Kalle Barfot: Jinn of Current Events

Submission, also known as Islam

Thu, 25 Nov 2004 17:46:26 GMT

Watch it courtesy of iFilm: Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh (yes, that van Gogh) was killed November 2, 2004, by a 26-year-old extremist Muslim of Dutch-Moroccan descent. The current theory is that he was taken down for his critical look at the treatment of Muslim women. It's not a documentary, but a metaphorical look at the harsh realities of their lives. (In English with Dutch subtitles.)

The film's screenwriter, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, grew up an upper-class Muslim in Somalia. In '92 she escaped to the Netherlands, mastered the language and attended university to study political science. Now a politician, she has received death threats for numerous stances she's taken and activities she's undertaken. But as a self-proclaimed ex-Muslim, she has taken it upon herself to make the plight of oppressed Muslim women known to the West--and to hopefully end their suffering.

Europe -- Thy Name is Appeasement and Cowardice

Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:40:12 GMT

Matthias Döpfner, Chief Executive of German publisher Axel Springer AG, has written a blistering attack in the daily Welt against the cowardice of Europe in the face of the Islamic threat, Europe — Thy Name is Cowardice: A few days ago Henryk M. Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, Europe — your family name is appeasement. It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so terribly true. Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives as England and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before they noticed that Hitler had to be fought, not bound to agreements. Appeasement stabilized communism in the Soviet Union and East Germany in that part of Europe where inhuman, suppressive governments were glorified as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities. ... And now many European intellectuals and politicians are demonstrating cowardice in the face of Islamofascist attacks. [via Davids Medienkritik]

Corruption and its fertile soil at the United Nations

Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:34:03 GMT

The UN is the largest fraud ever run. Dictatorships are lent equal legitimity to free countries, money is extracted from tyrants while shielding their murderous regimes, terrorists are treated as admirable human beings, Israel is the target of relentless attacks, and America pays most of the bills that support anti-Americanism.

The United Nations must be replaced with an alliance of free countries, with specific political requirements for membership, including free elections, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and private property. No organization that includes tyrants, terrorists, and thieves can have any legitimate purpose.

The UN is corrupt by nature. It cannot be fixed. The Diplomad: ... [We] have served at the UN, in New York, Vienna and Geneva, and worked with the UN in a variety of other posts, and can tell you from experience that the UN is a massive, expensive hoax that needs to be ended once and for all. ... The UN system is built on corruption, on the principle of the shake-down; whatever lofty objectives might have existed at its creation, for the UN corruption now provides the means and reason to exist. ...

The ingenuity and adaptability of the American soldier

Mon, 15 Nov 2004 15:19:24 GMT

Ralph Peters: Setting aside the greater issues of defeating terrorism and promoting a free Iraq, the Second Battle of Fallujah has been remarkable on a purely military level. Beyond the sophistication of our weaponry and even the valor of the American soldier, the fighting affirmed that our armed forces are very good at learning while at war. ... Doctrine has rarely been an American strength. We've won our battles and wars through pragmatism, casting aside what didn't work and improving the methods that did. Instead of the inflexibility that outsiders attribute to our military, our armed forces are brilliant improvisers, ingenious at coping with war's surprises. ...

Hold on to the Republic, after the election

Fri, 05 Nov 2004 15:24:28 GMT

To all the people who despair, hate the results, and variously seek to explain Kerry's defeat, I have two questions to which I require an answer before I'll consider listening to you:

1. Do you value individual rights?
2. Do you value a limited, representative government?

The reason I am asking this is that there are too many people who seem ready to dismiss the institutions of representative government as soon as the results are not aligned with their personal desires. You know these people by now, the ones who spend years claiming elections were "stolen", or who threaten to leave the country, or who denigrate those who voted for their opponent as unthinking masses, or who accuse such masses of being either morally corrupt or misled by evil forces (or both at the same time). If this is similar to what you believe, if you reject the rationality and validity of representation through majority electoral systems balanced among the States, then there is no reasonable republican debate in which you can participate (note the small 'r' -- this is about the republic not about political parties), there is no freedom-oriented social-political process which you would support.

The genius of the American republic is that it allows (nay, encourages) factions to fight each other within institutional structures that channel their efforts towards a limited form of government, as long as they subscribe to that form and to its purpose. Sometimes your faction wins, sometimes it loses. Always, the imperfect Republic lives, stumbles, and somehow manages to serve its general purpose: to guarantee and protect the people's individual rights.

There is no perfect President, no pure Senator, no disinterested Congressman, no unbiased Judge --humans are not angels-- and that is both the essence and the beauty of the American system of government.

As Ben Franklin said, the Founding Fathers gave the American people a Republic, if they can keep it. Please make sure your faction, whatever it is, always works to keep it, throughout electoral victories and defeats (yes, both happen). A good step towards that goal is to read and ponder The Federalist Papers written by Hamilton, Madison, and Jay.

Political bias is cultured at the BBC

Thu, 04 Nov 2004 15:11:28 GMT

The Old Media (aka mainstream media, or MSM) are strongly biased towards socialist and marxist ideology, but they refuse to acknowledge this fact. This has two major effects: their rejection of objectivity, and the false sense of social dominance of the left. In other words, they lie when convenient. And their behaviour encourages leftist parties and their adherents to believe that their bubble is central to modern Western society, culture, and politics.

New Frontiers Foundation: The BBC and mainstream media were so hopeful and sure of a Kerry victory that they have repeatedly distorted news, while simultaneously accusing the Republicans of lies. They have demonstrated that they are incapable of distinguishing between (a) their centre-left opinion and (b) an attempt at discovering objective truth. ...

Eurabia and the Islamofascist threat

Wed, 03 Nov 2004 23:05:34 GMT

If a free Europe is to survive this century --by defeating Islamofascism-- it must start listening to two courageous women: Oriana Fallaci and Bat Ye'or.

Bat Ye'or: In one of the most compelling books published in recent times, Oriana Fallaci comes face to face with herself in a deeply moving dialogue that brings us into intimate contact with the major conflicts of the Twentieth Century and the dawning Twenty-first. Fallaci draws us into her tragic, impassioned vision of a spiritual combat transposed into politics, separating the essential from the incidental, brilliantly combining corrosive satire, humor, and political lucidity against a background of illness, and her confrontation with death. This theme runs through the book, giving it breadth and a humane density that resonates in the political subjects that she treats with such vivid style. ...

My electoral, and other, predictions

Tue, 02 Nov 2004 05:39:28 GMT

Bush will win a second term by a landslide (easily gaining both the popular and the electoral college majorities). Moreover, the Republicans will win a solid majority in the Senate.

Old Media will emerge as the main losers of the early 21st century. The Democrats will either descend further into leftist paranoia, or --less likely-- they will reject the madmen such as Michael Moore, Jimmy Carter, and Howard Dean.

The blogosphere will continue to grow as a massive, mostly American movement to collect facts, check sources, and seek to integrate facts and opinions into coherent wholes. By virtue of its mostly self-correcting operation, the blogosphere ensures that lies, distractions, and ambiguities are exposed as such -- because they cannot be integrated with the facts known by an informal aggregate of millions of experts. There is no subject matter that can escape this development of human knowledge.

When Osama the Murderer apes Michael the Propagandist

Sat, 30 Oct 2004 15:56:30 GMT

When watching Bin Laden's video, remember 9/11 and the people who died there, because the mass media won't show you those pictures.

The New York Times > Opinion >David Brooks: ... Here was this monster who killed 3,000 of our fellows showing up on our TV screens, trying to insert himself into our election, trying to lecture us on who is lying and who is telling the truth. Here was this villain traipsing through his own propaganda spiel with copycat Michael Moore rhetoric...

Bin Laden's missing legs

Sat, 30 Oct 2004 15:37:40 GMT

Bin Laden has always been shown either sitting on the ground in the Arab fashion or walking around. He has also always had weapons on display, such as a dagger or a rifle.

In the latest video, his lower body is hidden and he has no weapon. I suspect he has lost one or both legs. (Or he wants Kerry to believe he is a peaceful man with whom Kerry could negotiate our surrender.)

Who is winning: Osama, or the USA?

Sat, 30 Oct 2004 02:55:05 GMT

Belmont Club: It is important to notice what [Osama Bin Laden] has stopped saying in this speech. He has stopped talking about the restoration of the Global Caliphate. There is no more mention of the return of Andalusia. There is no more anticipation that Islam will sweep the world. He is no longer boasting that Americans run at the slightest wounds; that they are more cowardly than the Russians. He is not talking about future operations to swathe the world in fire but dwelling on past glories. He is basically saying if you leave us alone we will leave you alone. ...

To which the proper answer is: Die, Islamofascist!

Humaila al-Akrawy, Iraqi heroine

Fri, 29 Oct 2004 20:12:35 GMT

Here's a wonderful example of a young, very courageous Iraqi woman, fighting for freedom -- an illustration of Patrick Henry's call to arms: Give me Liberty, or Give me Death!

Robin Burk: What would you do if you were a 22 year old Kurdish Muslim woman in March of 2003, when an army drawn from several countries invaded your homeland? If you were [Humaila al-Akrawy] you would remember your brother, killed under Saddam -- and remember how they sent back just one leg and part of an arm to demonstrate his death and their power to your family. You would look at your father, who no longer has full use of his hands after being tortured by Saddam. And then, despite the disapproval of many but with the blessing and support of your family, on 23 March you would volunteer to become a translator for the 101st Airborne Division of the U.S. Army. But what would you do when Ba'athists and jihadists ambushed your car, injuring your brother and trying to kill you, and when they later killed your 24 year old sister thinking she was you -- pumping 60 AK47 bullets into her body? ...

Willful distortion and blindness: media bias in a time of war

Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:59:53 GMT

From the use of forged documents to the repetition of wild accusations, the Old Media have been relentless in their attacks on President Bush. They have also been particularly tolerant of Senator Kerry, neglecting his bizarre stories and outright lies.

Media Research Center: No matter who wins or loses this year's presidential election, Campaign 2004 will be remembered for the unprecedented partisanship of the so-called mainstream media, as the Media Research Center has documented all year. Here are our awards for the ten most-biased episodes in Campaign 2004, along with commendations for those instances when journalists rose above their bias and approached their craft in a fair and balanced way. ...

The lies, and the silence

Fri, 29 Oct 2004 18:26:52 GMT

A simple request
These are Saddam's dead
The survivors
What shall we tell the children
The liberators
What is crucial
Who is guilty
By what standard

How many times are we going to hear lies about missing munitions from the NYT, CBS, ABC, etc. all intended to make the case that US troops are totally incompetent -- the clear subtext being, yet again, that the Coalition should not have liberated Iraq from the Baathist tyranny?

A simple request

There is something these journalists and editors are NOT saying.

Let me ask you: Was Nazi Germany a good place to live in? Was Baathist Iraq a good place to live in?

Before you answer, please read the article at
http://varifrank.com/archives/2004/10/blood_red_fury.php

Read it to the end. Take your time. Look at the sample of pictures.

Then come back here. And think about when was the last time you saw these pictures in the mass media.

These are Saddam's dead

The fathers, daughters, mothers, sons, cousins, sisters, uncles, grand-mothers, husbands, friends, and babies who were buried in mass graves. The bakers, the engineers, the poets, the housewives, the farmers, the teachers, the truck drivers, the fishermen, the students, the merchants, and the schoolchildren who will never again use their hands to create, never again smile or laugh, never again embrace their loved ones, never again breathe nor speak. They are Saddam's dead.

They are not the tens of thousands tortured and mutilated that you don't see either, the ones who still breathe pain and feel Saddam's marks on their body every second of their life -- because that's another silenced story.

They are the Iraqi people who were being murdered at an estimated average rate of 30,000 per year. Thirty thousand innocents. Murdered. Every year.

The survivors

Now look at the survivors. The ones holding the plastic bags of bones. What do you tell them?

What do the American mass media tell them?

Have these media informed you that mass graves are still being found in Iraq? and that European "inspectors" are refusing to help in that work, because they are worried the evidence could be used to sentence Saddam Hussein to death?

What does one tell the survivors, when one opposed their liberation? what does one tell them, when one opposes punishment for the chief murderer?

What shall we tell the children

Shall we then tell our children how the Coalition should have begged for permission -- begged the bribed UN, France, Germany, China, and Russia -- begged Saddam's friends for permission to liberate Iraq? And shall we tell the children also that without permission from those who armed and made billions of dollars helping Saddam since 1991, Iraq should not have been liberated?

Do we tell the children that we should have waited for permission from Vichy France, Nazi Germany, and Soviet Russia to stop the Holocaust during WW II?

Have the children heard of the Holocaust? why isn't the more important story told by the NYT that Nazi insurgents continued to resist for two years after the fall of Berlin? or that some US soldiers may have killed German prisoners in rage? or in cold blood? or that some Nazi weapons and treasures were never found? or that there were days during WW II when more than 1,000 US soldiers died?

The liberators

Do we teach children respect for the courage of soldiers who risk --and give-- their lives for the sake of freedom?

Do we tell the children about the courageous Poles who fought against both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union when their country was invaded at the beginning of WW II? do we tell them about the heroic Polish pilots who fought so valliantly in the Battle of Britain? do we tell them about the two hundred thousand Polish troops who fought side-by-side with American and British troops to liberate Europe?

Do we tell them about the betrayal of Poland at Yalta and their decades of suffering under the yoke of Soviet Russia?

Do we tell the children about the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who are fighting now for freedom in their country -- and the thousands who have already died doing so? or do we pretend that their sacrifice is nothing compared to the death of American soldiers, that they somehow don't count? maybe they don't count in the same way as the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis in the mass graves don't seem to matter.

Shall we betray the liberators of Iraq and toss that country to the wolves for another few decades?

What is crucial

Was the Nazi mass-murder of Jews important? is it crucial to understand WW II and the destruction of Europe? what about the Baathist mass-murder of the Iraqi people? is it crucial?

Should we tell the children that Saddam's mass graves of Iraqi children do not matter in relation to the missing 380 tons of explosives -- have we taught them enough arithmetics so they can figure the proportion of 380 tons out of 600,000 tons? how important is 0.06%? how does that compare to the crushed bones of thousands of Iraqi children?

Should we also tell the children that there "never even were WMDs" in Iraq -- and pretend that the Kurds who were gassed by Saddam did not exist? shall we tell the children how many millions did not demonstrate through the streets of Europe when the Kurds were being gassed?

How many pictures of these mass graves have you recently seen on the covers of the American mass media? do you know how many Iraqis were murdered by Saddam's Baathist regime over three decades? do you wonder why you don't hear about that?

Who is guilty

Shall we tolerate silence about the Baathist mass-murders? shall we instead accuse the liberators? shall we propagate lies?

The mass media are perpetrating something truly horrible at the moment.

They are drowning the story of the end of a decades-long genocide, of the liberation of Iraq, of a new hope for freedom and prosperity. Repeatedly drowning it with wild accusations about minor issues. They are maintaining silence about the mass-murderers and their victims.

Someone is busy attacking the liberators and silencing the victims -- thereby white-washing the murderers. Someone is busy hiding the truth from you.

By what standard

In the name of what exactly is the media doing this? what is their purpose?

And who will hold them accountable? Will you?

By what standard shall we judge the lies and silence of these journalists and editors?

the dead's standard?
the survivor's?
the liberator's?

Who shall we honour? who shall deserve our respect? where is our honesty, our pride?

The essence of John Kerry

Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:58:02 GMT

If John Kerry had had his way in the last 30 years, Eastern Europe would still be under the boot of communist dictatorships, Russia would still be Red and accumulating nuclear weapons aimed at the West, no such giant of mobile technology as Nokia would have arisen out of Finland, Saddam would be in control of Kuwait and probably most of the Middle East, Central America would be ruled by various marxist tyrannies, and the US military would be completely lacking in modern weaponry.

Hugh Hewitt: JOHN KERRY now closes his presidential campaign exactly as he opened his political life: Attacking the United States military. Thirty-three years ago, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he indicted the soldiers of Vietnam as war criminals, the heirs of Genghis Khan. This week he embraced an already discredited account of missing munitions to attack the reputation of the 3rd Infantry Division and the 101st Airborne. Make no mistake, that is exactly what Kerry is doing when he asserts that deadly weapons went unsecured and unreported as these two divisions rushed to liberate Baghdad. And not just these divisions, but every officer and soldier who had a hand in drawing up the war plan. ... Let us hope that his defeat in this Presidential Election will signal the end of Kerry's nefarious political career.

Government and trial lawyers versus our health

Tue, 19 Oct 2004 23:42:40 GMT

Weekly Standard: If Kerry thinks he can solve the flu vaccine problem, he need look no further than his own running mate, trial lawyer John Edwards. Vaccines are the one area of medicine where trial lawyers are almost completely responsible for the problem. No one can plausibly point a finger at insurance companies, drug companies, or doctors. Lawyers have won the vaccine game so completely that nobody wants to play. ...

ABC News promotes Vietnamese communists, ignores American veterans

Sat, 16 Oct 2004 16:13:41 GMT

After the deliberate promotion of forged documents by CBS to attack President Bush, ABC uncritically presents stories told by Vietnamese people who live in a totalitarian system, while continuing to ignore eyewitnesses in the USA. Looks like the Old Media is as depraved as Old Europe.

Beldar: ... Most importantly, while ABC News invested a great deal of time and money going to Vietnam, they've failed to exhaust, plumb, or even scratch the surface of trying to do any investigative reporting here in the United States. It's not only that they've failed to interview pro-SwiftVets eyewitnesses, but also that they've also failed to interview pro-Kerry eyewitnesses -- and no one, from either side of the debate, can seriously defend their failure to do that. Indeed, they failed to review, summarize, or even reference what others have reported -- including, notably, the eyewitness account given by their fellow mainstream media source, Chicago Tribune editor William B. Rood -- and that's simply inexcusably sloppy. ...

Fake sympathy

Fri, 15 Oct 2004 02:13:33 GMT

John Rosenthal (WSJ): ... In the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, countless private individuals in Western Europe undoubtedly felt sympathy with the victims and many saw fit to express it in small symbolic acts, such as laying flowers before the American Embassy in Paris. Given the horror of the attacks, such reactions were, so to say, only human. What was more unusual and hence noteworthy, however, was that at the same time the attacks seemed to elicit from the very start a sort of paroxysm of--as an Austrian friend of mine aptly put it--anti-American "ventilating." In the major media, moreover, the expressions of hatred and contempt for America quickly came to eclipse those of sympathy. An especially conspicuous case in point is provided by the influential French daily Le Monde. ...

The growing American prosperity

Sun, 10 Oct 2004 04:27:54 GMT

The Heritage Foundation: The U.S. economy has displayed a remarkable resilience following the bursting of the Internet bubble and the 9/11 terrorist attacks that struck at the heart of American business. The economy's strength was such that the 2001 recession is among the weakest on record. Today, business investment continues on an unprecedented expansion and more Americans are working than ever before. Still, myths are rampant. This paper presents a basic statistical overview of the American economy and prosperity that Americans today enjoy. ...

The importance of showing the barbarians' work

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 18:39:11 GMT

We must keep in mind, and in sight, the pictures of the innocents who jumped to their death from the WTC on 9/11, as well as the Islamofascist beheadings. Michael Ledeen: We cannot wage an effective war unless we understand the nature of our enemy. If we do not grasp that the terrorists' ranks are full of people who are there precisely because they are thrilled by the prospect of beheading human beings, we will fail to see the war through to its necessary conclusion. The beheadings are about them, not us. They show us very important things we need to know: What they are, what they want, what they will do if we do not stop them.

"cato"