“The secret of all victory lies in the organization of the non-obvious.” -Marcus Aurelius
Anything but that he is Muslim. They are ready to invent a new disease just for him to avoid the obvious. Well, for anyone who ever wondered what life must have been like in the USSR before the wall fell, it would have been like this. Surreal reports that defy obvious reality in order to stick with whatever ideology the Kremlin was selling that day.
Compare and contrast this with the absurd analysis by Dr. Phill in the video below.
h/t Occidental Soapbox
This video is the most frightening thing I have seen since the exorcist was re released with new footage.
Here, the psycho-left does every conceivable thing to detract from the raw facts of the matter. A Muslim goes and kills a bunch of people in the name of Islam after saying that is what they intend to do, and a group of leftists attempts to spin it as anything but. Here, the narrative is at its loudest. There is only one sane person on this panel and it is most certainly not doctor Phil, a man who actually places his own blinders on in the morning. The one sane person is pilloried and on national TV. That is what courage of your convictions really looks like.
This video thanks to Weaselzippers and www.gatesofvienna.blogspot.com
[kaltura-widget wid=”mlq0qadxzw” width=”410″ height=”364″ addpermission=”3″ editpermission=”3″ /]
First off, if teachers intend to teach patriotism in the same manner students are taught Canadian history, the thought is alarming. Rather than a few bars of song every day, students would instead be subjected to incredibly bland, uninteresting versions of what it means to be Canadian, dumbed down into a pablum whose only purpose is to avoid offending any particular group. Anyone who’s flipped through a Canadian social science textbook any time over the last 20 years knows what I’m talking about. According to the approved official version of events, Canadian history goes something like this:
White people arrived and brutally destroyed the advanced and untroubled native civilization that was flourishing in their absence. Then the English conquered the French, and we don’t really have any comment on that, but it happened. Later on, we formed a country, and did a way better job of it than those crazy Americans, and at some point after that, we won a battle at Vimy Ridge, which was instrumental into making us into peacekeepers a generation later. How that happened, no one knows, but don’t ask questions. Just trust us. And then Pierre Trudeau came along, and we purged ourselves of all remaining human imperfections while simultaneously becoming bilingual UN cheerleaders. And it should be noted that women played a huge role in every part of that process, except the bad parts. The End.
While that’s obviously a bit flippant, the exaggeration isn’t as great as you might think. Continue Reading →
From The Ottawa Citizen
Italy reacted furiously Tuesday to a European Court of Human Rights ruling that crucifixes should not be displayed in schools, with the government condemning the “pagan” move and calling it an attack on the nation’s history and culture.
The ruling by the court in Strasbourg, which Italy said it would appeal, said crucifixes on school walls — a common sight that is part of every Italian’s life — could disturb children who were not Christians.
Italy has been in the throes of national debate on how to deal with a growing population of immigrants, mostly Muslims, and the court sentence is likely to become another battle cry for the centre-right government’s policy to restrict newcomers.
“This is an abhorrent ruling,” said Rocco Buttiglione, a former culture minister who helped write papal encyclicals. “It must be rejected with firmness. Italy has its culture, its traditions and its history. Those who come among us must understand and accept this culture and this history.”
A Vatican spokesman said it was sad the crucifix could be considered a symbol of division and said religion offered a vital contribution to the moral formation of people.
Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi added that it was “wrong and myopic” to try to exclude a symbol of charity from education.
Members of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi’s government bristled, weighing in with words such as “shameful,” “offensive,” “absurd,” “unacceptable,” and “pagan.”
Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said the court had dealt a “mortal blow to a Europe of values and rights,” adding that it was a bad precedent for other countries.
The case was brought by an Italian national, Soile Lautsi, who complained that her children had to attend a public school in northern Italy that had crucifixes in every room.
Education Minister Mariastella Gelmini said crucifixes on the walls of tens of thousands of classrooms “do not mean adherence to Catholicism,” but are a symbol of Italy’s heritage. “If we erase symbols we erase part of ourselves,” she said.
Bored with your current religion? Switch it up and Go Green.
From The Telegraph U.K.
By Stephen Adams and Louise Gray
Published: 3:11PM GMT 03 Nov 2009
In a landmark ruling, Mr Justice Michael Burton said that “a belief in man-made climate change … is capable, if genuinely held, of being a philosophical belief for the purpose of the 2003 Religion and Belief Regulations”.
The ruling could open the door for employees to sue their companies for failing to account for their green lifestyles, such as providing recycling facilities or offering low-carbon travel.
The decision regards Tim Nicholson, former head of sustainability at property firm Grainger plc, who claims he was made redundant in July 2008 due to his “philosophical belief about climate change and the environment”.
In March, employment judge David Heath gave Mr Nicholson permission to take the firm to tribunal over his treatment.
But Grainger challenged the ruling on the grounds that green views were political and based on science, as opposed to religious or philosophical in nature.
John Bowers QC, representing Grainger, had argued that adherence to climate change theory was “a scientific view rather than a philosophical one”, because “philosophy deals with matters that are not capable of scientific proof.”
That argument has now been dismissed by Mr Justice Burton, who last year ruled that the environmental documentary An Inconvenient Truth by Al Gore was political and partisan.
The decision allows the tribunal to go ahead, but more importantly sets a precedent for how environmental beliefs are regarded in English law.
Mr Nicholson, 42, from Oxford, told a previous hearing that his views were so strong that he refused to travel by air and had renovated his house to be environmentally-friendly.
But his beliefs led to frequent clashes with Grainger’s other managers, while he said that Rupert Dickinson, the firm’s chief executive, treated his concerns with “contempt”.
Once Mr Dickinson flew a member of staff to Ireland to deliver his Blackberry mobile phone after leaving it in London, Mr Nicholson claimed.
Mr Nicholson hailed the Employment Appeals Tribunal ruling as “a victory for common sense” but stressed climate change was “not a new religion”.
He said: “I believe man-made climate change is the most important issue of our time and nothing should stand in the way of diverting this catastrophe.
“This philosophical belief that is based on scientific evidence has now been given the same protection in law as faith-based religious belief.
“Belief in man-made climate change is not a new religion, it is a philosophical belief that reflects my moral and ethical values and is underlined by the overwhelming scientific evidence.”
His lawyer Shah Qureshi, head of employment law at Bindmans LLP, argued that if the ruling had gone against them, “the end result would be that the more evidence there is to support your views, the less likely it would be for you to enjoy protection against discrimination”.
Grainger now plans to contest Mr Nicholson’s claim of unfair dismissal at tribunal.
Dave Butler, its corporate affairs director, said: “This decision merely confirms that views on the importance of environmental protection are capable of amounting to a philosophical belief.
“We are looking forward to addressing the issues at tribunal level and demonstrating that there was no causal link between Mr Nicholson’s beliefs and his redundancy.”
The grounds for Mr Nicholson’s case stem from changes to employment law made by Baroness Scotland, the Attorney General, in the Employment Equality (Religion and Belief) Regulations 2003.
The regulations effectively broaden the protection to cover not just religious beliefs or those “similar” to religious beliefs, but philosophical beliefs as well.
The post below ripped word for word from IFPS.org
I had the opportunity to have a conversation with Diana West at a conference on freedom of speech and religion in Washington D.C. last week. To make the conversation short enough for the youtube limit, I removed most of my end of it. I opened by asking Diana about what she thought of the fellow from Harvard un-inviting the founder of the Minute Men to a debate at the last moment. The Fox video interview of that student is here.
Hopefully that makes her answer a tad less cryptic.
The rest of my chat, I replaced with single line questions in text.
Comments welcomed.
James
From The Sun U.K.
By ALASTAIR TAYLOR
Published: 29 October, 2009
Beth says the checkout lad told her the band for Help for Heroes – aided by The Sun – meant she supported the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And when she complained to a supervisor, he BACKED the Asian youth, saying he was entitled to his view.
Beth, 40, who has two brothers in the services, said the checkout worker told her he didn’t want to serve her because of “what she was wearing.”
Shocked Beth, of Whitworth, Greater Manchester, said that at first she thought the youth at Asda’s Rochdale store meant a cross round her neck.
“He pointed to my Help for Heroes wristband and accused me of supporting the war. I told him it was nothing to do with the war, but about supporting our injured troops.
“I immediately complained to a supervisor, but he said it was his right not to serve me. I was disgusted.”
An Asda spokeswoman said they were “shocked” by the claims but had found no evidence that the incident happened in their store.
She added: “We are big supporters of the Help for Heroes campaign and we sell the pin badges and wristband in hundreds of our stores.”
What the f**k? No wonder British police forces are having trouble keeping law and order; they are too busy fussing over what ‘appropriate’ language to use when communicating with the public. ‘Morning ma’am is out. So is evening, child, boy, girl, homosexual, afternoon, businessman and housewife. Youth, youngster and ‘the tax man’ are also on the linguistic chopping block. Madness, sheer madness.
From The Telegraph U.K.
By Jasper Copping
Published: 9:30PM BST 24 Oct 2009
The official guidance means the salutation “evenin’ all”, which marked the start of each episode of Dixon of Dock Green, could be under threat.
The instructions form part of lengthy guidelines issued by police forces and fire services across the UK on what language their staff should use. Critics have accused the guides of “lacking common sense”.
Other words now discouraged include, “businessman”, “housewives” and “child”, which the organisations argue have negative connotations and could cause offence.
Confusingly, staff are also barred from using the word “homosexual”, for which they are instructed to use the term “gay”, while they are warned against using the phrase “straight”, and told to say “heterosexual”.
The instructions have emerged in response to a Freedom of Information request to police forces and fire services about the guidance they give their staff on their use of language. One force urging caution over the use of “evening”, is Warwickshire Police.
Under a section entitled “Communication, Some Do’s & Don’ts”, in its “Policing Our Communities” handbook, it gives advice to officers on communicating with people from different ethnic groups. It states: “Don’t assume those words for the time of day, such as afternoon or evening have the same meaning.”
A spokesman added: “Terms such as ‘afternoon’ and ‘evening’ are somewhat subjective in meaning and can vary according to a person’s culture or nationality. In many cultures the term evening is linked to time of day when people have their main meal of the day.
“In some countries including the UK, the evening meal time is traditionally thought of as being around 5-7pm but this might be different say for a family say from America who might have their main meal earlier and thus for them ‘evening ‘ may be an earlier time.
“The point is there is an element of subjectivity leading to a variation between cultures that we need to be aware of – taking steps as far as possible to ensure our communication is effective in serving the public.”
A number of organisations, among them Essex Police and Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service, now instruct staff to avoid the phrases “child, youth or youngster”.
The 52-page guide used by both organisations states that such phrases could have “connotations of inexperience, impetuosity, and unreliability or even dishonesty”. It also states that addressing someone as “boy” or “girl” “may cause offence”. Instead, officers and firemen are instructed to use the phrase “young people”.
The same guide also warns against the phrases “manning the phones”, “layman’s terms” and “the tax man”, for “making women invisible”.
The Metropolitan Police warns its staff about “common errors” to watch out for in their language. It says “homosexual” should be avoided and “gay” used, but that “straight” should not be used and “heterosexual” should. “Homosexual” should only be used in connection with legislation, according to the force.
London Fire Brigade instructs its staff not to use the terms “businessmen” or “housewives”, because it says they “reinforce outdated stereotypes”.
For the same reason, it tells workers not to call themselves “firemen” – they are “firefighters”. Other organisations have discouraged using the terms “postmen” and “binmen”.
Marie Clair, spokeswoman for the Plain English Campaign, said: “I have never heard of anyone being confused as to what part of the day it is. When the police need absolute accuracy over when something happened, then I am sure they use the exact time. There comes a point when common sense must prevail.”
She also criticised the decision to avoid phrases like “child” and “youth”. “Do you call a two-year-old a young person? Surely we can get greater accuracy in the language we already use, which is non-offensive,” she added.
The New York Times does not tell us whether Tareq Mehanna, the 27-year-old Massachusetts pharmacist who was just arrested on federal terrorism charges, is or even might be a Muslim. In their pages, telling this particular truth is still verboten, politically incorrect, rude, racist, a cheap shot, even “Islamophobic.”
Look: Mehanna might have traveled to Pakistan, Syria, and Yemen (which he did) because, as a relatively young man, he just wanted to sew his wild oats. No matter that Mehanna and his “associates,” including one Ahmad Abousamra who subsequently fled to Syria, had traveled together “seeking training from terrorist groups to fight against American soldiers.” No matter that Mehanna had tried to buy a gun from one Daniel Maldonado who is “currently serving a 10-year-prison sentence for training with Al Qaeda in Somalia. “
Please click here to read the rest of this article. If you have any friends who are in denial of the facts of Islam, please send them this link. Chesler explains them rather well here.
by Baron Bodissey
I posted on Monday about Jimmie Åkesson, the party leader of Sverigedemokraterna (the Sweden Democrats), and the op-ed he published in the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet. The paper’s editors wrote their own inflammatory headline for the op-ed, which did not reflect Mr. Åkesson’s words at all, and which predictably produced a massive uproar against the author’s “racist” opinions.
Kent Ekeroth, the international secretary for Sverigedemokraterna, has kindly translated the entire text of Jimmie Åkesson’s piece into English for Gates of Vienna. The correct title has also been restored to this version:
The establishment ignores the dangers of Islamization
by Jimmie Åkesson
One of multiculturalism’s many inherent paradoxes is that, despite its universal claims, it is a monocultural phenomenon which has only found fertile ground in the post-modern, oikophobic* Western world, and is therefore also based in Western phenomena and experience in assessing and analyzing the world. The Western experience is seen as a higher stage of development, one which the rest of the world has just not yet had time to achieve.
This is also why today’s multicultural Swedish power elite is so totally blind to the dangers of Islam and Islamization. They assume that Muslims want nothing more than to adapt to a Western lifestyle and Western standards, and that Islam is fundamentally the same as Christianity, with the only difference that Muslims have a different name for their god.
Thus we also assume that Islam can be tamed in the same way that secular forces centuries ago tamed European Christianity, and consigned it to the private sphere.
However, Islam differs from Christianity at several crucial points, for example, regarding the distinction between spiritual and secular power and the perception of the use of force. Islam has no equivalent of the New Testament, and no universal human message of love. These differences have resulted in the active rejection by Islam and the Muslim world of the Enlightenment and humanism.
This, together with almost 1,400 years of wars and conflicts between Islam and Christian Europe, is now believed by today’s rulers to be surmountable in a trice.
So far have we have to conclude that Islam has affected Swedish society far more so than Swedish society has influenced Islam. Mass immigration from Muslim countries, together with the relatively high birth rates in the Muslim community, suggest that this trend will continue unless a change in policy is instituted. Of course, a significant proportion of Europe’s Muslims are not literal believers; however, most studies performed in this field shows that fundamentalists are a large and growing minority. Continue Reading →