From the Caliphate of England

LONDON (AP) -- Britain barred a far-right Dutch lawmaker from entering the country Thursday because of his anti-Islamic views, touching off a wide-ranging debate in the U.K. about the limits of free speech.

The British government has said that Wilders was not welcome because he posed a threat to ''community harmony and therefore public security.''

Wilders was invited to Britain by a member of Parliament's upper house, the House of Lords, to show his 15-minute film ''Fitna,'' which criticizes the Quran as a ''fascist book.''

The film sparked violent protests around the Muslim world last year for linking Quranic verses with footage of terrorist attacks.

Uh, don't tell the AP but those were MUSLIM terrorists. I mean Islam, Muslims, Quran... terrorists.... Nope, no connection. Move along folks, nothing to see here.

Wilders told The Associated Press he had no regrets about the trip, attacking what he called ''the cowards in the U.K. government,'' and accusing British Prime Minister Gordon Brown of having a servile attitude toward Islam.

Wilders told the AP by telephone it was ''a sad day for Britain and freedom of speech.''

''You would expect something like this to happen in Zimbabwe or Jordan,'' he said

Yes. Yes you could. You can now add the Caliphate of England to that list.

NYTimes

The Brussels Journal has an article in it titled "P. D. Ouspensky and the Nightmare of Revolution," by Thomas F. Bertonneau. It is an appreciation of "Letters from Russia" (1921), by Peter Damian Ouspensky.I confess to have never heard of it which is my loss. Bertonneau notes:

the (book) boasts the twin virtues of its brevity (less than sixty pages) and its moment of composition, the year 1919, during the fantastic and homicidal tumult of Russia’s Civil War.....fled St. Petersburg when the Communist coup d’état erupted but could not find his way free of embattled territories until 1920,...In his role as mathematician and philosopher, Ouspensky had written about the fourth dimension, so he had some experience in trying to come to terms rhetorically with odd notions and fantastic, counterintuitive theses. The first of the five installments of Letters from Russia establishes the book’s pervasive, nightmarish tone as Ouspensky describes upheavals of ordinary life so gross and brutal that he must search out a new language of indirection by which to convey them to the blissfully uninitiated....

In a subsequent sentence Ouspensky feels compelled to put the phrase living in the old way in quotation marks and supply for it a gloss, but the attempt fails. “You do not even know the significance of the words… you have not the necessary perspective; you cannot get away from yourselves and look at yourselves from another point of view.”

At the Tiflis railway terminal, where Ouspensky stopped (or rather was halted) on his way from St. Petersburg, Bolshevism manifested itself as “terrifying cries and shouts… heard on the platform, quickly followed by several shots.” A soldier told passengers that he and his comrades had executed a “thief.” By morning they had executed three more thieves. The abuse of language is characteristic. In any case, shooting summed up Bolshevism, which, having “no constructive program,” could only destroy and did so prodigiously and gleefully. Ouspensky anticipates Solzhenitsyn in identifying Bolshevism (Marxism) as a pernicious German invention seized on by Lenin and his followers to justify their orgy of violence against a world they hated because it had the temerity to exist apart from their desires and wishes. “As a general rule,” writes Ouspensky in the fourth letter, “Bolshevism based itself on the worst forces underlying Russian life.”

I shall read this book. I think it shows what all "isms" bring, and that would include the terror"ISM" of radical Muslims and living in a society where extremists Muslims can shut down free speech merely by threatening to riot.

Ouspensky repeats a refrain in all five letters that Bolshevism, being barbarism with a fancy vocabulary, constitutes a threat not only in Russia, but anywhere, hence also everywhere, because it is a destabilizing condition of ordered life, so arduously achieved, always to carry with it “barbarian forces existing inside [the] society, hostile to culture and civilization.” I could not help connecting a recent remark made by Sean Gabb in a Brussels Journal entry with the foregoing words by Ouspensky.

In a discussion of “hate speech” laws and their selective enforcement, Gabb notes that, “the soviet socialists and the national socialists kept control by the arbitrary arrest and torture or murder of suspected opponents,” but that these methods are currently “not… acceptable in England or in the English world.” Nevertheless, writes Gabb, censorious speech-legislation involving intimidating criminalization of certain words or verbal attitudes “has nothing really to do with politeness,” but is, rather, “about power.” So it is as well in the United States and Canada. Wherever governments and elites seek to control expression, whether or not as Gabb observes it has to do ostensibly with “diversity and inclusiveness,” the real agenda is to achieve “the unlimited power to plunder and enslave us, while scaring us into the appearance of gratitude for our dispossession.”

To steal an expression of what use to be the world's oldest governing body of a free people, England's Parliament, "Here Here!"

I would say that “hate crime” and “hate speech” laws represent a trial balloon of totalitarian methods. Such methods are barbarous. They betray the basic decency of the Western achievement. They take root in “the worst forces,” as Ouspensky says, “underlying our life.” Now “ought” is a counterfactual word. But it strikes me that if history taught only one lesson to the civilized it would be that as soon as any visibly power-hungry group succeeds in an agenda of intimidation, no matter how minor, sensible people dedicated to their own freedom ought to respond with all necessary resistance until the aggressors have themselves been intimidated into a retreat.

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3792">Link

If you ever wondered how a civilization could slide down into darkness, look no further than what the English have done.

A great country has died. Not from Spanish shot or French cannon balls or German bombs, but the poison of self hatred that was self made, self taught and self administered.

It shall be missed.

Dear England. Rest In Peace. Your children have deserted you.

Muslims and Obama and immigration

On Monday I posted that Obama had issued an Executive Order to spend $20.3 million dollars to assist in the immigration of Muslims from the Gaza strip of Palestine. Since no Muslim country will take them I opined that his intent is to bring them into the US.
The question, of course, is why he would want to bring hundreds of thousands, 99.9% of which will possess no marketable job skills beyond untrained labor, given that even when our economy was booming there were few jobs available and almost none now. I say that he sees them as reliable voters… watch how quickly they become naturalized citizens… to assist him in remaining in power in 2012 and perhaps longer if he can get the Constitution changed.
So all this piffle that follows any discussion concerning the spread of Muslims and their effect always evolves to discussions about religion and good/bad Muslims, etc., etc., but that actually has nothing to do with anything. It matters not if the Muslims are good. The net effect is always bad.
Before we can discuss immigration, the base question becomes, “Do you want your country’s culture and laws to remain basically unchanged?” If you don’t care they are changed then you will have no problem with unlimited immigration by groups that are outside the existing culture and laws. If you do care then you will be opposed.
And the actual country doesn’t matter, nor the groups. When small groups enter they are easily assimilated. As the groups become larger, assimilation becomes harder because the larger the group the more identification there is with the culture and country of the past. Thus in the late 19th century and early 20th we had Little Italy, Chinatown, Irish enclaves in Boston and New York as well as the Jewish Garment District in New York. All were known to have problems and all were known to have high crime rates.
However, several things pushed them into the existing “American” culture. The first was that there were no major newspapers or journals in their native languages, although there were some small papers. Communication with family and friends left in the “old” country was slow and expensive. All official communication was in English, and schools were in English. In addition there was a large need for unskilled labor and land was being given away. All external pressures pushed the immigrant towards learning English and becoming “American.”
Although of less importance, at that time, the basic religions were Christian and Jewish…and the immigrants came from countries in which a secular form of government existed. And yes, the demands of the Jewish faith stressed the bubble as did some of the Catholic Church’s demands. But on the whole these were marginal.
In addition, the vast majority of the immigrants came from legal systems that were based on either English Common Law or the Napoleonic Code.
That is no longer true. There are numerous radio stations/TV in Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Arabic as well as newspapers. We not only dial 1 for English we skip channel 11 for Spanish…Ballots are printed in non-English and signs are printed in various languages.
From a purely commercial view these things may be good. But for having a unified society with, basically, a common culture, it is not only bad, it is stupid.
Now, let us back track to Europe.
Amazingly, much of what can be said of the US can be said about Europe. It was a secular society based on English Common Law or Napoleonic Code or some variation thereof. But even more surprising, Europe was even more nativist than the US. Oh, I know many spoke several languages as a practical matter, but on the whole they were ferocious defenders of their homelands as the various wars fought through 1945 show.
After WWII, Europe prospered under the protection of the US and a funny thing happened. The protection came to be resented, mostly encouraged by members of the far Soviet Left. The developing welfare state(s) needed unskilled labor. At the same time, peace and improvement in health care caused a boom in the Muslim population. It was a merger; it turns out, made in Hell.
Immigrants were welcomed. Social benefits were plentiful as were jobs. The Europeans, even less religious than ever before and more secular, saw no problems with Islam and its gun bearer, Shari Law. And as the Muslim population was small, there were no large demands by them. And even worse, the governments made no attempt to push assimilation. They were still nativist and they were use to ghettos for the Jews, why not the Muslims?
Time, as it is said, went by. And since the governments had not pushed assimilation many second generation “European” Muslims did not think of themselves as French or German. They thought of themselves as Muslims. Worse, the economy had been bad for years. Unemployment was and is high and there is almost no demand for unskilled labor. That was and is a perfect receipt for developing an underclass that is under educated, bitter and envious.
Even worse, the European Union, in an attempt to pull a “country” together from the various pieces has pushed various speech codes and “hate” laws to the extreme trying to insure that the French do not insult the Flemish who do not insult the Germans who do no insult the Wallons. I trust you get the idea. But like most roads to Hell these good intentions prevented honest criticism among the groups and sheltered Muslims who needed the criticism most of all. Yet to do so subject the person criticizing to attacks and arrests. It was, and is, PC on steroids and diversity run wild.
And the various Islamic sects have done so by sponsoring schools, providing Imams that rant and attack. The picture includes riots in France, Denmark, England and Norway over such “insults” as cartoons and movies. With predicable attacks upon gays, rapes of non-Muslim female “honor” killings, etc. It has become a witch’s brew of diversity run wild and used by the extremist Muslims for their own purposes.
Worse, in a recent poll 42% of all Muslims in England think they should be allowed to go their separate way and develop their own society. That, of course, is nonsense. Islam is expansionist. The English must either force assimilation or be devoured.
So you see, the issue isn’t about good or bad. It is about numbers and a religion, Islam that is not only expansionistic; it has a history of expansion by conquest and is one of the least tolerant religions. The issue isn’t about freedom of religion; it is about freedom from Islamic religion. The radicals although small in number, aided by the extremists by largely obeyed by the “moderates” because of fear have the bit between their teeth and are constantly on the offensive.
They rule through peer pressure brought by the preaching of the Imams, terror of the extremists on the moderates and a European culture who has been abject surrender for two decades or so.
To understand this you must first know Islam is not a religion as we think of it; it is a system of living that controls all aspects of a Muslims life. And it does not tolerate other faiths. Thus whenever and wherever Muslim reaches a certain mass it starts to demand changes in its favor and control. And it is perfectly happy to discuss settlement of its demands while it prepares a list of new ones.
Some say that Europe is lost. These numbers aren’t exact, but somewhere around 2050, if the current trend continues, the population will be a majority of Muslims. But based on political control and the weakness of the native Europeans the Muslim population will be running things much sooner.
The issue of immigration should always be discussed thoroughly because of the economic and societal impacts on the existing citizens. The Muslim immigration into the US must be doubly reviewed. Not because they are “good” or “bad” but because the results of Muslim immigration have been uniformly bad in Europe and because the US is merely an extension of the Europeans, although more open and, on the whole, more liberal.
And because we can already see the results of increases in the Muslim population. They range from schools in San Diego segregating boys and girls and sponsoring times for prayers to technical schools in Minneapolis/St. Paul providing foot washing facilities for prayer services to taxi cab drivers refusing to carry dogs and/or people who have alcohol to a private school in Virginia teaching that it is okay to steal from and/or kill Jews.
And now we can turn again to Obama’s EO and ask, “Why?” He is an educated man, well informed so it is reasonable to assume that he knows these things. And once you come to that conclusion the only logical one is that he doesn’t care or that he sees these things as a positive.

As time goes on we will, unfortunately, understand his position. Both are bad.

The above is an expansion of a comment I made in the Tennessean.

No bathing suits in the lobby!

Success is getting what you want!
Happiness is wanting what you get!

And always be careful of what you ask for.
Particularly if you ask old men! They are apt to try and be helpful!

Hat tip to Jimmy M!

British fears and Muslim Immigration

The issue in the US really is immigration. Muslims in small groups present no real threat beyond a possible association with radical Muslim terrorist groups and providing funds for terrorist groups through so called "charities." But as their numbers grow then the assimilation will slow and as isolation sets in they will revert to more traditional religious beliefs and will be prayed on by the more radical Imams. As they become less "western" they will lose their place in the economic structure, even as they revert more and more towards the most conservative views of Islam with the problems that brings. Unable to find work they will become easy prey for gang membership and terrorist recruiters. Whipped to a frenzy by their Imams they will riot and kill over any thing they see as an insult.

This can be readily seen by looking at Europe. Demands for Shari law have been agreed to in England and any criticism of Muslims is called hate speech in the EU. 42% of the Muslims in England have stated they do not want to become "English" but want to be separate. Ultimately that can not work. The English will force assimilation or the Muslims will take control.

Geert Wilders, a Dutch member of his Parliament has produced a 15 minute video called "Fitna." The link to it is directly below. It consists of statements by Muslims, news reports and reading from the Quran. If you dare you can watch it and draw your own conclusions. It does not express opinions, just facts. As you might imagine it has been condemned by Muslims and Wilders has been arrested for "hate speech."

Fitna

As I commented before, what has happened in Europe is coming here. To understand it we need to look at Europe. Three blogs, The Brussels Journal, The Gates of Vienna and Islam In Europe are excellent sources. I read all three, and no, I do not agree with some of the things said, but the bare facts and links to other news sources, normally not in the US media, are invaluable if you really want to be informed.

Something that you would learn is that Wilders, who had been invited to England by a member of the House of Lords, has been declared persona non gratis because a Muslim member of the House of Lords has declared he will marshal 10,000 Muslims and have riots in the streets.

The invitation by the House of Lords member has not been withdrawn and Wilders says the English will have to arrest him at Heathrow. We shall see.

So much for the English's vaunted belief in democracy. So much more for the fear the Muslims have instilled in the British. So much for the country that once stood alone and toe to toe with Hitler and protected the world.

They were family. They called us "Colonials" and "Cousins" and "Yanks." We called them "Brits" and "Limeys." But most of all we knew each other as friends and allies.

I mourn their demise. I weep for their shame.

I fear for our future.

Wilders

Brussels Journal

Gates of Vienna

Islam in Europe

This has been expanded from a comment by me in the Tennessean.

Airbus 340 crashes on the ground

This is one of those, "I couldn't make this up stories."

"The brand spanking new Airbus 340-600, the largest passenger airplane ever built, sat in its hangar in Toulouse , France without a single hour of airtime. Enter the Arab flight crew of Abu Dhabi Aircraft Technologies (ADAT) on November 15, 2007 to conduct pre-delivery tests on the ground, such as engine run-ups, prior to delivery to Etihad Airways in Abu Dhabi.
The ADAT crew taxied the A340-600 to the run-up area. Then they took all four engines to takeoff power with a virtually empty aircraft. Not having read the run-up manuals, they had no clue just how light an empty A340-600 really is.
The takeoff warning horn was blaring away in the cockpit because they had all 4 engines at full power. The aircraft computers thought they were trying to takeoff but it had not been configured properly (flaps/slats, etc.). Then one of the ADAT crew decided to pull the circuit breaker on the Ground Proximity Sensor to silence the alarm.
This fools the aircraft into thinking it is in the air.The computers automatically released all the brakes and set the aircraft rocketing forward. The ADAT crew had no idea that this is a safety feature so that pilots can't land with the brakes on.
Not one member of the seven-man Arab crew thought to throttle back the engines from their max-power setting, so the $200 million, brand-new aircraft crashed into a blast-barrier, totaling it.
The extent of injuries to the crew is unknown, for there has been a news blackout in the major media in France and elsewhere. Coverage of the story was deemed insulting to Moslem Arabs. Finally, the photos are starting to leak out."

Did this really happen? Hard to believe on one hand, on the other hand we have the pics. One thing bothers me in the explanation. Pulling the circuit breakers shouldn't fool the aircraft into thinking anything. It should just show the indicators as not functioning, not "the aircraft is in the air." But hey, who knows. Maybe the French engineer was brain damaged from eating too many freedom fries!

Hat tip to Larry P!

European Court of Justice considers if a chimp is a person

1. The European Court of Justice for the protection of human rights will examine the plea to grant recognition to a chimp as a person with corresponding rights. The litigant is not the chimp personally. If successful, this individual will get a guardian to represent his interests. In a future case one anticipates, institutionalized discrimination against chimps will be charged. Putting someone under tutelage because he is a chimp has implications. They are that all chimpanzees, regardless of their personal merits, are deemed to need a guardian. This is, indeed, a clear case of racial profiling.

This must be next.



Link

Ode to importing Muslims

In celebration of Barry Hussein Obama, aka "I have Muslim famnily members, we just didn't know you had hundreds of thousands" decision to first close GITMO and then import more from Palestine in case the GITMO bunch needs help, click on this link for some musical commentary.