Muslim Persecution of Hindus In India — The Story You Won’t See In the Western Mainstream Media

Sep 10 2010 Published by under 2010 Elections

They are crossing the border illegally and violently displacing the indigenous population whose homes and possessions they either destroy or occupy. They are attacking the young, the elderly, and especially the girls and women, whom they kidnap, forcibly convert, or traffic into brothels. The locals are terrified of them. The police rarely come to their aid, nor do the politically correct media or government. Both are terrified by the criminals and terrorists who are riding these immigrant waves. I am not talking about illegal immigrants to Europe or North America. I am describing Muslims who are penetrating India’s West Bengal region. These Bangladeshi immigrants are becoming conduits for criminal activities (arms, drugs, and sexual slavery) which also fund global jihad. You won’t read about this in the Western mainstream media—or even in the Indian media, which has turned a blind eye to this ongoing tragedy because they are afraid to be labeled “politically incorrect” or “Islamophobic.” They are also afraid of reprisals. When Islamic zealots ransacked the office of the renowned newspaper, ‘The Statesman’ in Kolkata, in retaliation for a mere reproduction of an article condemning Islamic extremism, the Indian press remained silent. The editor and publisher of the newspaper were arrested for offending Muslim sentiments and no action was taken against the rioters. Read the Rest at Fox News

See the rest here:
Muslim Persecution of Hindus In India — The Story You Won’t See In the Western Mainstream Media

No responses yet

What Again Were We Supposed to Learn from 9/11?

Sep 10 2010 Published by under 2010 Elections

It’s the 9th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks tomorrow. It’s a good time to reflect, but I’m not sure everyone knows on what exactly. Of course, there are the tragic deaths, but one of the reasons to remember is to keep in mind the lessons we need to learn to keep such a horror from happening again. And what is that lesson? Here’s what I think we need to learn from 9/11: There are large numbers of violent, irrational people out there and we can’t just ignore them and hope they go away. As we sit around with our iPads and our DVRs and enjoy our culture, it’s easy to forget there are barbarians standing just outside. They aren’t very good at anything, but they would like to see us dead. I don’t think in this post 9/11 world most people have learned the appropriate lesson from this. The whole Koran burning insanity illustrates this. That a handful of people in Florida can hold the world hostage by threatening to burn a few books is beyond silly, yet the main reaction has been not to tackle how ridiculous that is but to figure out how to appease the irrational violent people. You can’t appease irrational people. They’ll get violent over one guy burning Korans. They’ll get violent over cartoons. They’ll get violent because of false rumors of Korans being flushed down toilets. And yet are focus is on how to keep these crazy people happy and calm. There’s a popular school of thought that if we just got out of the Middle East, then all the irrational violent people would be happy and stuff. We want to prescribe rational notions to irrational people. The left think the people in the Middle East are like angry dogs; you can just do a few tricks to keep their simple minds calm. But they’re people, and people have a complex crazy. And you can’t just push that crazy off to some isolated area and think it will all work out for the better. At some point, we have to engage it. That doesn’t just mean militarily — hopefully it doesn’t mean anymore fighting — but at some point we have to stand up for ourselves. We can’t have people attack us and be all like, “Oh, we’re sorry. Let’s try to be nicer to you people.” We act weak, and we get attacked. The radical Muslims are stomping all over Europe now because those people are nothing but weak; they can’t even stand up for their culture anymore. We have to be strong, and if we’re strong enough, we can give people something better to hold onto that their current violent, craziness. The culture over there has to change one day, and we might as well lead the way. We haven’t been good at the not being weak lately. We can do better. We can’t appease the craziness in the Middle East — we have to be more willing to call it out. With all the oppression and violence that goes on there every day, we should have been more willing to ridicule the notion that a bunch of Korans burning was anything worth our attention. Well, that’s my ramble. 9/11 is complicated. There’s my attempt this year to figure some things out.

Continue reading here:
What Again Were We Supposed to Learn from 9/11?

No responses yet

Muslims Worshipers Occupy Paris Streets Illegally – Are We Tolerant or What?

Sep 06 2010 Published by under 2010 Elections, Uncategorized

Mark Steyn, whose book “ America Alone ” provoked a flurry of quasi-judicial activity in Canada from the usual human rights sock puppets , must be feeling these days like his only mistake was underestimating the speed and scope of the problem he described. Steyn’s essential point was when a moribund secularized society – unsure of what it believes in and equally uninterested in reproducing itself – accepts into its midst large numbers of prolific, zealous and inherently hostile members of another society, it doesn’t work out well for that first society. This is a lesson that was driven home with some force in ancient Rome sometime around 400 A.D. As bad as that was, the Islamization of Europe, once it is come to full fruition, will make the Visigoths look like a friendly merger. (The other salient difference is, for all their obvious distress, the Romans didn’t have to endure togaed apparatchiks prattling on about “the moderate Visigoth community” while throwing open the gates — but I digress.) If Steyn were looking for further validation of this thesis – and there’s no good reason he’d require it – he need only look at recent videos of mass Muslim prayer gatherings conducted on the streets of Paris in open defiance of the law . A hidden camera shows streets blocked by huge crowds of Muslim worshippers and enforced by a private security force. This is all illegal in France: the public worship, the blocked streets, and the private security. But the police have been ordered not to intervene. Presumably President Obama – Citizen of the World and  frequent pontificator on matters not remotely connected to his office – was unavailable for comment. Otherwise he might have reminded us, with that stern expression and sibilant “s” we all find so convincing, that thousands were guillotined in the French Revolution so that people like this could enjoy the right of illegal public assembly, or whatever. Those of us without Obama’s Spengler-like command of world history might have to settle for a more modest explanation, which is that the Stealth Jihad Robert Spencer so eloquently describes in his book of the same name , is progressing more or less unimpeded in Europe, and is a harbinger of what will inevitably befall the United States if we don’t stop shooting messengers like Spencer and Pamela Geller and start calling things by their real names. It would also be beneficial – notwithstanding the Left’s well-documented contempt for concepts like “restoring honor” – to do some deep thinking about what actually made America the greatest nation on earth, just how far we’ve wandered off that particular path, and how best to return to it. Otherwise, as Steyn argues so convincingly, the invaders we so decry will win by default. There is at least one civic official in New York City who should take a long hard look at this video, not that I have the slightest confidence he would either comprehend, or wish to comprehend, its contents. He’s one of those benighted souls, like Diogenes with his lamp, wandering the streets of lower Manhattan looking for a moderate Muslim. (HT: Trevor Loudon @ New Zeal )

Original post:
Muslims Worshipers Occupy Paris Streets Illegally – Are We Tolerant or What?

No responses yet

From the Pen of David Horowitz: September 6, 2010

Sep 06 2010 Published by under 2010 Elections

In the counter-revolutionary year 1989, on the anniversary of the Revolution, a group of protesters raised a banner in Red Square that summed up an epoch: Seventy Years On The Road To Nowhere . They had lived the socialist future and it didn’t work. This epic of human futility reached a climax the same year, when the socialist state formally decided to return the land it had taken from its peasants half a century before. The collectivization of agriculture in the Thirties had been the very first pillar of the socialist Plan and one of the bloodiest episodes of the revolutionary era. Armies were dispatched to the countryside to confiscate the property of its recalcitrant owners, conduct mass deportations to the Siberian gulag, liquidate the ‘kulaks’ and herd the survivors into the collective farms of the Marxist future. In this ‘final’ class struggle, no method was considered too ruthless to midwife the new world from the old. “We are opposed by everything that has outlived the time set for it by history” wrote Maxim Gorky in the midst of battle: “This gives us the right to consider ourselves again in a state of civil war. The conclusion naturally follows that if the enemy does not surrender, he must be destroyed.” The destruction of the class enemy — the most numerous and productive element of Soviet society at the time — was accomplished by massacres, by slow deaths in concentration camps and by deliberately induced genocidal famine. In the end, over 10 million people were killed, more than had died on all sides in World War I. [25] But the new serfdom the Soviet rulers imposed in the name of liberation only destroyed the peasants’ freedom and incentive, and thus laid the foundations of the final impasse. Before collectivization, Russia had been the “breadbasket of Europe,” supplying 40% of the world’s wheat exports in the bumper years 1909 and 1910. [26] But socialism ended Russia’s agrarian plenty and created permanent deficits — not merely the human deficit of those who perished because of Stalinist brutalities during the collectivization, but a deficit in grain that would never be brought to harvest because of the brutality inherent in the socialist idea. Half a century after the socialist future had been brought to the countryside, the Soviet Union had become a net importer of grain, unable to produce enough food to feed its own population. These deficits eventually forced the state to allow a portion of the crop to be sold on the suppressed private market. Soon, 25% of Soviet grain was being produced on the 3% of the arable land reserved for private production. Thus necessity had compelled the Soviet rulers to create a dramatic advertisement for the system they despised. They had rejected the productive efficiencies of the capitalist system as exploitative and oppressive. Yet, the socialist redistribution of wealth had produced neither equity nor justice, but scarcity and waste. At the end of the 1980s, amidst growing general crisis, Soviet youth were using bread as makeshift footballs because its price had been made so low –  (to satisfy the demands of social equity) that it was now less than the cost of the grain to produce it. This was a microcosm of socialist economy. Irrational prices, bureaucratic chaos, and generalized public cynicism (the actually existing socialist ethos in all Marxist states) had created an environment in which 40% of the food crop was lost to spoilage before ever reaching the consumer. And so, half a century after 10 million people had been killed to “socialize the countryside,” those who had expropriated the land were giving it back. The road to nowhere had become a detour. ( Soviet joke: What is socialism? The longest road from capitalism to capitalism. ) Now the Soviet rulers themselves had begun to say that it had all been a horrible “mistake.” Socialism did not work. Not even for them. – The Road to Nowhere from The Politics of Bad Faith – If you have a favorite Horowitz quote you want to highlight for others then please email it to DavidSwindle {@} Gmail.com. Please include: “Horowitz Quote of the Day” in subject line. A link to where the quote is from. (No need to include this if it’s from a book.) Any remarks you’d like published explaining what value you take from it. Your preferred name and a link to your blog or homepage (if you have one.)

Follow this link:
From the Pen of David Horowitz: September 6, 2010

No responses yet

Islamization Takes Over the Streets of Europe: is America Next?

Sep 04 2010 Published by under 2010 Elections

America, Look at Your New Daily Block Parties Islam has taken over Europe and is fully intent on conquering America. Islam has slowly gained momentum in America, notably since 9/11, using freedom of religion as a weapon of war to literally take over American city streets. In an attempt to warn America, Christian Broadcast Network (CBN) reporter Dale Hurd met with Parisian “Maxime Lepante,” (an alias to protect the Parisian’s identity from Islamic threats) who secretly filmed the Islamic conquest of France, exposing it so it can be prevented in America. Lepante’s video reveals over-crowded Paris streets with thousands of Muslims on their knees praying, stopping traffic, and making it impossible for pedestrians to enter places of business.  The video is a dire presage for Americans facing invasion by dominant subjugation in the streets of New York City. Leponte tells Hurd: Muslims are blocking the streets with barriers.  They are praying on the ground.  And the inhabitants of this district cannot leave their homes, nor go into their homes during those prayers. The Muslims taking over those streets do not have any authorization.  They do not go to the police headquarters, so it’s completely illegal [in France]. The Muslims in the streets have been granted unofficial rights that no Christian group is likely to get under France’s laïcité , or secularism law . According to Hurd: This is all illegal in France: the public worship, the blocked streets, and the private security.  But the police have been ordered not to intervene.  It shows that even though some in the French government want to get tough with Muslims and ban the burqa, other parts of the French government continue to give Islam a privileged status. America, unlike France, is not a secular nation; America has a bill of rights guaranteeing freedom of religion.  Those rights, however, have been stripped from Christians and Jews and given to Muslims. Leponte explains that laïcité  prevents French citizens or visitors from openly practicing any form of religion in public : It says people have the right to share any belief they want, any religion.  But they have to practice at home or in the mosque, synagogues, churches and so on.  Some say Muslims must pray in the street because they need a larger mosque. French Christians and Jews are forbidden public religious practices under secular laws. How did this happen to France? Decades-ago, Europe granted Islam rights to immigrate, because : Due to France’s growing economy in the 1960s, the government turned to immigration as a solution to their labour shortage.  They enticed workers from their former colonies of Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia to fill job vacancies, granting visas but not French citizenship to their families. France’s acceptance of Islamic immigration led to Islamic takeover and a  refusal to abide by laws.  Muslims only follow Sharia ,which calls for world-wide Islamic takeover: They are coming there [to Paris] to show that they can take over some French streets to show that they can conquer a part of the French territory. Muslims in America crowd New York City streets and school yards while refusing to abide by the Constitution.

The rest is here:
Islamization Takes Over the Streets of Europe: is America Next?

No responses yet

From the Pen of David Horowitz: September 04, 2010

Sep 04 2010 Published by under 2010 Elections

How many poor people have progressives starved since 1917? It’s a good question and somebody should do the research and publish it. Russia was the breadbasket of Europe until progressives seized power in that year and started instituting policies to “share the wealth.” For the next 70 years until socialism collapsed, Russia was a net importer of food always on the brink of famine. In the 1930s, Stalin instigated a calculated famine in the Ukraine to rid himself of approximately 10 million political enemies. His crime was protected by the progressives at the New York Times and on the Pulitzer Prize Committee (they control both institutions to this day). Because soft progressives cover for hard-line progressives like Stalin, Castro and other political monsters — preferring to demonize George Bush and John Ashcroft instead — these atrocities continue. The left’s inability to understand the most basic economic fact — that people need an incentive to produce — has caused the unnecessary deaths of tens of millions of people — mostly poor — in the last 75 years. But thanks to a politically corrupted media and educational system, their pig-headed pursuit of socialist fantasies goes on. – Present from Progressives: Starvation – If you have a favorite Horowitz quote you want to highlight for others then click here to submit . Please include: “Horowitz Quote of the Day” in subject line. A link to where the quote is from. (No need to include this if it’s from a book.) Any remarks you’d like published explaining what value you take from it. Your preferred name and a link to your blog or homepage (if you have one.)

See the article here:
From the Pen of David Horowitz: September 04, 2010

No responses yet

Filling the Global Security Gap

Sep 03 2010 Published by under 2010 Elections

Addressing the possibility that the U.S. and Europe will shy away from military interventions post-Iraq/post-Afghanistan, Richard Gowan suggests that emerging countries — Brazil, China and India, in particular — could very well step in to fill the gap in the context of U.N. state-building operations. It tracks well with what Matt Armstrong wrote in his WPR feature article , U.N. Peacekeeping as Public Diplomacy. ( Gowan’s article in that issue , The Tragedy of 21st Century U.N. Peacekeeping, makes for good reading, too, as a cautionary note.) In this case, emerging countries’ interest in burnishing their global bona fides would overlap with U.S. and Europeans’ interest in downsizing their global security footprint with regard to lengthy state-building projects. The fact that U.N. forces have gotten pretty at the job makes it an attractive option, and one we should be encouraging.

Continued here:
Filling the Global Security Gap

No responses yet

European Military Reform and American Power Projection

Sep 02 2010 Published by under 2010 Elections

This is a good point by Galrahn at Information Dissemination, on the disconnect between trends in European military reform and trends in U.S. strategic thinking: We will have to wait and see what Germany ultimately decides to do, but in reading military reform arguments from various nations across Europe, including Russia, the 21st century army models of expeditionary forces most often include discussions regarding amphibious lift capacity and numbers of medium and heavy lift helicopters. In other words, the capabilities that most mimic the U.S. Marines are more desired by the rest of the world than the capabilities of a large standing army. It is a noteworthy contrast of strategic thinking how in the U.S., we seem to have this in complete reverse as we debate what the U.S. Marines will be in the future while speaking of the enormous challenges towards recapitalizing the Army in DoD budget discussions. With Iraq combat operations now over, it is time to keep an eye on what narrative emerges in Washington. At a time when many are rightly asking what we’ve learned from Iraq, it’s important to contrast that with what our main defense partners have learned from Afghanistan. European defense planners are clearly concerned by their lack of expeditionary capacity. Having available troops might not have affected their ultimate refusal to send more of them to Afghanistan. But they would have preferred to say no by choice, not simply because they don’t have the ability to say yes. At the same time, they have become even more convinced of the importance of the political component of any intervention, and in particular, the need for an exit strategy before entering the field. The EUFOR Chad mission is a case in point: The mission’s end date was written into its deployment authorization and was — to most observers’ surprise — respected. Along these lines, another indicator to watch, both for decision-makers and public opinion, will be the EU participation in the UNIFIL mission in southern Lebanon, should that ever become a hot zone. It’s too early to tell what Washington policymakers have learned from the Iraq war. I don’t think it’s fair to extrapolate from the Obama administration’s time-limited escalation in Afghanistan, for instance, to conclude that we have learned nothing, as Michael Cohen and Andrew Bacevich have done. But in terms of defense thinking, we might be risking a role reversal in the division of labor between the U.S. and its European allies, whereby their militaries become more apt at short-term expeditionary interventions and ours more geared toward long-term stabilization operations. In other words, they would become the peacemakers, and us the peacekeepers. It’s far from a certainty that things will play out this way in Europe. Such an expeditionary capacity is in pretty sharp opposition to the European mindset regarding power projection. And I suspect, like Andrew Exum , that even if the U.S. does end up with a boot-heavy, COIN-focused Army, it would go largely unused for the 10 years to come. But that just represents a waste of resources, and another case of “last-war-itis,” on both sides of the Atlantic.

Follow this link:
European Military Reform and American Power Projection

No responses yet

« Newer posts Older posts »