Thursday, November 23, 2006

Army of 155,000 trapped in Iraq

Shalom from Israel.

I just had to share this most droll observation of Kofi Annans. According to him, the US is 'trapped' in Iraq. Really? By any dictionary definition of that word I'm aware of the US is not trapped. The people of Iraq ARE trapped. They are trapped in a country where there is no law but the law of the gun, the law of the sectarian murderer and the law of the politically amoral. The US Army can just leave. Get in their C-5's and zoom back home. The people of Iraq are there for the duration. They need a functioning country, with peace and the institutions to run a decent country and protect themselves from thier belligerent neighbors. Without a US army there, the likelihood that they will find their way to that point is very small.

Idiots like Annan, with their opinions from Jupiter or Saturn or anywhere but earth would be funny if they weren't actually in charge of large (if ineffectual) organisations. He, like millions of Americans, Europeans and Arabs, are still bleating about whether there should have been another UN resolution, about faked evidence of WMD and a zillion other historical details. Apart from the fact that many of these people can't get any single fact straight distracts from the larger point- that in the three years and counting since the US/UK invasion, the world has been changing relentlessly, and there's lots to consider and weigh up. Constantly revisiting 2003 is a microcosm of the liberal view writ large- don't have a decent plan, don't try to help, just sit on the sidelines, safely away from real decisionmaking and power, and carp. Yeah, good.

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

Incompetent terrorists should be allowed

Whether we like it or not, large parts of the Islamic world have declared war on the West. Because Muslim countries, to date, have lacked the military and economic capability to wage conventional warfare against us, they have engaged in vicious acts of terrorism designed to intimidate and undermine Western society. They may soon be in position, through developments in Iran and, perhaps, Pakistan, to commit acts of nuclear blackmail or actual nuclear warfare.

Reading this article, and the above paragraph about muslim armies, and their incompetence, reminded me of a comment I read recently on the BBC News Forums. The commentator had a foriegn name although he lived in London, and his gist was:
"The response to terrorism in Britain has been completely over the top- after all, most of the terrorists are incompetent. Because of their incompetence, they pose no real threat. So therefore, we should just let them be". He then listed the following "A ricin plot with no ricin, a shoe bomber with a match" etc etc. Great argument. He sadly failed to mention the 7/7 bombers, and the second stick who attacked two weeks later who only failed to murder hundreds of people because the explosives in their backpacks, of identical material to the 7/7 sticks bombs, was beyond its best-before date.

It worries me deeply that there are so many idiots like that correspondent in Britain. It makes me wonder whether there is still a quorum of sober, intelligent, rational people to appeal to to make the difficult choices we are going to have to make in the near future. I believe that without the rapid reduction of muslims in this country, the closure of all muslim schools and mosques that teach wahhabist islam, and the cessation of muslim immigration into Britain, we are going to spend an awful lot of time, money and blood stopping the approaching wave of terrorist atrocities. All of it completely our fault for allowing mass immigration into a settled and harmonious nation in the first place, but lets not go there.

Friday, November 10, 2006

Diminishing the potency of a word

My dad taught me many good and true things. One of his concerns was the weakening the potency of words by deliberate misuse. Jon Snow, the anchor on Channel 4 news, calls people who request the wearing of Remembrance Day red poppies 'poppy fascists'. It may seem obtuse to move from the substantive point about whether or not the ultimate sacrifice of hundreds of thousands of young men and women on our behalf should be memorialised each year, to the much more trivial one of using the label 'fascist' for every group of people we think are a little too keen on something, but humour me.

The fascist movements (for my purposes Communism is also fascism, but with different terminology) that came to the fore in Europe during the early 30's harboured many psychoses. When they took power their psychoses were then projected on to the rest of the world. Between fifty and sixty million people died, many of them murdered, before fascism was finally exterminated as a political creed in Europe. So to use the word fascist for those who are particularly keen on good nutrition for children (food fascists) or for those who are very over the top in their desire to protect children from accidents (health and safety fascists) drains that word of its power. I wish those who unreflectingly rob the word fascist of its potency would muster the mental strength to find some other description for the single-issue bores and the jolly-hockey-sticks home counties marms who insist they know whats best for us all. For one thing, I'd much rather have a country dominated by those well-intentioned if slightly blinkered folk than one dominated by the real fascists of our day, the islamists. And so would you if you have any wit whatsoever.

Possibly the worst abuse of the word fascist at the moment is the use of it to describe the Republicans in the US and those people in positions of power in the UK who are most engaged in the war on islamism. Interestingly, now that the Republicans have just lost control of both the Senate and the House of Representatives, will the fascist label still be ubiquitously attached to them? Probably. As I always say, by their fruits ye shall know them. The intentions and good will of both Britain and America are evidenced in many places over many decades all over the world. Only the most ludicrous interpretation of the evidence would allow ourselves and the Americans to be deemed fascistic. There are real dangers in the misuse of words. When you can no longer describe something effectively, you lose the power to deal with that thing precisely and elegantly. Lets not do that to ourselves.

Monday, November 06, 2006

Where have all the conservatives gone?

On page eight of todays Times of London Bronwen Maddox starts her editorial concerning the decision to hang the barbarian Hussein with these words:

"This is victor's justice."

No shit sherlock. She means that as a criticism and an insult rather than a simple description of the facts. Although it is true that this is victors justice, it is not interesting. Were the Nuremburg trials wrong and a travesty because the Allies won WWII? No. Did they not produce fair and just outcomes? Yes, they did.

What is of much greater pertinence to her readers is, are the victors in the 21st century just and good? Are their intentions beneficial or harmful? These are not of interest to Ms Maddox however.

She immediately goes for a utilitarian argument. Will the trial result calm Iraq or promote further turmoil? A hundred years ago, perhaps fifty years ago, the Times of London would not have permitted such amoral arguments to appear on its pages. Someone serious would have written that whatever else happens, calling a murderous dictator to account for his barbarities is just and right. Iraq is plagued by rivalries old and new- and is currently unable to settle those without resort to tit-for-tat murders. Will that be the case forever? Of course not. But to suggest that a trial should or should not be held simply because it might inflame a rivalry that is already burning brightly is beneath contempt.

The invasion of Iraq was conducted primarily for moral reasons- Saddam Hussein was a murderer of his own people and a clear and present danger to his neighbors. In removing him, Britain and America sent an unequivocal message: commit mass murder and invade your neighbors and we won't wait for the United Tyrants Club of Nations to send in a couple of Bangladeshi battalions to stand around while you continue your bloody work- we're coming for you. As long as Britain and America continue to do that I will be happy.

What does worry me is Bronwen Maddox and her legions. The pompous regurgitators of left-wing talking points, increasingly prone to national self-loathing and just-for-sake-of-it America bashing, have comprehensively taken over former conservative bastions like the Times of London and the Daily Telegraph. Since Mark Steyn and the latter parted company, there is not one serious right-wing voice remaining. Not only are the pompous middle-class lefties ubiquitous, they are also dull and worthy and boring. Much as the Soviet Union was, actually. There is not a single newspaper left in Britain, in fact, which hosts a vibrant energised right-wing perspective. Do I hear any offers?

Friday, November 03, 2006

Any old law will do when it comes to fighting fascists

British National Party leader Nick Griffin told a crowd that Islam was a "wicked, vicious faith" a court heard. Mr Griffin, 47, from mid-Wales, is charged with using words or behaviour intended to stir up racial hatred in Keighley, West Yorkshire, in 2004.

Hmmmm. Last time I checked, islam was a religion, not a race. And what if Mr Griffins description was factually correct? Presumably the court would not care...
I think this "using words or behaviour intended to stir up racial hatred" thought crime should be subsumed within a new super-law banning all descriptions of other people and their activities. We can all just sit here and smile. Shoot me somebody please.

How useful idiots explain the world to themselves (and us)

While perusing the entry for this book (The Dream Palace of the Arabs, by Fouad Ajami) I came across this screed-

Ajami's book is a perfect example of the disasters inflicted on the Arabs by a group of self-loathing and deracinated intellectuals, who could not come to terms with their own history. Rather than construct a modernism that is not at odds with the rich past of the Arabs, they foisted on us the "glories" of Arab nationalism and socialism. Long before Ajami and his ilk took off for their academic posts in the West, they abandoned their homelands to the barbarians whom they nurtured by their incessant and vicious demolition of the Arabs' unique world view. What they left behind was a half-baked pseudo-modernism, that was rooted in no authentic tradition- in fact in nothing.

Ajami rails against the theocracies of Iran and elsewhere. His true heirs are the officer gangsters and crass cliques that have gobbled the area's resources and turned it into a cultural desert; all the while mouthing the slogans of secularism and democracy. This book is an outrage against all those who were marginalised, exiled, ridiculed, and ultimately betrayed by the intellectual elites of the Arab World of the 50's, 60's and 70's. Give me an ayatollah anyday in preference to the neo-fascists of the Baath and the heirs of Nasser. Ajami does not admit that the intellectual elites of West Beirut whom he glorifies paved the way for the racketeers and criminals who inherited the Arab World. His solution for this cul-de-sac that his crowd led us into is to throw the Arabs into yet another horrid experiment; this time into the arms of the New World Order with all its injustices and inequalities. Ajami and a few like him may have found their bolt hole in the West, and became more royalist than the king, but this is no recipe for the millions trapped in a civilisational limbo. No reader should be seduced into believing that Ajami's work is anything but a piece of well-written fiction that camouflages an ugly reality. Stick to Edward Said, Robert Fisk, Jonathan Randall and Patrick Cockburn if you are seeking the truth.

You can almost see the beads of bloody sweat coating this guys face, and the flecks of froth at the corners of his mouth as he smashes at the keys...

Because I'm slightly masochistic, I tried to follow the narrative as he led us the merry dance around the 20th century middle east. But I became unnerved by the catalogue of terrible crimes committed by Fouad Ajami. Here is my distillation of them:

1. caused a disaster of unspecified nature to Arabs
2. cannot come to terms with own history
3. constructed a modernism that is at odds with 'rich' history of Arabs
4. caused nationalism
5. caused socialism
6. abandoned homeland to the barbarians
7. nurtured said barbarians by incessant and vicious demolition of the Arabs' unique world view
8. left behind half-baked pseudo-modernism
9. this half-baked pseudo-modernism was rooted in no authentic tradition- in fact in nothing (unlike the well-baked pseudo-modernism)
10. railed against theocracies
11. spawned officer gangsters and crass cliques of resource gobblers
12. turned the middle east into a cultural desert
13. mouthed the slogans of secularism and democracy
14. committed an outrage against all those who were marginalised, exiled, ridiculed, and ultimately betrayed by the intellectual elites of the Arab World of the 50's, 60's and 70's by writing this book
15. threw the Arabs into the arms of the New World Order with all its injustices and inequalities
16. ran off to a bolt hole in the West
17. provided no recipe for millions trapped in civilisational limbo
18. wrote fiction disguised as truth to camouflage an ugly reality

Whew! Thats a Herculean burden of horrors this guy is responsible for! Forget Hitler and Stalin. Mr Ajami must qualify as the worst person EVER.

What does perplex me is, what agenda would our correspondent support? He hates modernism, nationalism, socialism, militarism, gangsterism, monarchy, non-specific barbarians, secularism and democracy. What does that leave us?

Oh hang on. I know. Traditional Wahhabist Islam and its 'rich' culture; and the dreary apologists for it (Edward Said, Robert Fisk, Jonathan Randall and Patrick Cockburn).

"But hacking off peoples heads with rusty scimitars is part of our rich cultural tapestry..." We know.

Lucid delineation of the current war

James Dunnigan does a sterling job outlining exactly what the larger situation is in the Middle East, and why Arab lying is such a problem. It is Arabs who lose out mainly from Arab lying, but it is so deeply ingrained in their culture that even when the terrible results of it become apparent (which they have to many intelligent people in the Middle East) they just can't wean themselves off it.

Also, the passivity and fatalism which prevent muslim societies developing even basic infrastructure and productive capability are well-described. Lets not forget- many Arabs were still living in tents and riding camels one hundred years ago (or less). And they have no civil institutions to act as permanent bearers of cultural learning. Just the mosque, with all its lies and unchallenged bullshit.

Thursday, November 02, 2006

A Pet Peeve

There is something which comes up constantly in discussions of Britains islamofascists I hate. It goes like this:

"Well I just don't understand how these guys can dress in t-shirts and jeans, wear baseball caps and latest stylee sneakers, and still want to blow up our tube trains!"

Really? Clothing as a signifier of cultural bias or political allegiance tells us NOTHING. Look at the Pakistani cricket team. They dress like nouveau riche pop starlets, but they cheat like Pakistani cricketers. Just because Osama Bin and Gone dressed like a 7th Century camel herder does not mean he wasn't a 21st century politician. The half of Bradford council which is Pakistani dress in suits and ties, but they rig elections like local politicians in Karachi.

As I walk the streets of London, I am constantly reminded that although most of the people walking by me are dressed approximately like me, their culture and world view differ in most important respects. And if the British don't re-colonise their cities and wake themselves up from their narcissistic and degenerate torpor soon, there will be no-one to save them from the barbarian avalanche.