The Global War On You Know Who

"The West is facing a concerted effort by Islamic jihadists, the motives and goals of whom are largely ignored by the Western media, to destroy the West and bring it forcibly into the Islamic world -- and to commit violence to that end even while their overall goal remains out of reach. That effort goes under the general rubric of jihad."
-- Robert Spencer

Monday, June 13, 2005

Gone Fishin'!

Arafish: LGF.

Back next week. Until then, here's an excellent interview with the most important scholar of our time, Bat Ye'or.
Bat Ye’or was born in Cairo. In 1955, her Egyptian nationality was revoked because she was Jewish. She found asylum in 1957 with her parents in London as a stateless refugee, acquiring British citizenship in 1959 after her marriage. In 1958, Ye’or attended the Institute of Archeology at London University and moved to Switzerland in 1960 with her husband, where she continued her studies at the University of Geneva until the birth of three children. She has worked alone in a groundbreaking field of historical research and on numerous publications for the past 35 years.

oldSpeak recently sat down with Bat Ye’or to discuss the ideas in her new book [Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis].

John Whitehead: In your book, you discuss at length the meaning of jihad, which is central to Islamic history and civilization. Few Americans understand what it means for them, their country and people around the world. Can you explain the significance of jihad and the danger it poses?

Bat Ye’or: Jihad represents both a doctrine and a jurisdiction elaborated from three sources: the Koran, the Hadiths (words and deeds attributed to the Prophet Muhammad) and the biographies of the Prophet. Treatises on jihad have been written down and explained by the four founders of Islamic jurisprudence in the 8th and 9th centuries. Since then, they have represented an important part of Islamic legislation as jihad regulates the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims according to Islamic law.

According to the jihadic doctrine, the world is divided into two parts: Muslims and Infidels, the latter living in the dar al-harb, the land of war, because their land must be Islamized by peaceful means, or by war if they resist. Before attacking the Infidels, Muslims must first call them to convert; if they refuse, they are asked to pay a ransom; if they refuse again, Muslims have the duty to wage war on them. Truce is accepted on condition that the Infidels pay a regular ransom and put no obstacle to the spread of Islam in their own countries. There are other conditions also, like sending soldiers to fight for Islamic interests. A truce should not last more than 10 years, and it is allowed only when the Muslim ruler is weak. Otherwise, war against the Infidels is mandatory.

The treatises on jihad establish with a meticulous precision the tactics and means to conduct war, the type of truces allowed and the treatment of prisoners of war: male, female and children, the division of the booty, the characters of the land of the Infidels that has become Islamized, the rules to govern the submitted Infidels and so on.
. . .
JW: The title of your book, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, implies a fusion of European and Arab interests. Your argument, however, seems to be that there is not so much an equal cooperation of these two interests but that the Islamic world is actually manipulating the Europeans. Is this explained by the Islamic policy of dhimmitude? What does this concept mean for Europe?

BY: First, I want to stress that European and Arab interests coincided on many plans. Otherwise, the European Community (EC), replaced in 1992-93 by the European Union (EU), would not have agreed on such cooperation. Those mutual concerns were the oil, Arab markets and European interests in Arab industrial developments, which created a Euro-Arab economic interdependency as was planned by European politicians and economists. On the political level, the Euro-Arab solidarity is essential to the economic collaboration between the two partners. This political solidarity refers to the anti-American and anti-Zionist militancy. Both represent strong and permanent trends in Europe, on the extreme right as well as in the Leftist movements where the Arafatian cult replaced that of Stalin. The rebirth of the powerful Nazi and communist parties machineries and ideals into Palestinianism−a jihadist anti-Western cult that subverts its values–is a European phenomenon. Europe itself wants to fulfill the Arab dream: to be a stronger power, rival and opposed to America. Both Europeans and Arabs share the desire for the fusion of the two shores of the Mediterranean and anti-Israeli policies based on Palestinianism, as well as anti-Americanism.
. . .
JW: You paint a very negative picture for the future of Europe, which, of course, affects the United States and the rest of the world. Do you see any hope for democracy and freedom as it faces what you argue is the onslaught of Islam and jihad?

BY: I distinguish between Islam and the ideology of jihad. These are two different domains. Europe rejects its Judeo-Christian tradition and wants to recreate the Andalusian paradise or the Ottoman Empire, which were both governed by shari’a. As for jihad, Europe refuses to acknowledge it because it does not fit its system of alliances and opponents. What escapes usually the observer is that Europe is not a victim. Europe has deliberately and willingly chosen a policy which it conducts systematically, whatever happens. In fact, it is so proud of it that it pressures America constantly to adopt it in the name of peace. I call it the peace of dhimmitude. But since this history is denied, no one knows what it means.
Much more here.

Sunday, June 12, 2005

Ask an Imam: Women

Part II of selections from Ask an Imam, "the online fatwa resource!" Please note the questioner's locations.

Question 14776 from United Kingdom:
In respect of “Huqooq-ul-Ibaad”. What should one do if one has broken someone’s heart and trust?

I am a 30 years non-married male and was working in a company with a 27 years married Muslim lady. During one-year job I never said anything wrong to her or touched her. She was then treating me as her brother. She and I were the only persons in the building during weekends and she was sitting just next to me. Next weekend, she went into the toilet and I followed her there to see her naked. I went in the toilet next to her and raised myself up to see her, she suddenly lifted her face up and saw me and screamed a lot. I begged her to forgive me but she shouted at me and ran out of the building.

Answer 14776
You should make sincere Tawbah [penance] for your wrongs. There is no need to approach the lady nor her husband. You should not allow this to affect you. You should continue with your life. It is important for you to consider marriage if you are not married.
Question 14779 from United Kingdom: What would be the proceedure of Divorce (Talaaq) if it is the wife who has left her husband.
. . . the husband does not know where she is since the last four years to date. He is wanting to forget this marraige and move on because of the frustration that, although he is still married to her, he does not know where she is. Please note that the husband has tried his level best to locate her.

Answer 14779
According to the Shari’ah [Islamic law], a husband has the sole right to issue his wife a divorce. This right may be exercised at any time or place. However, we suggest you consult your local Ulama and explain them your situation. They will advise and guide you on pursuing the matter further.
Question 14767 from United Kingdom: Is it permissable for a women to work..Not in times of difficulty but to teach a subject in school.
Answer 14767
Allah ta’ala states, ‘And stay within your homes.’ (Ahzaab 33). Considering the above, if there is no necessity, it will not be permissible.
Question 14583 from Australia:
Is it counted as travelling for a women, if she was to go to a place that was 40km (25miles),away from her house and was to stay in a safe-secure all-girls environment, for 2 nights, and return home the 3rd day?? I don't see this as travelling, because that women hasn't travelled for more then 88 km.

Answer 14583
In principle, a woman supposed to remain within the precincts of her home and should not emerge except at the time of necessity. Allah has declared in the Qur’aan, ‘And O Women, remain within your homes and do not exhibit yourself like the displays of the immoral women of former times of ignorance.’ (al-Ahzaab Aayat33)

It is also not permissible for a woman to travel the distance of 88 kms except with a Mahram [male relative escort]. Nabi is reported to have mentioned, ‘A woman is prohibited from traveling the distance of three days (approximately 88 kms) except with a Mahram.’ (Bukhari pg.147)

With regard to less than 88 kms., it will only be permissible under the following conditions:
1. There is no alternative, e.g. no Shar’ee Mahram available to accompany her;
2. There should be no fear of Fitnah or life/respect, etc.
3. She observes the laws of Hijaab.

Only under the following conditions will it be permissibe, otherwise not.
You'd think Western feminists would be screaming at the top of their lungs about the import of Islam's barbaric, oppressive treatment of women. But you could find more indignation at a Superbowl party than you would at a NOW conference. Kind of speaks volumes about the extent to which feminists' priorities have been subverted by "respect for other cultures."

Saturday, June 11, 2005

Vikings No More

Norway continues the struggle to deport Mullah Krekar, founder of Ansar Al-Islam, a key terrorist group in Iraq also associated with Zarqawi.
OSLO, June 9 (AFP) Mullah Krekar . . . on Thursday reiterated his praise for Al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden, calling him "a jewel" of Islam, media reported.

"I do not deny that I have said that Osama bin Laden is a jewel among the imams of Islam. He is faithful to the religion," Krekar told an Oslo court, Norwegian news agency NTB reported, as he tries to prove that he presents no threat to Norway.

Norwegian authorities decided in February 2003 to expel Krekar, whose real name is Fateh Najmeddin Faraj, due to national security concerns, but his deportation was suspended until the situation in Iraq improves.
That doesn't mean Norway is keeping him corralled to prevent him from assisting jihadis in Iraq -- it means they're protecting him:
"An agreement with the Iraqi authorities to return Krekar can not be reckoned as in agreement with the European Human Rights Convention before the new constitution is in place there," [Minister of Local Government and Regional Development Erna] Solberg told a press conference [last month].
The Iraqi government has reinstated the death penalty. And the EHRC forbids signatories from deporting or extraditing bad guys to jurisdictions in which they might be subject to it. (See an excellent explanation here.)

So what's he up to in Norway? Robert Spencer elaborates:
Mullah Krekar, who has admitted that he is the "former" leader of Ansar al-Islam, has been living for years in Oslo, Norway, spending Norwegian welfare money and occasionally suing people for suggesting that he is a terrorist, of course using welfare money to hire his lawyer.
In other words, Norway has effectively given asylum to a key terrorist leader.
This isn't an accident, or an isolated instance of bureaucratic fumbling; this is de facto policy.

Meanwhile, Norway and Sweden celebrate the opening of a new bridge between the two countries. They ought to be building moats rather than bridges, but in this case, it probably wouldn't matter; Sweden has already capitulated. Denmark, however, isn't so keen to roll over.

Friday, June 10, 2005

Fast Track to EUtopia

OSCE conference: Don’t make terrorism an issue of religion (AFP).
CORDOBA: The Organisation for Security and Cooperation [in Europe] began winding down a two-day conference on anti-Semitism and intolerance in this southern Spanish city on Thursday by insisting terrorism must not be identified with a religion, ethnic group or culture.

"International events and political questions never justify racism, xenophobia or discrimination, towards Muslims, Christians or the faithful of other religions," participants concluded.

A discordant note emerged, however, when the US-based Simon Wiesenthal Centre which seeks to uphold Jewish rights and preserve the memory of the Holocaust, regretted that the OSCE was broadening its remit beyond anti-Semitism.
"A discordant note emerged" when a Jewish group spoke up at a conference on anti-Semitism that avoided mentioning Jews. Hokay.

Also this week: Britain introduces a bill banning "racial and religious hatred."
Ministers insist the new law would not affect "criticism, commentary or ridicule of faiths." The Racial and Religious Hatred Bill would create a new offence of incitement to religious hatred and would apply to comments made in public or in the media, as well as through written material.

The aim is to protect people from incitement to hatred against them because of their faith. The maximum penalty for anybody convicted of the new offence would be seven years imprisonment.

The government says the legislation is a response to the concerns of faith groups, particularly Muslims. The Muslim Council of Britain has welcomed the move, arguing that the courts have already extended such protection to Sikh and Jewish people.

Keith Porteous Wood, of the National Secular Society, also said the legislation would curtail free expression. Similar laws in Australia had stirred up tensions between different religious groups, he argued.
Actually, it's been used to imprison a Pakistani Christian for criticizing Islam -- a man who'd fled to Australia due to persecution by Muslims in his home country.

This just in: Islam Q&A weighs in on defamation of the Prophet:
Question Reference Number: 14305
Title: It is essential to respond to those who defame the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)


Praise be to Allaah.

Defaming the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is a kind of kufr. If that is done by a Muslim then it is apostasy on his part, and the authorities have to defend the cause of Allaah and His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) by executing the one who defamed him.

If the person who defames him is a non-Muslim living under a treaty with the Muslim state [ed. note: a dhimmi], then this is a violation of the treaty and he must be executed, but that should be left to the authorities.
Somehow, it's just not too hard to see where this is going.

Column of the Day

Academic . . . long-winded . . . but spot-on: Is Europe Dying?
The demographics are unmistakable: Europe is dying. The wasting disease that has beset this once greatest of civilizations is not physical, however. It is a disease in the realm of the human spirit. David Hart, another theological analyst of contemporary history, calls it the disease of "metaphysical boredom"-boredom with the mystery, passion, and adventure of life itself. Europe, in Hart's image, is boring itself to death.

And in the process, it is allowing radicalized twenty-first century Muslims -- who think of their forebears' military defeats at Poitiers in 732, Lepanto in 1571, and Vienna in 1683 (as well as their expulsion from Spain in 1492), as temporary reversals en route to Islam's final triumph in Europe -- to imagine that the day of victory is not far off. Not because Europe will be conquered by an invading army marching under the Prophet's banners, but because Europe, having depopulated itself out of boredom and culturally disarmed itself in the process, will have handed the future over to those Islamic immigrants who will create what some scholars call "Eurabia" -- the European continent as a cultural and political extension of the Arab-Islamic world.

Should that happen, the irony would be unmistakable: the drama of atheistic humanism, emptying Europe of its soul, would have played itself out in the triumph of a thoroughly nonhumanistic theism.

. . . why should Americans care about the European future? I can think of three very good reasons.

The first involves pietas, an ancient Roman virtue that teaches us reverence and gratitude for those on whose shoulders we stand. . . . We have seen what historical amnesia about civilizational roots has done to Europe. Americans ought not want that to happen in the United States.

The second reason we can and must care has to do with the threat to American security posed by Europe's demographic meltdown. . . . Since 1970, which is not all that long ago, some 20 million (legal) Islamic immigrants -- the equivalent of three E.U. countries, Ireland, Belgium, and Denmark -- have settled in Europe. [This could well produce a] Europe increasingly influenced by, and perhaps even dominated by, militant Islamic populations, convinced that their long-delayed triumph in the European heartland is at hand.

The third reason why the "Europe problem" is ours as well as theirs has to do with the future of the democratic project, in the United States and indeed throughout the world. . . . To deny that Christianity had anything to do with the evolution of free, law-governed, and prosperous European societies is more than a question of falsifying the past; it is also a matter of creating a future in which moral truth has no role in governance, in the determination of public policy, in understandings of justice, and in the definition of that freedom which democracy is intended to embody.

Thursday, June 09, 2005

Update: Italian Hostage Freed

Clementina Cantoni, an Italian aid worker abducted in Kabul last month, has been released.
No details about her release were immediately provided.

Afghan officials had been in contact with the kidnappers but had refused to say who they were or what demands they had.
Schoolgirls backed the campaign to release Clementina Cantoni

Days after her abduction, a video was broadcast on a private TV channel, showing Ms Cantoni wrapped in a blanket, sitting on the floor between two gunmen with weapons pointed at her head.

The Afghan government had criticised the Italian embassy in Kabul for trying to negotiate Ms Cantoni's release with her kidnappers.
Let's hope Italian taxpayers get a better deal than they did last time.

More: Afghan Interior Minister Ali Ahmad Jalali says no ransom was paid:
Jalali said combined pressure from the Afghan public, President Hamid Karzai, tribal leaders and Muslim clerics persuaded the kidnapper, who he described as a criminal, to release her.

Jalali said negotiators worked "relentlessly, tried to use every channel, every effort to win the release of Clementina. We had 24 days of sleepless nights and we are happy that it paid off."
Hmm. Hokay.

Ms Cantoni, who was released yesterday, said her hostage takers numbered between four and six and their leader introduced himself immediately as Timur Shah. . . . Italian newspapers reported that Ms Cantoni was freed in exchange for the release of Shah's mother.

An Afghan official in Kabul confirmed that Shah's mother was released from custody, but said that the authorities wanted to release her anyway as there was no grounds to charge her. They had originally suspected her of participating in a previous kidnapping attributed to Shah's gang.

Thinking Outside the Box

It's funny that Trey Parker and Matt Stone -- of South Park fame -- were among the first to publicly posit active collaboration between Kim Jong-Il and Islamic terrorists in Team America: World Police.

Two weeks ago, I mentioned Geostrategy-direct's report that Iran has received a shipment of plutonium from NK. A possibility it took the CIA 10 years to confirm. Two years after we became aware that NK had supplied Libya with much of its unconventional weapons capabilities.

This "unthinkable" cooperation between the remaining two members of the Axis of Evil is discussed in greater depth in an article on FPM: The Iran-North Korea Connection.

Of one thing we can be absolutely certain: this web of terror is bound together by a glue of total hatred directed at America, at our freedoms, and at the culture of the West. All terror masters are allied in that goal; they will settle differences among themselves after we are defeated.

Corroborating this deadly trend are the latest reports from Iran that detail how North Korea has supported Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Again, because of our cultural blinders, we have been reluctant to look much further east than Pakistan to seek those who are assisting Iran with its nuclear R&D. Sure, some observers say, we know that the North Koreans are there, but because of the differences we minimize the effectiveness of the collaboration. But think for a minute how ridiculous that concept sounds. Who, for example, are our two most solid treaty partners in Asia? Japan and South Korea share out geopolitical goals and participate in joint defense projects. Why can we handily bridge cultural gaps to produce credible results, but discount the notion that our enemies are capable of doing something similar?

North Korea has a several-year old relationship with the mullah regime in Iran that includes a technological spectrum of evil: medium range missiles, nuclear weapons, poison gas, and warhead guidance systems. It is possible, but not verified at this time, that the Kim Jong Il regime is also using the mullah’s Italian crime contacts to launder heroin. Regardless, the known degree of cooperation is sufficiently serious to warrant concern.

Given the reports coming out of Gadhafi’s Libya that North Korea was a major supplier of partially processed uranium ore to the dictator’s weapons program, we ought not be shocked that Iran was in on the action also. . . . Not to be unnecessarily redundant, but these continual, repeated poor performances by CIA and State intelligence services are singularly unhelpful to the president and to the country. Drastic reform is overdue, especially at State.
Investigative reporter Joel Mowbray made an excellent case for exactly that in his book Dangerous Diplomacy -- published almost two years ago. Tick tock.

Righteous Cause of the Day

Pardon the potty language, but there's really no way around it., among other things, sponsors . . . well, fuckers, to be deported from Israel. Here's why, and here's how.

Deport The Fuckers now sends all the 1-way bus tickets to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's Office with a note (on the back of a sticker), saying:

Dear Prime Minister Sharon,

The enclosed 1-way bus ticket was purchased by a supporter of Deport The Fuckers, for you to use on 1 Fucker to be Deported. We, the People, believe that all Fuckers should be deported equally. Therefore, we urge you to listen to and act in support of this voice of the people. This is the nature of democracy, in addition to the fact that it is a policy you have publicly supported and undertaken as the prime minister.


Deport The Fuckers
Sounds mean? Xenophobic? Racist? Violates the poor dears' human rights? Here's the alternative. Which is fine with me too.

Wednesday, June 08, 2005

Operation: Desecrate American Flag

An Islamist website announces: "Members of desecrate the American flag to show their allegiance to Allah (swt) in reply to the Qur'an desecration at Guantanamo Bay."
Just to show where our loyalty belongs to. You see this flag here? It's gonna go on the floor [places flag on the street, steps on it]. And to us, our loyalty does not belong to this flag. [Shouting] Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar!
See the sickening, shocking 5-minute video here.

Oh yes. Also see the DoD memo on proper handling of the Qur'an, dated Jan. 19, 2003, here (PDF).
4. Handling.

a. Clean gloves will be put on in full view of the detainees prior to handling.

b. Two hands will be used at all times when handling the Koran in manner signaling respect and reverence. Care should be used so that the right hand is the primary one used to manipulate any part of the Koran due to the cultural association with the left hand. Handle the Koran as if it were a fragile piece of delicate art.

c. Ensure that the Koran is not placed in offensive areas such as the floor, near the toilet or sink, near the feet, or dirty/wet areas.
UPDATE: Robert Spencer receives death threats from the Islamic Thinkers Society for "waging an e-Crusade," i.e., publicizing and criticizing the abovementioned video.

Tuesday, June 07, 2005

Advisors to Bush: Never Apologize

Well, I'll be damned. Someone (other than bloggers) actually thinks we ought to start fighting the propaganda war.
Some members of the Bush administration have taken a cue from a classic John Wayne Western and are advising their boss to take the film's advice – "Never apologize" –- when dealing with Muslims, reports geopolitical analysts Jack Wheeler.

Wheeler says the goal of the John Wayne aficionados is to eliminate any "We're sorry" message in State Department cables and communiqués, National Security Council analyses, and Pentagon press briefings – "and inserting in their place, however subtly worded in diplo-speak, the message: 'If you don't like it, stuff it.'"

In his column, Wheeler quotes from a message the anti-apology staffers would like to see in a future Bush speech:
I want to make it very clear that neither this administration nor the American military nor the American people owe an apology whatsoever to the religion of Islam and its believers. The American people have every right to take enormous pride in the respect which our military treats believers in Islam, and in the fact that the American military is not just the most powerful but the most humanitarian fighting force in the history of humankind. It is the Islamic terrorists and their followers who owe us an apology for making war on us, and owe an apology to their fellow believers in Islam for making war on them.
Writes Wheeler: "So cross your fingers he takes the movie and the message to heart. The day the president of the United States announces that Muslims owe an apology to us and not the other way around will be the day we truly begin to win this war."
Darn tootin. And while we're at it, State may want to stop circulating namby-pamby bilge like this in the Arab world.

Monday, June 06, 2005

Prepare For Tha Shiznit, Beyatch

A terrifying reminder to our enemies of what we got and they don't: gold-toothed Compton carjackers . . . honed to deadly perfection by the Marine Corps. Turn up the bass, and see for yourself: Live From Iraq. Hoo-rah!

Read their story here, and buy the CD here.

Other formidable weapons in our arsenal:
Ten or so interrogators would gather and sing the Rolling Stones' "Time Is on My Side" outside Kahtani's cell. Sometimes they would play a recording of "Enter Sandman" by the heavy-metal group Metallica, which brought Kahtani to tears, because he thought (not implausibly) he was hearing the sound of Satan.
Who needs pliers and sodium pentothal? We've got Western culture!

UPDATE: Oh. Wow. What icy heart wouldn't melt? The good chaps at Al-Faw prove that Brits can have fun anywhere: The Way to Amarillo.

Sunday, June 05, 2005

German Perfidy

The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini (whom Arafat claimed as his uncle) meets with Hermann Goering in Berlin, 1941.

In spring 2003, many reports confirmed that cash-strapped Russian, French, and German defense firms had casually helped Saddam fortify his defenses. The German specialty -- surprise -- was underground bunkers. Indeed, terrorists have been operating out of a lavish bunker near Fallujah; Col. Dave Hunt says it's German.
U.S. Marines said yesterday they had discovered a massive underground bunker complex with 50 caches of weapons and ammunition and living quarters fitted out with air conditioning, a kitchen and showers.

The Marines said the bunker complex, discovered over the past four days in Anbar province west of Baghdad, included a recently used "insurgent lair" containing air-conditioned quarters and high-tech military equipment, including night-vision goggles.

The bunker was found cut from a rock quarry in Karmah, 50 miles west of Baghdad. Marines said the facility was 170 yards wide and 275 yards long. In its rooms were "four fully furnished living spaces, a kitchen with fresh food, two shower facilities and a working air conditioner. Other rooms within the complex were filled with weapons and ammunition," the Marines said.

The weapons included "numerous types of machine guns, ordnance including mortars, rockets and artillery rounds, black uniforms, ski masks, compasses, log books, night-vision goggles and fully charged cell phones."
Is the picture over the top? Sure. But this is what you get when socialists run a government as if money grows on trees. German unemployment is now up to 12%; annual growth is negative, i.e., the German economy is contracting; and burdensome taxes and regulations crush incentive, initiative, and entrepreneurship more than ever. Naturally, for-profit firms take business wherever they can find it.

Schroeder was re-elected in 2002 on a bitterly anti-American platform; his policies have amounted to a self-inflicted Versailles treaty. Can Kohl protege Angela Merkel oust Schroeder and fix it? Maybe. Will we hear demands for the German government to apologize for allowing this to happen? Certainly not. We have accidentally urine-flecked Qur'ans and the Michael Jackson verdict to worry about.

Saturday, June 04, 2005

Ask an Imam!

It's like Dear Abby, only you don't risk mobs and riots and death and stuff if you decline to take her advice.

Question 7278 from United States: My wife cooks too much food and it is wasted. Should I punish her or not do anything since she is such a good cook and keeps me happy with sexual items?
My wife cooks so much food and we cannot eat all of it. She feeds some food to our exotic pets, a Mali Uromastyx lizard, poison spitting tree frogs, a tarantulla, a pac-man frog, our two dogs, a cat, and our many saltwater fishes and sharks in a 400 gallon aquarium. [Ed. note: WTF!?]

Is it bad for us to feed very expensive food to our pets or simply put in the garbage disposal? Sometimes even the house cleaning maids get angry over this, and they are not even Muslims. Should I punish my wife by physical hitting her, or should I tell her that I will not give her my sex? Sometimes she thinks hitting her is sex forplay, so I do not know what to do.

Answer 7278
No, you should not physically punish her. rather sit down and explain what bothers you. Communicate your concerns to her verbally. Explain to her that she must cook less and why.

If there is leftover food per chance, you should feed it to the pets instead of disposing of it in the garbage can.

and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best
Mufti Muhammad Kadwa
Can't make this stuff up, people.

Question 1373: can u take steriods to train yourself for jihad is this allowed?

Answer 1373
It is not permissible to take Stroids to train for Jihaad.

and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best
Mufti Ebrahim Desai
Hmm. Now why would he want to train on steroids when jihad is just a peaceful inner spiritual struggle?

Question 1125: Why is eating pigs haraam [unlawful]?
Answer 1125
There is a saying in English that "a man becomes what he eats." According to physicians and medical experts, pork is a harmful diet. Consumption of swine-flesh creates lowliness in character and destroys moral and spiritual faculties in a man.

Anything, which is harmful for the body, hurts the soul as well. Consumption of swine-flesh reduces the feeling of shame and as such the standard of modesty. Those nations, which consume pork habitually, have a low standard of morality with the result that virginity, chastity and bashfulness are becoming a thing of the past in Europe today. The number of unwed mothers is on the increase despite the use of pills and other contraceptives.

According to a report, 60 to 70% girls in Sweden become mothers before marriage. The formula of "skin to skin is no sin" is having its toll but there is hardly and feeling of shame and remorse over the end-result. Since the European nations have become addicted to wine and pork, sexual freedom with all its attendant evils has got ingrained in their culture.
Pork, huh. And all this time, I thought it was just socialism, multiculturalism, and post-modernism. Silly me!

Special Offer: Get Your Free Qur'an!

Jawa Report: Damn it feels good to be an infidel!

So it's confirmed.
15 Guantanamo detainees "abused" their own Qur'ans;
3 US personnel intentionally "abused" a Qur'an; and
2 US personnel inadvertently "abused" a Qur'an.

Many have suggested that these budding artists ought to apply for an NEA grant. However, a Saudi sheikh calls Qur'an abuse by the infidel "a violation of international law and conventions." I.e., tantamount to an act of war.

I bet you're thinking, "Hey! Everyone has a Qur'an to abuse but me! When do I get to commit my own heinous act of war?"

Well. Conveniently, leading jihad propaganda group CAIR is giving them away for free. And not just any Qur'ans, but a version annotated with 20% extra anti-Semitic bile. Call now!

Not sure what to do with yours? See ideas here and here.

Warning: first see Geometry of the Flush.

Friday, June 03, 2005

AI Promotes Human Rights Abuses

So America- and Israel-hating Amnesty International radicals think that Guantanamo is the "gulag of our time." Yawn. What's new. That's the problem with hyperbole. As with PETA's execrable "Holocaust on Your Plate" campaign, equating banal trivialities with historical monstrosities makes otherwise caring people angry, and then they tune out.

And that's the real story. Organizations filled with pampered do-gooders forfeit their opportunity to do any actual good by waxing hysterical any time we forget the olive in a detainee's (non-alcoholic) martini. Further, the more airtime that gets diverted to hand-wringing over rumors of flushed Qur'ans is attention diverted from beheadings, suicide bombings, and dead children.

There are many valid critiques to level at AI. Moral equivalency. Double standards. A presumption that the hotly disputed Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions constitutes settled international law. A total ignorance of asymmetrical warfare. Overlooking all the privileges detainees are afforded, and how much transparency does exist, considering that we give them Qur'ans and know about Gitmo at all. No awareness whatsoever that terrorists have often been trained to lie about mistreatment in captivity, and actively promote the wanton murder of civilians.

If one wanted to get snippy, one could point out that the head of AI, an organization that sits in judgment of a war against jihad, Irene Khan, is a Muslim. Or that AI's executive director and chairmen are donors to the campaigns of Sens. Kerry and Kennedy. And, Amnesia International seems to have forgotten about those other gulags on the island of Cuba.

But above all, they forget that every single detainee at Gitmo was picked up on the battlefield in Afghanistan, and could have been simply shot on the spot -- perfectly legally. We don't, because we need the intel. AI doesn't consider that all these "secret" CIA prisons in Afghanistan and Iraq may have sprung up because of AI's endless bitching when we do tell them what we're up to.

If AI really cared about the detainees, they'd stop waging a propaganda war against their captors and demanding perfection. They'd shut up, play nice, and try to get what access and privileges they could. But they don't, which raises the question of what their priority is, then. It's hard not to conclude that it's to undermine a Republican administration they hate more than the head-choppers. Net result, they wind up assisting the enemy, which has a demonstrated human rights record that ranks a notch below atrocious.

Nice work, AI. You wail impotently. We'll try to ignore you, and get back to defending civilization.

UPDATE: AI's executive director William Schulz admits that he doesn't "know for sure" if Gitmo is a gulag, "has no idea" if Rumsfeld has approved torture and starvation, and has "absolutely no idea" if the ICRC has access or not. So speculation and unfounded allegation is what passes for hard-hitting investigation these days. How about talking to someone who worked there? One guard notes that "the international media makes regular visits (almost every week when I was stationed there)"; and "the ICRC is there all the time. They don't just make occasional visits."

Thursday, June 02, 2005

Inside the Medieval Mind

Like "outrage" over underwear abuse and "outrage" over Qur'an flushing, the AP obediently warns us of other things that "outrage" Islamists. Saudis outraged over women-drive proposal.
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Consultative Council member Mohammad al-Zulfa's proposal has unleashed a storm in this conservative country where the subject of women drivers remains taboo. There even have been calls to kick al-Zulfa from the council and strip him of his Saudi nationality.

The uproar may be astounding to outsiders.
Not really.
But in Saudi Arabia, where the religious establishment has the upper hand in defining women's freedoms, the issue touches on the kingdom's strict Islamic lifestyle.

Y'know, like George Bush, Bill Frist, and Priscilla Owen,
who believe women should be shielded from strange men, say driving will allow a woman to leave home whenever she pleases and go wherever she wishes. Some say it will present her with opportunities to violate Islamic law, such as exposing her eyes while driving or interacting with strange men, like police officers or mechanics.

"Driving by women leads to evil," Munir al-Shahrani wrote in a letter to the editor of the Al-Watan daily. "Can you imagine what it will be like if her car broke down? She would have to seek help from men."

But al-Zulfa contends neither the law nor Islam bans women from driving. Instead, the ban is based on fatwas, or Islamic edicts, by senior clerics who say that any driving by women would create situations for sinful temptation.
Carefully omitting who would be sinfully tempted. What would proper journalists do without the passive voice?
It is the same argument used to restrict other freedoms. Without written permission from a male guardian, women may not travel, get an education or work. Regardless of permission, they are not allowed to mix with men in public or leave home without wearing black cloaks, called abayas.
I'm not going to whine about "human rights violations," because this empty, hackneyed phrase has lost all meaning, covering anything from summary execution to someone feeling offended.

The real problem here is, Islam absolves men of any and all responsibility to control their own base impulses. It is a woman's duty to hide under a pile of blankets and stay out of the way. If she fails to, she brings dishonor on the family, redeemed only if she is beaten or murdered.

MEMRI TV has subtitled many revealing clips from Arab television in which the propriety of wife-beating and the culpability of rape victims remain subjects of contentious debate. Please watch a few.

Whither Europe Part II

Hey, I have an idea for a new EU constitution. It would go something like this: "We the People of Europe, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution . . ."

Oh, wait, yeah. Someone already tried checks and balances, robust free markets, limited government, and rugged individualism. Geez, what a disaster that was.

Anyway. An outstanding piece from the EU Referendum blog (British): Why they have got it wrong.
. . . Where they are gone wrong, of course, is that the European Union is not a political construct. It is closer to, if not in fact, a secular religion, the only thing separating it from one of the more established, fundamental religions is that God does not lie at the core of its belief system.

Instead, the core of this religion is "European Union", this mythical, ill-defined entity that encompasses all, the attainment of which is the ultimate goal of the "project". European Union is no longer for anything – it does not have a purpose. It is the end in itself, the utopia, nothing less than heaven on earth. But, like the Holy Grail, it will never be found. Its acolytes simply strive, Bhudda-like, to achieve the ultimate level of attainment, without ever achieving it. There is always one more level, one more treaty, to attain.

As a secular religion, it of course has all the trappings of the more established religions. For its dogma, it has the sacred acquis communautaire. It has its High Priests in its European Commission, its Praetorian Guard, in the phalanxes of Monnet professors – the Jesuits of Integration – and, of course, its pastoral bishops and priests, its members of the European Parliament. And, of course, it has it temples, its churches and shrines, its saints and martyrs - and its mantras and incantations.

. . . Crucially, like any religion, it does not obey the rules of politics. As a belief system, it divides the world into two camps, the believers and the unbelievers, the latter group encompassing a division known as "Eurosceptics" or "Europhobes". In the context, these should be better known as heretics, or perhaps "Euroheretics" - "Europrotestants" even.

That is why the High Priests cannot take note of "no" votes in referendums. They cannot rethink, reform, or change their ways because that, in itself, would be heresy. Simply, if the people do not agree, they must be – as a matter of definition – wrong. They are to be pitied, cosseted and then guided back into the path of righteousness. No more could their false beliefs be accommodated than could an Inquisitor suddenly agree with the point of view of a heretic and release him from the rack or liberate him from the purifying fire.

And it is that which sets the framework for the current events, and will dictate the response of the "colleagues". They are not wrong; there is nothing wrong with the "project". It is simply that the people have misunderstood.

. . . Driven by religious zeal, it will go on and on until it is stopped, physically, and brutally, or the politicians which give it its sustenance drive a stake through its heart.
Dang. The EU is a vampire, Frankenstein, and an orthodox juggernaut all at once. Couldn't have been more blistering myself.

UPDATE: European leaders may scrap constitution.

Anatole Kaletsky: Europe's Dirty Little Secret.
Whatever you think of European integration, there is something inspiring about 20 million people who, having been told what to do by their most respected politicians and after listening attentively, then do the exact opposite.

This week’s referendums in France and the Netherlands are probably the most significant event in European history since the end of the Cold War. As in Germany after its citizens found that they could smash symbolic chunks out of the Berlin Wall with impunity, everyday life in Europe may go on as before, but nothing will ever be quite the same.

Wednesday, June 01, 2005

Whither Europe

After the emphatic French rejection of the EU constitution the other day, my elation soon turned to contemplation. As expected, the Dutch have rejected it as well, by a huge margin; and I find my contemplation deepening.

Perhaps the EU constitution would have "streamlined decisionmaking" -- i.e., removed pesky stuff like voters, national legislatures, and sovereignty from the loop. Perhaps its free market language wouldn't have had the tiniest impact on Europe's lumbering welfare states. Perhaps Europe's reckless Euro-Arab Dialogue would have been further reinforced and the immigration problem made even worse.

But I, like most other analysts, did not anticipate that typically apathetic European voters would refuse to roll over in such huge numbers. Certainly not to the extent that putting it to a re-vote or sending it to the legislature would be political suicide, rather than business as usual. One way or another, I expected arrogant Eurocrats to muscle it through and get to yes, with or without the consent of the voters. But the EU constitution appears to be officially DOA.

So I'm just now starting to wonder if Europe has been on a collision course either way. Ralph Peters echoes my concerns that the alternative to a centralized Eurabian super-state may be even worse. Europe Eschews Union: Return of the Tribes.
. . . something's happening in Europe that international elites swore was impossible. Tribes are back.

In Europe, they're called nations, which sounds more distinguished. But the French voters who refused to submerge their identity in a greater European state behaved as tribally as any Hutus or Tutsis in central Africa — or any Arab clan in Iraq.

Certainly, there are practical issues at stake. The French fear an invasion of their welfare state by hardworking East Europeans. They dread hints of a market economy and Turkey's prospective membership in the EU. The Dutch are still reeling from the failure of their multicultural experiment and the grisly rise of Islamic fundamentalism.

But the underlying cause of the voter shift from continental integration to the nouveau chauvinism erupting from Paris to Moscow is far cruder and more explosive: the undiminished importance of group identity, of primal belonging.

If anything should strike us about this turn from Greater Europe back to a Europe of competing parts, it's how wildly the intellectuals were wrong and how ineffectual elite power monopolies proved in the end. For a half century, Europe's approved thinkers insisted that a new age had begun, that historical identities were dying. The wealth and power of a borderless Europe would rival, if not exceed, that of the United States.

Instead, we see a squabbling, grasping continent. Far from feeling solidarity with their Polish or Hungarian counterparts, French farmers view them as the enemy. Labor unions in Germany and France have turned Slavic job-seekers into bogeymen who'll rob the daily bread from the native-born.

The Dutch feel doubly under siege, invaded by an immigrant community that rejects their values, while simultaneously in danger of being gobbled up by a leviathan Europe that would seize control of their destiny.

For Europe's political elites — accustomed to docile, bought-off populations — the turn against further EU integration has been an enormous shock.

The German vote that thumped Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder last month was a vote against globalization and a European meta-identity. In his first public appearance after Sunday's "Non!" vote, President Jacques Chirac looked like a walking corpse.

Satisfying to watch? You bet. But the pleasure we can take in the humiliation of Schroeder and Chirac masks the fact that, for all their rhetoric and anti-American posturing, they were do-nothing, status-quo leaders whose authority never rose above the nuisance level. We may come to miss their fecklessness and gourmet-level pandering as nationalism swells among their electorates.

Whenever Europe's nationalist tide flows back in, the innocent drown.

. . . We may discover that Europe has changed less than any other part of the globe, that all the bureaucrats in Brussels can no more suppress the local tribes than could the Roman legions. For all of our concern about a European super-state, we may live to regret the return to a Europe of nations.
The good news is, a tribal Europe is more likely to find the backbone to resist what has become a bona fide Muslim invasion. The bad news is, it will likely be led by ultra-nationalists who will burn down every mosque, then move straight to the synagogues, and y'all know what comes after that.

UPDATE: Ali Sina of Faith Freedom sees it similarly: The Fall of Europe.
Europe is threading a very dangerous path. Two things can happen in Europe:

1. Islam is left alone to grow unchecked, which means Europe will succumb to Islamism before the end of this century. Or

2. The Europeans sense the danger too late, panic, and give birth to Eurofascism to counter Islamofascism.

In either case Europe will be destroyed.

Islamists at the UN

British MP: Muslim states should demand a seat on the UN Security Council.
Regarding India’s efforts to get a permanent seat in the UN Security Council, [Labour Party MP Muhammad Sarwar] said it was amazing that not even a single Muslim state had ever demanded a seat on the world body. "I think the heads of Muslim states should demand a seat in the UNSC for the representation of 1.2 billion Muslims of the world," said the British parliamentarian.
Maybe they will. The UN's largest voting bloc, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), will soon be getting a facelift.
The 57-nation OIC [ed. note: actually, 56; they count the non-state of Palestine] is to consider changing its name, charter and structure in a major overhaul aimed at projecting a more moderate image, Malaysia said on Tuesday.

Malaysia’s Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar said after returning from the OIC Commission of Eminent Persons (CEP) meeting in Islamabad last week that the group had come up with a plan to give the OIC a completely new look.
Lipstick on a pig. Heh. Oops.
"The agreement was that first of all we must improve our image. We must project Muslim nations to be seen as moderate countries and be mainstream players in international politics," he told reporters.
Ummm, image isn't really the problem. Killing people and vowing to finish what Hitler started kind of is.
"To achieve this we must undertake some programs, we must have better media interaction and more interaction with people of different religions and cultures."
Yeah, because the proliferation of mosques in every Western country, and AFP and al-Reuters' obedient cheerleading dhimmified reporting isn't nearly good enough.
"We propose a change to the OIC name as well as the contents of its charter. Now we want to take a global context," he said. Syed Hamid said the two-day meeting focused on the challenges facing Muslims in the 21st century and how to make the world’s biggest grouping of Muslim nations more relevant.
More relevant, eh. I'd say 9/11 put Muslim nations on the map. And without the OIC, who would have made sure that fully 30% of all General Assembly resolutions since the UN's inception condemn Israeli "aggression"?

Furthermore, formerly clueless Westerners are now studying Urdu, Pashtu, Farsi, and various Arabic dialects;

aware that the shalwar-kameez, hijab, burqa, and kaffiyeh are items of clothing;

familiar with the concepts of jihad, taqqiya, kaffir, da'wa, jizya, and hudna;

understand that imams, mullahs, and muftis are all Muslim clerics of one sort or another, and that the fatwas they issue are usually death warrants;

know that the Islamic penalties for premarital sex, theft, adultery, and apostasy are gang-rape, having a hand chopped off, stoning, and death, respectively;

experience a surge of adrenaline when we hear "Allahu Akbar" because it means someone is about to die;

and have learned that the Qur'an is so holy, the only surefire way to avoid disrespecting it and causing riots is to convert to Islam and institute shari'a.

If the OIC is so distressed that the Muslim world hasn't advanced past the 12th century, I'd cautiously suggest that "image" and "relevancy" are not the problem.

Mexican Jihad?

Back on the west side of the pond: the reconquest of "Aztlan." (Hat tip: JJ).
The San Gabriel Valley east of LA was sparsely inhabited farmland back then, but Lucky [Baldwin] saw it as a place where people could have homes and communities. He bought square miles of it for a few dollars an acre, and created a number of cities, among them Arcadia, Monrovia, and Baldwin Park.

You would think there would be a statue of its founder in Baldwin Park, in tribute to Lucky Baldwin as an embodiment of American vision and capitalism. But there is not. Instead there is [a monument inscribed with "This land was Mexican once, was Indian always, and is and will be again" and "it was better before they came."]

They, of course, are the hated “Anglos,” the white European-Americans who “stole” the land from Mexico – who stole it from Spain who stole it from Indian tribes such as the Chumash (not the Aztecs, whose empire was in central Mexico, 2,000 miles away from LA), who stole it from other Indian tribes like the Shoshone.

Two weeks ago on May 14, a small group of folks staged a peaceful rally to demand the removal of the racist monument, which is on public property and was erected by the city council at taxpayer expense. The rally was met by a far larger, violent counter-demonstration led by an organization of Mexican Nazis who call themselves Reconquistas.

These are people who want to “reconquer” the entire American Southwest ceded to the US in 1848 and have it become part of Mexico again. What makes them Nazis is their pathological anti-Semitism. Their hatred for America is equaled only by their hatred of Jews.

One of them yelled at a television cameraman at the Baldwin Park fracas: "Too bad Osama Bin Laden didn’t drop a hydrogen bomb on that Jewish s**thole town Manhattan." The TV video can be seen here.

One of the Reconquista chants was "Go back to Europe, go back to England, Gringos." Another was, "Viva (long live) Zarqawi, the Gringo Killer," in praise of arch-terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s killing American soldiers in Iraq.

On their website, Aztlan (referring to their crackpot theory that the American Southwest was the Aztec homeland of "Aztlan"), about half of the links are to anti-Semitic sites – including one demanding an end to "certified Kosher" labels on food products called the "Kosher Nostra Scam."

The principal organizer of the Reconquistas is a student organization called MEChA – Movimiento Estudiantil de Chicanos de Aztlan - The Student Movement of Aztlan Chicanos, with dozens of chapters in California schools. A requirement for MEChA membership is an agreement to work for “the liberation of Aztlan,” including “the physical liberation of Occupied America.”

MEChA’s motto, as stated in its founding document, The Spiritual Plan of Aztlan, could not possibly be more racist: Por La Raza Todo, Fuera de La Raza Nada: for the race (their own “bronze” race), everything; outside the race, nothing.
Antonio Villaraigosa, the new mayor of Los Angeles, was president of the UCLA chapter of MEChA in 1974. He has yet to clearly and publicly denounce the concept of Aztlan, or denounce the Baldwin Park thugs.

UPDATE: FBI busts Iranian smuggling ring on the Arizona-Mexico border.

Column of the Day

Bruce Thornton nails it: Muslims Have Desecrated Bibles and Churches -- So what is all the mob angst over the Koran? (Hat tip: AB.)

. . . what should trouble us is our own response. For the past week high-ranking officials of the United States government have been falling all over themselves assuring the rioters that we really, really do respect their “holy Koran” and would never, never sanction such disrespect. We like their religion, we really do; we respect and honor it and its marvelous contributions to civilization. And what have we received in exchange for all these protestations of respect and esteem? More riots and more contempt.

The jihadists may be irrational, but they are not stupid. . . . They know, for example, that the West has been corrupted by a self-loathing cultural relativism masquerading as cosmopolitan tolerance and respect for the "other." They know too the various psychological springs of this attitude: guilt over a presumed history of colonial and imperial crimes; indifference subsidized by wealth, comfort, and leisure; a sentimental obsession with suffering and wounds to self-esteem; and a spiritual corruption that privileges the material and sensual over the transcendent.

. . . This behavior smacks of the modern version of what Bat Ye'or calls dhimmitude, a psychological submission to Islam that accepts one's own cultural inferiority. If we do not start recognizing the current conflict for what it is, another episode in the 14-century-long jihad against the West, we will end up like Europe, in a state of full-blown psychological dhimmitude characterized by abject submission to hypocritical double-standards that validate Islam's superiority and the West's inferiority. What else explains the Italian judge who indicted journalist Oriana Fallaci for “defaming Islam” in her book The Force of Reason? The quintessential Western political and intellectual good of free inquiry and speech is subordinated to Islamic sensibilities, an action that to the jihadist proves their beliefs are right and ours are wrong.

If we are serious about winning what has been misnamed the “war on terror,” we need to start by renaming it the "war against jihad" and taking seriously the millions and millions of Muslims who have made clear their passionate support for jihad against the West, including those Palestinian Arabs who cloak jihad in the Western camouflage of nationalist aspirations. We need to stop pretending that what we call Islamism is some sort of deformation of Islam instead of the modern expression of its jihadist traditions. We need to take seriously those spiritual motives and their power and stop reducing them all to our own material causes. And we need to understand that only those actions and statements unequivocally displaying our firm belief in the value and superiority of our own culture — the culture that has made us so free and rich that we can afford the luxury of despising it — will help us prevail.
Read it all.

The Islamo-Progressive Axis

Using the Google Images search engine, I came across this image, which is used in an entirely serious context on the website of the Bath Islamic Society. (For the uninitiated, green is the color of Islam.)

The unfortunate thing is, the Brits most vocally concerned about such ambitions are often supporters of Britain's National Front party, who sell bumper stickers like these. Opposed to "mixing of the races" and kosher as well as halal practices, it's clear that preserving England as a pluralistic democracy isn't their goal any more than it is for the Islamists.

Anyway, on to the main story. Today, ex-communist David Horowitz wrote a column in which he quotes Saddam-supporting moonbat British MP George Galloway to support his argument that an "unholy alliance" exists between radical leftists and Islamists. Asked by a Muslim interviewer how far it's possible to unite Muslim and progressive forces globally, Galloway responded:
"Not only do I think it’s possible but I think it is vitally necessary and I think it is happening already. It is possible because the progressive movement around the world and the Muslims have the same enemies. Their enemies are the Zionist occupation, American occupation, British occupation of poor countries mainly Muslim countries. They have the same interest in opposing savage capitalist globalization which is intent upon homogenizing the entire world turning us basically into factory chickens which can be forced fed the American diet of everything from food to Coca-Cola to movies and TV culture. . . . So on the very grave big issues of the day-issues of war, occupation, justice, opposition to globalization -- the Muslims and the progressives are on the same side."
A friend wrote to say, "someone needs to finish this guy off. Doesn't anyone remember the definition of sedition anymore?" I responded:
"If I may play devil's advocate for a moment and disagree. [Galloway] didn't invent the Islamo-progressive axis -- he's just helpfully confirming what we "paranoid" observers have already concluded. I understand the principle of hanging such an obnoxious traitor -- it seems unbearably wrong that a declared enemy can hold elected office. But then, few take him very seriously, at least [in the U.S.]. Did you see when he lambasted Congress a couple of weeks ago? Even Democrats were disgusted and offended. To kill him would be to dignify him."
I continued:
"We've reached a point where we (Westerners) tacitly agree that "just" saying something, no matter what position you hold, no matter how helpful to the enemy, no matter how harmful to our own cause, no matter what, can never be bad enough to warrant prosecution.

But failing to prosecute treason and sedition not only allows it to continue, it removes the deterrent and encourages it to multiply. And since the 60s, it has -- and the left has conditioned us all to call it "free speech" and feel discomfort over throwing such people in prison. Precisely the ACLU's founding agenda back when they were defending communists and encouraging desertion during WWI.

So we now live in an era of exploding, epidemic sedition and treason, raising the question: where will it end? When do we draw the line? When does it become dangerous and harmful enough that we're compelled to do something about it? If we say "never, because that's what fascists do," then the enemy's arguments gain legitimacy, spread throughout the population, and before long, you have half the country supporting its own enemies to some degree or another.

At that point, there are basically three options. (1) Do nothing, let it continue, and hope fervently that everything will turn out okay. (2) Attempt to garner political support for very limited sedition and treason prosecutions (say, limited to people who hold public office), and watch that go over like a fart in a spacesuit. Which leaves (3), hope like hell the traitors start a civil war so you can kill as many as possible and re-establish order once the smoke clears.

But if we're confining the discussion strictly to Britain, it's already too late. You only hope like hell for a civil war if victory is assured, and in Britain, it certainly is not.

My point is, if you don't deport or throw traitors in prison, and allow treason to become a constitutional right, over time, a country narrows its options to the point where only a good bloodletting can fix it.
My friend replied:
"And that's the problem. There is no "just" saying something. Michael Moore is one thing, he's a yellow-sheet propagandist, nothing more, nothing less, the idiot, full of sound and fury, but no real content. Publicly proposing an alliance with the enemy is something else entirely.

But like you said, Britain is lost. The leftists can't lose no matter what the goverment does, really. Well, they do lose, but they won't know it until they're bured neck deep and getting hit in the head with fist size stones."
Ah, but fist-sized stones are too big, because they might kill the victim too quickly.

It may sound extreme or paranoid to talk of civil war. But when a large and growing proportion of your population desires Shari'a justice, "it is well to remember there are things worse than war."

UPDATE: Well well, speaking of the Islamo-progressive axis. The Bronx AQ guy arrested by the FBI last weekend, Tarik Ibn Osman Shah, is a big fan of Ward Churchill.