dig at the local mosque and so came round, destroyed the mural, arrested the TV news crew filming it, and wiped their tape. The Dutch have determined to commit societal euthanasia, and dislike fellows pointing out it might not be as painless as they’ve assumed.
The staggering injustice of all of this is nicely put into words by Bruce Bawer, in a piece he concluded with these words:
In Dutch Muslim schools and mosques, incendiary rhetoric about the Netherlands, America, Jews, gays, democracy, and sexual equality is routine; a generation of Dutch Muslims are being brought up with toxic attitudes toward the society in which they live. And no one is ever prosecuted for any of this. Instead, a court in the Netherlands—a nation once famous for being an oasis of free speech—has now decided to prosecute a member of the national legislature for speaking his mind. By doing so, it proves exactly what Wilders has argued all along: that fear and “sensitivity” to a religion of submission are destroying Dutch freedom.
Well worth going over to Mark Steyn’s article on it as well:
There is an interview with the man who was arrested. I hope to add that transcript in English to the rest of this post as well very soon. In the meantime, I am going to have to ask myself as a Canadian,
What is it I am not allowed to hear or know?
How is whatever law is being used to isolate me from reality being selectively enforced as Mark Steyn so clearly points out in his article related to this? Here is the original youtube link with more information on this incident and links to other interviews and information. This may not be spectacularly violent or sexy as fascist expose’s go. But that is what makes this so important. We must familiarize ourselves with this and humiliate the Dutch government and thereby all western governments that would make it impossible for their own people to make healthy decisions for themselves by effectively blinding and deafening them. While the cop may not have been wearing jackboots, at least that would have gotten some people upset. With the Dutch policy of non-escalation, no one can know enough to be upset. But after all, isn’t that is what ‘non-escalation’ means?
Huge thanks to V.H. for the amazingly fast and excellent work on the translation, and to a flu ridden Baron over at the gates who despite being bed ridden with the rotten flu that is going around, edited the work before I subtitled it. This gives some idea of the importance many of us feel this has. It also is an amazingly rare exception to the Frank Zappa rule of getting work done. 1. Good 2. Fast 3. Cheap. Pick any 2.
Typically this is really true. However our team did everything well fast and free. Thank you again guys and of course to Klein Verzet for sending me the links and to A Certain Amount of Evil for sending me the original Dutch video in the first place a few days ago. Something I did not know existed. But something that by coincidence, did come up in a recent interview a few weeks ago, between The International Free Speech Society and Morten Meserschmidt
ADDITIONAL INFO: Please click here to read the Gates of Vienna post on this matter. He has more information including a transcription of an interview with the man who was arrested and more. Very thorough work by V.H. The translator (I made a mistake in the credits in the video) and The Baron.
___________ COMMENT FROM YOUTUBE WHERE THIS VIDEO IS HOSTED_________
4711inside has replied to your comment on Dutch police remove mural on Islamic instruction:
right WHERE Theo was executed in cold blood a portrait of him was painted on a window shutter… not unlike the one in this video. The police painted over it IN THE NIGHT. Then it reappeared and was painted over again and so forth.
People paint THEO just his name, around the neighborhood. And the police paint over it. But they NEVER paint over gang signs!
I’m sorry to say this but the dutch police are nothing but cowards.
You can’t count on them to uphold the law. They bow to islam every time.
People paint THEO just his name, around the neighborhood. And the police paint over it. But they NEVER paint over gang signs!
I’m sorry to say this but the dutch police are nothing but cowards.
You can’t count on them to uphold the law. They bow to islam every time.
Steve Emerson on Fort Hood. This is good. Watch it.
Thank you KitmanTV for putting this up. This kind of lucidity has become rare and as rare things can be, precious. Steve Emerson founded “the investigative project on terrorism” 1998
http://www.investigativeproject.org/
He also made the legendary documentary in 1994 “jihad in America” and made a speech to congress warning about osama bin laden group
Here is his documentary, again courtesy of KitmanTV
Terror in Mumbai
First, let me thank KitmanTV for the embed code for this profoundly significant and important documentary. Hell if I had a single wish, it might be to make Obama watch this documentary and understand it, and it’s implications.
Frank Gaffney has a much better approach than most on major Hassan
NPR: More news on Major Hassan and the Ft. Hood shootings
Please watch and listen to this short video.
Two campus events of note. Nonie Darwish and Robert Spencer silenced.
US universities need to be redefined. This is a fairly urgent matter. it is one thing for the universities to become fundamentally different things than they have traditionally been, but it is quite another to allow them to be thought of and treated as bastions of intellectual freedoms and debate, of places where unfashionable ideas are allowed to be examined and debated for their actual merits, and most importantly, of the inheritors of our Greek intellectual heritage.
Please see these two examples of the new agenda and modus operandi of American Universities from this week alone.
This evening at NYU I witnessed an act which was both disturbing and appalling. Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, an erudite scholar on Islam and patriotic defender of our freedom was giving a talk on the ever-growing threat to the West of Islamists. In the midst of describing the ends of Jihad as promulgated by one of the foremost radical Islamic scholars of the 1970s, a grungy looking fellow stood up and yelled at Spencer “Should we just go bomb all the Muslims!?” and attacking him with other vitriolic and hysterical words. In creating this diversion, a couple members of the audience ran up and threw pies at Mr. Spencer and another panelist. The campus authorities quickly intervened, and as the officers dragged the cowards away from the stage, another (presumably accomplice) student filmed the the officers on his phone. Luckily, Spencer and his fellow panelist Elan Journo ended up largely unscathed.
This whole scene characterizes where we are in America today. A man gets attacked for merely repeating the words of a Muslim radical. Worse, American students are planted in auditoriums all across this country ready to quash any free speech that is not to their liking. This is especially dangerous when it comes to matters of Islam, because as Spencer later argued in his speech, by not allowing criticism of the religion, and worse censoring free speech, we are elevating Islam above our own culture. This plays right into the hands of the people who wish to impose Sharia law over us. How ironic that the leftists in this country are the useful idiots for a Jihad movement that wishes to crush all tolerance. Finally of course, it is most likely the police who will be in trouble because of a video probably bound for YouTube as we speak which will show the officers violently hauling out the innocent and naive college hippies.
For the rest of this article please click here:Here is a speech by Robert Spencer just so we all know who he is and what he might of said at NYU
And at least as insidious, perhaps more perhaps less, the difference is merely tactical. Is it worse to allow someone to speak to a degree then attack them in the manner above, or to make sure at the last minute that they do not get to speak at all:
From Phylis Chesler at Pajamas Media on the cancellation of Nonie Darwish:
In our time, a speaker must face a gauntlet of hostility and a menacing crowd if she wishes to speak in favor of Israel or to tell the truth about Islam.
That’s if she’s lucky. Most such speakers never get invited or when they do, their invitations are canceled.
Nonie Darwish, the author of Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law and Now They Call Me Infidel: Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel, and the War on Terror, has faced on-campus hostility and disruption before. Over the years, I have interviewed her about this a number of times. Like many of us, she has also sometimes been forced to have security guards with her when she speaks.
Phyllis Chesler and Nonie Darwish
This time, Nonie, who is the founder of Arabs for Israel, was invited to speak at both Columbia and Princeton. The official invitation at Columbia came from the very distinguished CAMERA, Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME), and from a new student organization there: Campus Media Watch, a group which is not yet quite up and running. Darwish flew from the West Coast, and was already all dressed up and ready to travel to Columbia when she got word that she’d been canceled.
“How humiliating is that? To come all this way, to be almost out the door, only to be told that they had to cancel my speech because campus security felt they could not protect me. Everyone is trying to blame someone else. Even the campus Republicans were afraid to sponsor me. SPME kept trying to fix it, but in the end, they could not.”
True, in 2006, President Ahmadinejad of Iran was not able to speak at Columbia because the notice given was too short. However, in 2007, Columbia University was able to provide security for him. And yet they could not provide it for Darwish. In 2006, Holocaust-denier Norman Finkelstein spoke at Columbia and in 2009, anti-Zionist, Israeli journalist Amira Hass spoke at Columbia–both without incident. Neither speaker was canceled. Next week, Noam Chomsky is speaking there. In Darwish’s view, “I doubt Chomsky will even need any security.”
For the rest of this article please click here:
Also, more can be read at Pam Geller’s site here where I found a lot of this
Thanks to SolsticeW13 for hipping me to the Darwish story
Salim Mansur on the Fort Hood massacre: the Islamist war against America
Some purport that the Fort Hood killer Major Hasan is a poor unfortunate, a victim of a peculiar psychosis, a stress related, mind- disorienting affliction. Meanwhile, Islamists have been quick to deny Hasan’s connection to Islamic extremism. They defensively apply their stock response that ‘endless crimes are committed by non-Muslims against others regularly’ and imply a biased media coverage. In typical fashion, The Canadian Charger writes under a headline banner:
It’s wrong to blame Muslims for what criminals do
`Aside from the fact that he is a psychiatrist and he was scheduled to be deployed to Afghanistan, there was little other information about Major Hasan. What conclusion will the majority of people draw from this coverage of a tragedy?
Non-Muslims shoot multitudes of people regularly – especially in America – but the perpetrators’ religious affiliations seldom becomes a focal point of media coverage.
Eric Rudolph and a significant number of others, bombed abortion clinics in the U.S., claiming to be good Christians, fulfilling God’s will.
—–
One, two buckle my shoe! Here is another perfect attempt at Islamist slight of hand:
‘While the Obama administration has refrained from using “Islamic” when referring to terrorism, the Fort Hood massacre is providing fodder for talk and radio shows, and websites which exploit such isolated incidents to ratchet up Islamophobia’. CC.
—–
Thankfully there are others who do not rely on such bullshit in their assessment of a killer intent on murdering as many innocents as possible in the name of Allah through jihad.
From The Ottawa Sun
“The massacre in Fort Hood, Texas, was an act in the war the Islamists declared some three decades ago against America, the great Satan in particular, and the west in general”.
Comment Columnists / Salim Mansur
Jihad sparked accused Fort Hood killer
By SALIM MANSUR
Last Updated: 14th November 2009, 2:40am
The massacre in Fort Hood, Texas, was an act in the war the Islamists declared some three decades ago against America, the great Satan in particular, and the west in general.
At what point in his life Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan — 39 years of age, Muslim by birth to a Palestinian-American immigrant family and a psychiatrist serving in the U.S. military — became in his own mind a loyal soldier of the global Islamist jihad (war) is highly relevant as are other details of his private life in piecing together the psychological profile of this accused mass murderer.
It seems there can be no mistaking that Nidal Hasan went out as an Islamist warrior to kill as many infidels before he found his martyrdom.
A majority of Americans and most people in the west for any number of reasons, including multiculturalism and political correctness, are dismissive of the view that a war is being waged against them by a segment of the global Muslim population that seemingly has no political standing anywhere in the world.
This would not be the first time the liberal fallacy — the idea that since war is irrational, no rational people will deliberately ignite war — endangers a country against those dedicated to the politics of violence, as are the Islamists in our time.
Islamist terrorism is not an alien off-shoot within Muslim history. It is instead a mutation of a violent strain of Muslim religious thought and practice that might be traced back to the earliest years of Islam.
The basis of Islamism is in the binary thinking of its proponents, that the world is divided into two warring halves — those who accept the fundamentals of Islam and act upon them to establish society accordingly and those who reject Islam.
In recent years, such thinking resurfaced in political movements within the Muslim world which oppose the secular and liberal values of the modern world.
Henchmen for Islamists, religion is politics and national identity and the purpose of their jihad until victory or death is to establish in the here and now Islamic rule associated with Muhammad and his companions in the first decades of the 7th century Arabia.
In achieving this goal, the Islamists are prepared to use any means. The world is witnessing the Islamist version of political authority in Iran under the ayatollahs and their henchmen, in Saudi Arabia under the compact of a tribal dynasty and the fanatic Wahhabi sect of Islam and got a glimpse of it in Afghanistan under the Taliban.
America, with Israel in tow as the little Satan, stands in the path of the Islamists. For Islamists, defeating the two Satans means driving them out of the Middle East.
Those Muslims who repudiate Islamism on the basis of their faith and their views on politics are considered apostates by Islamists and are to be hunted down as they did with president Anwar Sadat of Egypt and Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan.
Nidal Hasan acted on his Islamist belief as did the 19 Arab-Muslim terrorists on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001. He should be considered a war criminal and not a tragic victim of some mental illness and what he did was treason against his country.
sa**********@******ia.ca
Irshad Manji on the Fort Hood murders and media whitewashing of Islam
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
More on the shootings at Ft. Hood for when they tell us our eyes are bad
Frankly, I don’t really want to post endless information about how the Fort Hood shooter was in fact a Muslim Jihadi. We all know it and anyone who says otherwise as an agenda other than the truth.
However in my experience, giant events like this one have a habit of, what is that expression, ‘falling down the memory hole.
One just has to ask any Canadian about the ‘Marc Lepine’ Massacre at Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal and they will tell you he was a woman hating Canadian man who wanted women bare foot and pregnant in the kitchen. Well they would be half right. Marc Lepine was not his original name. He was in fact shouting Allahu Ackbar as he shot those women, he was the son of an Algerian Muslim who treated women exactly as Koran says they should be treated and as he taught his son to treat them and so on. However all that information comes as a great shock to Canadians and Im reasonably confident that two or three hours after you inform one, they forget it again and re-adopt the feminist party line on this, Canada’s first real jihadi-Islamic attack.
So I feel I really should post what I can find before the Obama administration finds a spin it likes, parachutes in another batalion of grief councilors and convinces us all it was as the British would call it “An anti-Islamic activity” designed to make our future religion and culture look less than perfectly liberal.
First, this video with Lt. Col Ralph Peters.
Here is Phyllis Chesler on Lou Dobbs thanks to Solstice
Then, this article from The Ottawa Citizen: H/T Gates of Vienna for this one
You can’t ignore the role of radical Islam
As dozens of talking heads descended on CNN and FOX TV to give their opinions on the Fort Hood massacre last week, no one seemed to notice the significance of the attire that suspect Maj. Nidal Hasan was wearing the morning of the killings. It was captured on a store surveillance video as Maj. Hasan bought a coffee.
CNN’s Arab commentator incorrectly reported that the major was wearing “Muslim garb” commonly worn in Jordan, and that it reflected his devoutness as a Muslim. However, to Pakistanis and Afghans watching the clip around the world, his clothing reflected something far more significant and sinister.
Maj. Hasan was wearing the “shalwar-kameez,” the traditional attire worn by Pashtuns on both sides of the Pakistan-Afghan border. Had Maj. Hasan been of Pakistani or Afghan ancestry, it would have meant very little, but for an Arab-American to wear this attire was significant.
In the Middle East, over five million Pakistanis and Afghans work and live among the local Arab population. The shalwar-kameez is common on the streets of Dubai and Jeddah, but no Arab male would ever want to be seen wearing this garb. I have lived a decade in the Arab world and not once did I see an Arab wearing the shalwar-kameez.
Having said that there is one particular group of Arabs who did embrace the garb of the Pashtuns. They were the “Afghan Arabs” who went to Afghanistan to wage jihad alongside al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Continue Reading →
Cost of refusal to deal with reality can be measured in lives.
One of the little mental applets I run in the background of my mind as a general rule, is trying to estimate the difference between some kind of objective reality, and how we as individuals or as a species decide to view events. Certainly the cost is in some kind of proportion to the difference. To borrow from a very old phrase, if you cannot tell the difference between shit and shinola, you will have very stinky shoes.
In this case, president Obama seems unable or unwilling to recognize who the enemy is with respect to the shooter at Fort Hood. This very refusal, it is now clear as day, is exactly the reason this attack happened. Everyone knew that this man was sympathetic to Islam and it’s goals and political ambitions. He was already under investigation for his terrorist ties among other things. But political correctness made it impossible for him to be removed from his position of power, access, and authority and ultimatly to the deaths of over a dozen US servicemen and injury to dozens more.
President Clinton for similar reasons was unable to prevent the attack on the WTC on September 11 2001 because his administration was not prepared to deal with the facts of the first attack on that same building by that same group for the same reasons less than a decade earlier.
For each of us, our refusal to admit where reality ends and our fantasies begin has a personal cost. Sometimes in mere money but as often in health and lifespan such as smoking or other habits we may cling to. But in a leader, the cost is exponential and to all of us.
During WW2, Adolph Hitler had a curtain built into his car so that if he was forced to drive through a bombed out area, he could draw his curtain and would not have to see the devastation wreaked on the German people. When Churchill was told about German rocket damage, he would take a car to the spot immediately and examine what the Nazi forces had done in order to best asses the damage and better determine the right course of action.
It is likely this one thing more than any other that won the war for the allies and against the Nazis. Reality, trumps fantasy when it comes to tactics.
Obama needs to have this explained to him.
Or perhaps it is as Shakespeare so eloquently stated it in the character of the king of Denmark in Hamlet:
“Madness in great ones, must not unwatched go”
Eeyore for Vlad
Fort Hood gunman had told US military colleagues that infidels should have their throats cut
It seems as if the Obama administration may have a difficult time whitewashing this as not a Muslim act of terror. Obama has already asked us not to jump to conclusions and of course, as this was not a white policeman doing his job arresting people breaking in to homes, I can see why he would say that. Obama only jumps to conclusions when he is wrong, and the object of that conclusion is a white Christian American.
Too bad Muslims typically don’t drink. No beer at the white house for Hasan I guess.
Meanwhile, back at Fort Hood:
From the Telegraph by way of The Religion of Peace:
Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the gunman who killed 13 at America’s Fort Hood military base, once gave a lecture to other doctors in which he said non-believers should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats.
By Nick Allen in Fort Hood
Published: 5:00PM GMT 08 Nov 2009
Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the U.S. Army doctor named as a suspect in the shooting death of 13 people and the wounding of 31 others at Fort Hood, Texas Photo: GETTY
He also told colleagues at America’s top military hospital that non-Muslims were infidels condemned to hell who should be set on fire. The outburst came during an hour-long talk Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, gave on the Koran in front of dozens of other doctors at Walter Reed Army Medical Centre in Washington DC, where he worked for six years before arriving at Fort Hood in July.
Colleagues had expected a discussion on a medical issue but were instead given an extremist interpretation of the Koran, which Hasan appeared to believe. Continue Reading →