Friday, November 25, 2011

Obama and the Return of the Winston Churchill Bust

It had not even been close to a month after his inauguration, but the American president just could not wait; a bust of Winston Churchill that had been loaned to the White House by the British government during G.W. Bush's tenure was quietly packed and shipped back to London, apparently with no comment.

This one had been on my mind since it occurred but I had no outlet for expressing it until a couple of months ago. By February 15, 2009, the event had made it to the press. Obama was not interested in having Churchill’s representation in the Oval Office. His press team of course went through their gyrations to try to justify the return, which left Britain's diplomatic corps (no doubt pronounced as "corpse" by Obama as he did when speaking about a Navy Corpsman) embarrassed, probably hurt, and without words for a response. White House staff pretended to hold that since the bust had been a loan (often used in diplo-speak for gifts - did anyone really think that Britain ever wanted it back?) it had been G.W. Bush's responsibility to return it and that Obama was just getting his predecessor's work done. When that attempt fell flat, the media naturally gave Obama one their first of soon-to-be scores of free passes for nasty, jerky, or insufferably foolish moves or statements and promptly ignored the return and its effects in London.

Obama has not hidden the fact that he has an axe to grind against the civilization of the West. His father was a Kenyan. Apparently his grandfather was involved in the Mau Mau rebellion and subsequently captured and tortured by the colonial authorities - all this during the second Premiership of whom? - Winston Churchill! To paraphrase The British statesman while simultaneously putting words in Obama's mouth, "Having that bastard's bust in the Oval Office is something up with which I will not put".

The example of the American president in this case illustrates much of the utter abandonment of civility, honest-thinking, maturity, and basic common sense that we regularly see from the Left. Obama will not allow himself to admit that much of what the West accomplished was good for the world, that the fact that it was not perfect does not make it inherently bad, and most of all, that personal vendettas/past family sufferings simply have no place when you have an official position of authority. 

Churchill was a bridge both between the old British Empire and the new and even more obviously, between all nations that have legal, cultural, and linguistic roots with his country. His four-volume "A History of the English Speaking Peoples"  does a thorough and convincing job of arguing that so much links the US and the Commonwealth with the people and events of English/British history. His work leaves it plain and clear that the common foundations of these nations/peoples mandates cooperation and mutual assistance among and with each other.

The only part of the series in which I see him completely wrong is when he pins the blame for Union defeats early in the American Civil War on Lincoln. Churchill had a romantic notion of the Confederate leaders, something that he does not hide in his writings. He also acts as an apologist for incompetent Union Generals which leaves Lincoln as the fall guy to Churchill. The fact is that Lincoln displayed tremendous strategic insight in his comments and his correspondence with Union generals, both in encouraging decisive actions when Confederate armies where in danger of being enveloped and in insisting that US forces be deployed on multiple approaches deep into enemy territory to maximize the numerical advantages of the North.

Back to the return of the bust - The US and nations of the British Commonwealth have literally millions of people descended from the very people who suffered under misrule/malrule of Britain, including myself. These people are nevertheless fortunate to be living in a society that has foundations based on English Law. All those who enjoy benefits derived from this situation *traditionally have opportunities and rights that far surpass those of other nations. Almost every part of our daily lives are affected by the minutiae of British history, right down to that of the native Britons, Roman Legionaries, Saxon conquerors, and those who followed.

When coupling the above fact with that of the responsibility of one in public office to dispense with personal grievances (at least while he is in office), the return of the Churchill bust is seen for its atrocious, detestable, sickening, and utterly boorish motivations. Obama's qualities are those of a peasant who is ruled by a clannish hatred. He is like a spoiled, stuck-up, crude, and vengeful child who won't allow himself to be governed or even mildly influenced by rules of civility or the ethics of his [sic?]country.

* Note that in recent decades much of those freedoms have been removed from the citizens of those countries. The most notable have been the right of the individual to own weapons (firearms) and the right to free speech. The former has been largely removed almost across the board (Britain, Australia, Canada, South Africa). The loss of the latter occurred mostly in Britain. Those who protest the splintering of the nations population into groups with a Dark Ages-type of application of different laws to different peoples are routinely accused of hate speech and charged with breaches of law.

Thursday, November 24, 2011

All-American Muslim Can't Hide the Charade

The much-touted reality show All-American Muslim, which purported to teach Americans that those who subscribe to Islam are really no different from other people, has had a hard go at it when it comes to credibility.

Their modus operandi tends to consist of showcasing nominal or non-practicing types of Muslims and trying to get the viewing public to buy into the claim that any concerns about Islamic teachings are baseless. We were given an example of a woman who opens a nightclub. Maybe someone can help me out with this, but isn't the consumption of alcohol forbidden in Islam? Also how does the example of a woman (who needs the permission of a male relative to leave her prison/house) that decides to dispense with that restriction to the point of owning and operating a night club, prove that Islam is no different from other religions? On top of that, her manner of dress on the show would not allow her half a minute of peace or safety in an Islamic society.

Am I supposed to believe that a guy who claims to be Jewish but habitually eats pork BBQ and never even attends synagogue/temple worship is to be considered representative of Jewish people?

If  people want to be vaguely culturally Muslim just as some others in the West are somewhat culturally Christian or Jewish that is fine. Just don't insult my intelligence by expecting me to think that this is how a person of a particular group acts.

The case of this woman proves nothing more than the fact that some people don't follow all of the tenets of their respective religions. She owns a business that sells alcohol, maintains her freedom to move about without anyone's permission and dresses how she wants. Good for her, but none of those things are consistent with being a Moslem.

What it does not prove is that she should not be considered an example of a Muslim anymore that the womanizing John F. Kennedy or many of his family should be considered Catholics. True to form for the Leftist/multi-cultural, anti-West types, the producers of the show serve up examples of people who more or less look and act like we do and hope that we believe that the "exception proves the rule".

According to Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, advertisers are pulling out of The Learning [sic] Channel's new show.
Josef Goebbels would probably consider this show to be a shoddy job of propaganda.

Monday, November 14, 2011

Erick Holder Declines to Apologize for Agent Terry's Murder Then Leaks an Apology to the Press Before Terry's Family

The disgrace of an Attorney General that is Erik Holder, when asked at a Senate Judiciary Hearing if he intended to apologize for Border Patrol Agent Terry's murder (Which was committed using a weapon obtained from the Justice Department's Fast and Furious program) declined to do so and stated that he regretted what happened.

Terry's Mom and Dad, who for the last year have made no public statements, were understandably distraught and shocked. Holder's office, in damage control mode, then quickly drew up an apology which was promptly leaked to the press before being delivered to the Terry's.

This from the same man who pretends to be under the impression that the Second Amendment does not apply to private citizens and works the old tired line that it only refers to the Nationals Guard of states, which is mentioned in the second portion of that amendment. (And of course under the control of the Federal government whenever they want)

He and his tenure are abominations.

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Wilson Ramos Rescued - Chavez' Failures

Numerous news agencies reported that Washington Nationals catcher Wilson Ramos was rescued in a mission that saw several minutes of gunfire. This is cause to be thankful for the MLB rookie and his family.

Early reports quoted Ramos as saying that a number of the criminals spoke with a Colombian accent. Don't laugh - I did not learn Spanish until High School and I can pick out a Colombian in a few seconds of listening.
It is very possible that the criminals were affiliated in some way with the FARC, which has grown more desperate after several major setbacks handed to them by Colombian Military and Police forces. Of course much of the intelligence came as a result of US assistance.

Venezuela has an extremely high frequency of kidnappings, even among Latin American countries. Hugo Chavez is fond of running his mouth about how bad the US is. He revels in throwing his petrodollars around to other Latin American countries, especially those that either have turned Leftist or may do so soon. He seems to want to present himself as a sort of Leftist Godfather and hopes to facilitate other countries in running their nations into the ground as badly as he has with Venezuela. He even has made a big deal of providing subsidized home heating oil to low-income American families. Included in this sort of 'bread and circuses' are a series of commercials where one of his 'useful idiots' (To use Lenin's phrase) talks about the program and proceeds to pretend that opposition in the US to the program is "because it comes from Venezuela"; yeah - that is the reason.

Chavez presides over a nation where middle class and wealthier families have long been afraid of kidnappings and robberies. MLB and Minor league players who play in Venezuelan winter leagues employ private guards. Even McDonald's restaurants have armed guards posted in high vantage points to ward off criminals. He was like a kid in a candy store when George W. Bush was President. He appeared once at the United Nations General Circus, I mean Assembly, a few years ago and rambled on and on about how the place smelled of sulphur because the Devil (Bush) had spoken there a day earlier.

He seethes with arrogance, yet can't or won't even try to bring his country to a point where it is half as good a place to live as the US, which of course to him is a prime example of the wrong way to do all things. I for one would be glad to congratulate the buffoon if he did actually help out his people and nation. I mean, if I really despised the US, wouldn't I want to make my country safer and more prosperous and therefore prove that the US is wrong? That's not his plan. He prefers to nationalize private property to keep giving shots in the arm to the country's revenue. He refuses to renew licenses to TV stations that do not toe the line that he has drawn and refuse to be a part of his propaganda machine.

My take? He wants things to get worse so he can have a reason to consolidate even more power and keep himself there as El Presidente for Life. When the last barrel of oil is shipped out of Venezuela and the only thing that they have to show for it is a socialist version of a banana republic with kidnappings being a major part of the economy, Venezuelans can thank Hugo Chavez.

Friday, November 11, 2011

Austrian We Are Church Group Intends to Do Priestless Masses

Below is an excerpt from a Reuters UK article:

VIENNA | Mon Nov 7, 2011 1:59pm GMT
VIENNA (Reuters) - Dissident Austrian Catholics announced lay people will start celebrating Mass when a priest is unavailable, a clear call to disobedience just as the country's bishops hold their autumn conference.
A manifesto adopted by dozens of activists at the weekend said lay people will preach, consecrate and distribute communion in priestess parishes, said Hans Peter Hurka, head of the group We Are Church.
"Church law bans this. The question is, can Church law overrule the Bible? We are of the opinion, based on findings from the Second Vatican Council, that this (ban) is not possible," he said Monday.
End quote.

This thing has one wondering what dolts We Are Church" chooses to be their spokespersons.
Pretending to be under the impression that something means or is the opposite of what it actually is occurs all-to-frequently in the West today. Mr. Hurka pretends to think that the Church's requirement that masses are to be celebrated by Priests somehow stands in contrast to the Bible, which pretty clearly establishes the practice of the Eucharist in the context of one who is part of the apostolic succession/appointed by such. If the reference to the apostolic succession is too much, I would be happy to agree with someone who would go no further than "who is a Church Minister/Elder".

The more sickening part is the reference to Vatican II. This council has been the subject of more outright lies than any governing body/convention/committee in the history of the world. The Leftists, while pretending to be Catholics, desire to bring down the Church piece-by-piece. They have repeatedly walked around and about making all sorts of outrageous claims that what they are doing either is outlined by the Second Vatican Council or is in their vague words "In the spirit of..."

In today's society, where honesty means little, one can pretend to be of the opinion that a Council decided on positions and practices that were completely contrary to what the actual signatories wrote and signed to document as their decisions. If that course is not chosen, then one can just pretend that the council did in fact decide or desire whatever one in his delusional mind would have wanted and hope that no one checks by reading what the council wrote.

I thought that We Are Church peaked in the early 90s. They were never an exceptionally bright lot, mostly being comprised of pseudo-intellectuals and angry feminists who knew next to nothing about the Bible and really wanted to keep it that way. They like to play-act things like Consecrating the Host and pretend that it is the same as the real thing.

If they really cared about the Church, they would press for more investigations/hearings into the suppression and destruction of evidence and malfeasance/ nonfeasance of Church administrators in reference to pedophiles in the priestly ranks. The need to purge the Church and society of all who committed criminal acts and those who allowed these to go unpunished is almost entirely ignored by We Are Church. The only time that these boneheads bring this issue up is to try to prove that the priesthood needs to be open to all.
(Of course the fact that the vast majority of pedophiles are married men means nothing)
Like marriage, the military, and other intuitions and organizations, the intent of the Left is to tear these down piece-by-piece. The easiest way to do this is to open these ranks to anyone. That way these will have little or no meaning. The scandal of US seminaries, where the vast majority of heterosexual, manly, and traditional men are either denied enrollment or thrown out with Soviet-style diagnoses of psychological problems is the biggest open secret of our lifetime. Its intended result, the shortage of Priests, especially manly ones, is celebrated as the left intends to exploit that gap and get their own people in those positions.

Anjem Choudary's MAC Offices Raided

The British Muslim group" Muslims Against Crusades, which is the fourth attempt of  Islamist Anjem Choudary to create a group that does not get banned due to being linked to terrorism, has had its offices raided by police in Britain, Reuters UK reported today. Choudary is known to be an extremely incendiary character who has previously organized and planned more "Poppy Burnings" for Armistice Day to protest UK troops being deployed in Muslim countries. He also angrily predicts that Sharia will be the law of the land in the UK. British officials have repeatedly played-down his tirades and insisted that he is not being serious when he calls for conflict and Islamic cultural takeover of the UK.
My bet is that he is still keeping himself detached from the guys that get their hands dirty and will consequently avoid charges in this case. I hope that I am wrong.

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Muslim Rape Gangs in Britain

The following is an excerpt from an NBC news article:

"Investigating Britain's 'sex gangs'

By Tazeen Ahmad, NBC News correspondent  

NBC News correspondent Tazeen Ahmad is also a reporter for Dispatches, an award-winning investigative news program on Britain’s Channel 4.  She wrote the following piece for after she and a team of journalists spent a year researching and producing “Britain’s Sex Gangs,” a program broadcast in the U.K.  
LONDON - Abby sat in the back of the car twisting her fingers nervously. She pushed her bangs out of her eyes but her hands quickly returned to her lap, clasped tightly together. Her chipped pink nail polish served as a reminder that these are the hands of a schoolgirl – a schoolgirl living a nightmare.
For the last two years, Abby had been repeatedly raped by men far older than she is. She was 13 years old the first time it happened.
“It went on from 7 o'clock, when it started getting dark, to roughly 3 or 4 o'clock in the morning,” she said.
Abby smiled, but the smile never reached her pretty hazel eyes. On this drizzly Friday afternoon, she showed us the places in the northern English city of Leeds her rapists had taken her: fast-food restaurants, hotels, alleyways.
We pulled up outside a children’s playground. Abby was brought here by someone she thought was her friend and then was raped by 20 different men. It was the same park she played in with her sisters. She said being here again made her feel sick.
Abby isn’t alone. The British government estimates that as many as 10,000 children in the U.K. may be victims of sexual exploitation by gangs, and fears the number could be much higher.

The crime has been dubbed “on-street grooming” or “gang-grooming” and refers to actions taken by men to befriend young girls, sometimes as young as 11, using a combination of charm, coercion and blackmail to gain their trust and lower their inhibitions before they sexually exploit them. After the target is “groomed,” the girls are passed on to other men to be raped and gang-raped.
Over the past four years, 14 gang-grooming cases have come to court across the country and 46 men have been convicted.
The problem is feared to be so widespread that Sue Berelowitz, Britain’s Deputy Children’s Commissioner, announced the start of a two-year inquiry into the problem in October of this year.
The newly formed Child Sexual Exploitation – Gangs and Groups Inquiry will investigate the scope and scale of the issue so that police and local law enforcement have accurate data – beyond just anecdotal evidence – to help protect future victims.

One aspect of the issue that has gotten a lot of media attention in the U.K. is the race of the victims and perpetrators. There have been high-profile arrests of men of Pakistani descent who abused white girls.
But Berelowitz emphasized that unfortunately this is a widespread problem. "It would also be wrong for anyone to conclude or assert that this is an issue for one particular ethnic community," Berelowitz told the BBC."

End quote

There are many more horrid details in the rest of the article.
The only thing that surprises me at this point is that the mainstream media actually even touched on this subject. The realities are that this has been going on for quite some time and that the overwhelming majority of assailants are from the Muslim community. For them, British white, probably Christian girls are simply fair game. In a religion that seems to be obsessed with sex, these men, like their women, have an air of superiority when it comes to non-Muslims, especially for their (non-Muslim) females. Islamic culture sees these girls and young women as spoils of war to be used for their pleasure and no doubt to humiliate the enemy, who have basically welcomed them into their country. A typical explanation from Muslims to mitigate the guilt of the assailants is that while Muslim women hold their purity sacred, non-Muslims do not; indeed these girls have probably engaged in sexual activity already so it doesn't matter what happens to them after that.

The British government's actions in response to this plague are sickeningly weak . This is not going to stop until Britain and other European governments, which have similar problems, begin to address the real issue.

When are parents going to stop believing the lie that one cannot control his or her own children? We've come to accept the this falsehood and consequently cut our children loose do do almost anything. Parents/guardians have to put limits on those with whom a child (including teens - they are not free yet) hangs out and limits on the amount and length of those times away from the house.

Monday, November 7, 2011

Copts being Arrested to Cover up Killings by Egyptian Army

More fruits of the Arab Spring - Now the Copts are being targeted for arrests. Apparently it is illegal to be shot and run down by armored personnel carriers in Egypt.
Below is an excerpt:

"Saturday, November 5, 2011

Egypt Randomly Arresting Copts for Maspero Massacre

By Michael Ireland
Senior Correspondent, ASSIST News Service

CAIRO, EGYPT (ANS) -- Egypt's Military Prosecutor decided on November 3 to continue the detention of 34 Coptic Christians for another 15 days, pending investigations on charges of inciting violence, carrying arms and insulting the armed forces during the October 9 Maspero Massacre, which claimed the lives of 27 Christians and injured 329. The court session was attended by more than twenty defense lawyers. The case was adjourned to November 18.
Egyptian journalist Mary Abdelmassih, writing for AINA -- the Assyrian International News Agency  , says that according to defense lawyers, most of the detainees were arrested after October 9, and some were not even at the Maspero protest and were just collected from the streets for "being a Christian."
According to AINA, three of them were teens under 16 years old and another had an operation to extract a bullet from his jaw and was chained to his bed in hospital, said defense lawyer Ibrahim Edward. "After the operation he was sent straight to prison where he cannot eat without feeding tubes, so he lives on juices."
AINA says prominent activist Alaa Abdel-Fatah, who criticized the army for the Maspero Massacre, was arrested on October 30, charged with inciting violence, seizing military equipment, and vandalizing military property. He refused to answer questions from the military prosecutors "in a case where the military is accused of committing a massacre when their APCs ran over peaceful protesters in front of Maspero on Oct. 9," his lawyer Ahmed Seif Al-Islam, former director of the Hisham Mubarak Law Center, is quoted as saying. "

End quote

Much more than for other religions, Islam is prone to mob violence. Whether that tendency was reflected in the attacks on Copt by the Egyptian army a few weeks ago or if the army smashed the Copts during their demonstration in a bizarre attempt to prevent more Moslems from rioting, the fact is that Christians are clearly in a worse situation now. Expect more of this in the near future.

Saturday, November 5, 2011

All - American Muslim

I saw a commercial for a new reality series that is to start on November 13. The show, which is billed as a look into lives of Muslims and their experiences in the US, appears to start with the premise that Americans know little or anything about the religion or those who practice it.

On the surface, one would be likely to see this as a great idea. Several individuals and families can be interviewed and the viewing public can of course can see that in many ways they are very much like we are.
Indeed, I would agree that many Muslims truly are good-hearted people. Just as being Christian or anything else does not lock one in to being a nice person, Islam does not in and of itself force one to be bad.The difference of course is that the system is one that mandates all individual, civil, and social behavior and very often not in a good way.

The trailer featured nice people, many of whom were born in the US.  Bits that were provided seem to indicate that Americans as a whole are out to run each and very Muslim out of the country and that we generally assume that  Muslims are out to get us. One example was a nice young woman who stated that a person was giving her all sorts of grief at an airport. Her response to this typical ignorant American was to the effect of " Listen, I have to make a flight to teach people like you about us at a seminar". Of course no one can know about Islam except those who belong to that group and we have to blindly accept what you tell us about it. Others consisted of still photos of anti-Islamic vandalism (We can't forget to link those who expose Islam to criminal behavior) and shorts of Muslims who laughingly ask "Where am I supposed to go? I was born here!".

I plan to watch at least a few of the episodes. It will be interesting to see how much of what Islam actually is will be left out. I also expect that almost if not all who express concern about Islam will have not been chosen from among the most level-headed and articulate of that group of people. It's more fun to interview idiots and that tactic makes others afraid to stick their necks out because then everyone else will think that they too are ignorant rednecks. The intent of the series ultimately will be to make your local Mosque and its attendees be percieved as the same thing as the local Church and to make concerned Americans afraid of being labeled as racists.

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Hagia Sophia in Istanbul En Route to Again Being a Mosque

The following article appeared in "Trend" News Agency Site on 10/31 It is a private Azerbaijani organization.
I caught wind of this first at Gates of Vienna.

-"Azerbaijan, Baku, Oct.31 / Trend A. Tagiyeva /
Hagia Sophia in Istanbul, which was earlier a Patriarchal Orthodox Cathedral and later a mosque, and now a museum, may once again become an active mosque, the Sabah newspaper reports.
Repairs are underway. A mimbar - a platform for the imam -- is planned to be built in the museum.
Earlier, Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc said during a visit to the museum that fundamental changes should be made in Hagia Sophia.
Hagia Sophia was built in Constantinople, now Istanbul, in 537. After Mehmet II conquered the city in 1453, the church turned into a mosque."-

After over 900 years as a Orthodox Christian Cathedral and seat of the Patriarchs of the Eastern Church, the grand work of Justinian and his master architects and builders was turned into a mosque following the sack of Constantinople. Few are aware of the pillaging, looting, rapine, and slave-taking that went on in Hagia Sophia once the walls of the city were breached. Mehmet, or Mahomet, is often referred to as allowing for the "customary" three-day period of looting upon the final failure of the city's defenses. Let's not ignore custom and tradition, now. Their sack probably made that of the Fourth Crusade look like high school kids having a night of mailbox baseball.

Picked clean of its gold, silver, people, and anything else of value to the Ottomans, the Icons, statuary, and anything that depicted a living creature were either removed and plastered over (after being severely scored to ensure a good bond for the plaster). The Church of the Holy Wisdom was now a Mosque. The building was to take on the look with which we are familiar - the four minarets surrounding it from which the the sound the American president referred to as "The sweetest sound in the world" would be heard until the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the founding of the nation of Turkey by Kemal Ataturk. Graciously, seemingly almost as an act of charity (sincere or not) the shell of Hagia Sophia became a museum.

The policies of Islamist Turkish Prime Minister's Tayyip Erdogan's party (And man! I was raised on how 'Western" and secular Turkey was - was of course being the operative word), like the Arab Spring praised by the left, are now also bearing fruit. Hagia Sophia is to again be a mosque.

Not that the West did not have its chances; the nations of Western Europe did pretty much all that they could to ensure the survival of the Ottoman state. Far from the Muslim victimisation-type claims (the old story of Europe ganging up on the poor declining Sultanate), Europe's far-sighted rulers happily encouraged them to attack other Christian nations like France did with Austria during the 1683 siege of Vienna. The British even brought the French into the Crimean War because, well, we can't have the Russians gaining full control of the Black Sea or taking Constantinople, that would give them an unfair advantage in the "Great Game". Catherine the Great had high hopes for John Paul Jones when the naturalized American was given a Rear Admiral's command - "He will get to Constantinople". But Russian selfishness iand intrigue among top officers caused him to be withdrawn from the Black Sea.

And today, we see more of the results of the Islamist resurgence that has pushed the secular Turkish army commanders aside. Muslims tend to be quite gleeful about taking over Christian houses of worship. In this case, Erdogan's boys get to act in the manner of "Well, you know that it was a great shame that Kemal remove so much of Islamic culture from our country, especially taking away our crowning achievement of the Aya Sofia (Hagia Sophia) Mosque. We will right that wrong and reestablish our rightful place as leaders in the Muslim world"

This time I would be surprised if the icons and other representations that did survive through the years and may have been brought back to public view (Lots of plaster would have had to be removed) during the museum period are not going to removed completely. If, to Erdogan, the Mosques are their barracks, then he is more than likely planning to ensure that the greatest of Turkey's barracks is not defiled by all of that (In the eyes of Muslims) horrendous Byzantine art.