Monday Post

To start off the week....


Russia and China remain unmoved in their support of Syria:

 The bodies of 47 women and children, some with their throats slit, were found in the restive Syrian city of Homs after a “massacre” that sent families fleeing the area, activists and the opposition said on Monday.

As violence in Syria continues, major powers remained divided over what action to take amid a growing clamour for foreign intervention.

At a UN Security Council meeting in New York, Western governments stepped up their pleas to Russia and China to end their blockage of action over the Syrian government’s deadly assault on protest cities such as Homs.

But Russia showed little sign that it would change its stance, with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov slamming “risky recipes” which he said risked increasing conflict in the Middle East.

Let's withdraw from the UN. Today.



Swift trials apparently mean verdicts a decade later:

 The world's first permanent war crimes court opened nearly a decade ago, promising accountability for brutal tyrants, justice for victims and swift trials for perpetrators.

On Wednesday, the International Criminal Court will hand down its first ever verdict, a ruling in the case of Congolese warlord Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, who was detained six years ago and faces two war crimes charges.

Lubanga's case may be a milestone, but he is a low-ranking player. The court has yet to go after key individuals responsible for the crimes against humanity and genocide included in its mandate.

Courts are judged by the cases they take on and the legal precedents they set. Lubanga's verdict is years later than planned. The court's slow progress is a source of disappointment in countries where crimes still go unpunished.

He's not even a big wheel as far as crimes against humanity go and the process is unbelievably slow.



April of the Arab Spring is the cruelest month:

The [Jews] are treacherous. Allah, who created them, told us so. We must be resolute and fill hearts with hatred and loathing. By Allah, the hatred and loathing of Jews is a form of worship. When we make our children loathe the Jews, it is a form of worship of Allah. These are people hated and loathed by Allah. 

(with thanks)



First they came for Ann Coulter. Now they come for Dick Cheney:

Former U.S. vice-president Dick Cheney has cancelled a Canadian speaking appearance due to security concerns sparked by demonstrations during a visit he made to Vancouver last fall, the event promoter said Monday.

Cheney, whom the protesters denounced as a war criminal, was slated to talk about his experiences in office and the current American political situation at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre on April 24.

However, Ryan Ruppert, of Spectre Live Corp., said Cheney and his daughter Elizabeth had begged off via their agent.

"After speaking with their security advisers, they changed their mind on coming to the event," Ruppert said.

"(They) decided it was better for their personal safety they stay out of Canada."

Last Sept. 26, Cheney's appearance in Vancouver was marred by demonstrators who blocked the entrances to the exclusive Vancouver Club.

The activists, who at one point scuffled with police, called for Cheney's arrest for war crimes and booed guests as they arrived at the $500-a-ticket dinner.

One man was arrested for choking a club staff member.

Ruppert said the "thugs" put everyone at risk and forced Cheney to remain inside the club for seven hours until police were able to disperse the protesters and deem it safe for him to leave.

"It was a complete disaster for them because it's a major security issue," he said.

The upshot, he said, is that discussion over American policy on such issues as Guantanamo Bay or the Iraq war is being silenced.

"You lost that conversation because you're talking about a group of thugs," Ruppert said.

"It's a real sad story because it really overshadows what the peaceful protesters, who often have very legitimate points, would be doing and saying."

Those who bought tickets to the Cheney event can either get a full refund or exchange them for an appearance by free-speech activist, Mark Steyn.

It doesn't matter if you like the person or not. Are we a nation of thugs and troglodytes that we chase people off? Apparently so. That's nothing to be proud.



This is the left and they are afraid of natural light.



I may be an ultra-Yankee but I don't think it's fair to accuse the people of the American South of being rubes:

As Alabama and Mississippi prepared for their Tuesday primaries, the water was warm for “aren’t Southerners stupid” jokes on HBO’s “Real Time” Friday night. But host Bill Maher went a step further, deploying House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi’s daughter to Missisippi to find out just how dumb voters are down in the South.

Maher claimed that Pelosi’s daughter, documentary filmmaker Alexandra Pelosi, told him she “did not seek out people who look like what some would say [are] rednecks.”

Pelosi told Maher, “If you took any of the footage we didn’t use, it would look just like the footage we did use.”

Pelosi’s film naturally begins with a stereotypical rendition of “Dixie” and stills of run-down homes. 

As narrator, Pelosi then points out that Mississippi is the most conservative — and poorest — state in the country.

Pelosi then proceeds to press a number of poor white men on why they are conservatives.

The footage has to be seen to be believed, if only because of how unrepresentative Pelosi’s sample is throughout the film. Pelosi only interviewed white men for the project even though recent census data shows that the state is 51.4 percent female and just 59.1 percent white.

Some illustrious persons of the American South: William Faulker, Harper Lee, Flannery O'Connor, Tennessee Williams, Truman Capote, Mark Twain, Robert E. Lee, Muddy Waters, Hunter S. Thompson, George Washington Carver, Gene Roddenberry and Leonard McCoy, MD.

I'm a doctor, Bill Maher, not a jackhole!

You know- rubes like that.


(with thanks)



There is a pill for anything when you think about but you might not want to take it:

What deserves further study is a fairly recent leftist trend to eagerly dive into the murky waters of the Eugenics Ocean provided that the “science” can somehow prove that they are biologically different than their thought-villain nemeses on the right. After rolling their eyes, holding their noses, and chanting “la-la-la-la” at any studies that appeared to establish innate racial differences, they are now wrapping their slender pink tentacles around any study—no matter how dubious its methodology—that suggests leftist egalitarians are almost a different race than their ideological enemies. After decades of claiming they’d eternally discredited what they called “scientific racism,” they are launching forward with a new academic discipline I’ll call “scientific anti-racism.” Or maybe “totalitarian liberal eugenics.” Or maybe I’m still working on its name.

This is "science", according to the left. Don't let them try it at home.



Don't burn a Koran or be rude to an Arab:

In the recent destruction of Commonwealth war graves in Benghazi, Libya (YouTube Video), you can see not just the desecration of graves, but attacks on crosses.

The radical Muslims who are kicking over and smashing headstones marked with crosses (and one with a Star of David), also took pains to demolish a tall "Cross of Sacrifice" standing at the edge of the cemetery.

This was no "furious mob" on a "rampage," as a Daily Mail report put it. Nor was there any evidence in what they were saying that they were angry or reacting to Koran burning by the US military.

The men are methodically, deliberately, and in an organized fashion, going about destroying crosses and objects marked with crosses. Their mood seems happy. Every now and again the cry Allahu Akbar rings out, or a chuckle of joy. They pass comments on the graves as they kick them over: "Break the cross that belongs to those," "This is the grave of a Christian," and, "This tomb has a cross on it: a kaffir [disbeliever]."

An Australian government minister, Craig Emerson, whose father served in Libya in World War II, commented, "There is nothing in Islam that would warrant this sort of behavior."

But is this true? Or just wishful thinking? Certainly many Libyans and Muslims of other nationalities have expressed their abhorrence of these acts. It would be completely wrong to attribute sympathy for such an attack to Muslims as whole. 

But all the same, was this attack on war graves truly senseless and without foundation or precedent in Islam? Regrettably, the answer is "No."

The phenomenon of cross-destruction goes back to the life and example of Muhammad. A tradition reported by al-Waqidi said that if ever Muhammad found an object in his house with the mark of a cross on it, he would destroy it. (W. Muir, The life of Muhammad. Volume 3, p.61, note 47.)

In the YouTube video, when one of the men says, "Break the cross that belongs to those dogs," he uses the same classical Arabic phrase – "break the cross' (the Arabic root is k.s.r 'break') -- which is found in a famous hadith (tradition) about Jesus — understood in Islam to be a Muslim prophet — who will return to the earth as a cross-destroying enforcer of Islamic Sharia law:

Narrated Abu Huraira: "Allah's Apostle said, 'By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, surely [Jesus,] the son of Mary will soon descend amongst you and will judge mankind justly [as a Just Ruler]; he will break the cross and kill the pigs and there will be no jizya [i.e. no taxation taken from non Muslims: because they will all be forced to convert to Islam]. …'"
(Sahih al-Bukhari: The Book of the Stories of the Prophets. 4:60:3448.)

This phrase 'break the cross' is religious and ritualistic in its overtones, invoking the canon of Islam. It is like a Christian saying 'forgive us our trespasses' in reference to the Lord's Prayer. This is a clear reference to the words of Muhammad, and invokes his authority for the deed being performed.

To pious Muslims, Muhammad is regarded as the "best example" for Muslims to follow, so it is hardly surprising if his enmity to the cross is shared by at least some Muslims today. The following are just some of many examples of cross destruction which can be culled from media reports of recent years:

• Two days before Christmas in 1998, a Catholic church in Faisalabad, Pakistan had its crucifix pulled down by a Muslim leader.
• On March 18, 2004, an Albanian mob attacked and desecrated the church of St Andrew in Podujevo, Kosovo. Photographs distributed to the international media show Muslims, who had climbed up onto the roof, breaking off the prominent metal crosses attached there. There have also been many instances of Muslim mobs smashing crosses in Christian graveyards across Kosovo.
• In April 2007, in the Al-Doura Christian area of Baghdad, Muslim militants instructed Christians to remove visible crosses from atop their churches, and issued a fatwa forbidding Christians from wearing crosses.
• When Hamas took control of Gaza in 2007, some of its militias went on a cross-destroying rampage. The Rosary Sisters convent and school in Gaza was ransacked and looted by masked men and crosses were specifically targeted for destruction. A Christian resident of Gaza also reported having a crucifix ripped from his neck by someone from the Hamas Executive Force, who said, "That is forbidden."
• On Monday 29 October 2007, in the Malaysian Parliament, a parliamentarian, Tuan Syed Hood bin Syed Edros complained about the "display of religious symbols' in front of church schools: 'I, as a responsible person to my religion, race, and country, I state my views that … these crosses need to be destroyed …'"
• Michael Yon has reported on a poster found in Afghanistan ("Destroying the cross is an Islamic obligation") which instructs Muslims to destroy objects with crosses on them.
•  

Antipathy to the cross among Muslims is not limited to Islamic societies: In November 2004, Belmarsh Prison in England was reported to have plans to spend £1.6 million on a mosque. The facility already maintains a multi-denominational chapel, but this has been rejected for use by the Muslim inmates, some of whom had been convicted on terrorism charges, because the chapel contains crosses which have to be covered up when the Muslims say their prayers.

Why are we in the mood to accommodate? Is it fear, a misguided sense of fairness or are we ready to capitulate no matter the cost?



Cambodia: genocide or demicide?

Rather, what happened in Cambodia is what happened in the French Revolution, and in Stalin’s purges and mass collectivization campaigns, and in Mao’s Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution, only on a proportionately larger scale. It was mass murder in the name of equality. It wasn’t “genocide”; it was Communist utopianism carried to its logical extreme. The Khmer Rouge, who called themselves Maoists, believed that the most important social and political value was equality and that in order to create their new, classless society in which everyone was equal, it was necessary to exterminate anyone who might be smarter, or better educated, or wealthier, or more talented than anyone else. Thus, they killed the educated, the bourgeoisie, the middle classes, and the rich; movie stars, pop singers, authors, urban residents, and workers for the former government; and anyone who protested — as well as the families of all the above. Towards the end, they also killed cadres who were thought to be a political threat. Whatever their crimes were, the Khmer Rouge do not seem to have been motivated by racial, ethnic, or religious hatred.

Why could the deliberate liquidation of class or profession not be a genocide?



And now, draw your own leprechaun.