Category Archives: Islam

Celebrating the Creeping Caliphate in Kosovo

Democrats, Foreign Policy, Islam, Media, War

Is there any doubt that by intervening in Kosovo, we strengthened the al Qaida-backed, Islamic Kosovo Liberation Army, and Islam’s greater project, to the detriment of Orthodox Christian Serbs? Is there any doubt who the neocons are supporting when they get in Putin’s face about Chechnya, another terrorist entity?

Republicans blasted Clinton, and for good reason, for warring against Serbia. The same principled people have made lingering in Iraq, and loving that equally unjust foreign policy foray, a fulcrum of their candidate’s presidential platform. The Christians of Iraq are numbered; they’ve been eliminated or expunged thanks to Bush’s faith-based intervention.

Geraldo Rivera, the neoliberal (or Neolithic) Fox fabulist, was dancing in the streets in celebration of Kosovo’s independence. What was he celebrating? In whose honor were Bush and his bastardized conservatives prancing about? Was this an ode to Clinton’s folly for partaking in an assault on a Christian country—Serbia—which, as Patrick J. Buchanan reminds us, was “an ally in two world wars, and [had] never attacked us”?

Where is Ron Paul when you need him?

Ayaan Hirsi Ali: America’s Shame

Europe, Gender, IMMIGRATION, Islam

I’ve been critical of Ayaan Hirsi Ali (although she’s changed a great deal since, and all for the best). But no one can fault her great courage. She’s a lionheart.

In this article, oddly, Breitbart.com, a Fox News creation, is, if not plain wrong, certainly confused. He displays the same mindset his creators are ever guilty of: the US government is never at fault:

“Hirsi Ali has been living under tight police protection since the murder of her associate, Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, by an Islamic extremist in 2004.
She is threatened with death for her role in writing the script of Van Gogh’s film ‘Submission,’ about the treatment of women in Islam. A note targeting her by name was found on his body.
The former Dutch lawmaker left the Netherlands for the United States in May 2006 following a bitter row which broke out when she admitted lying about her age and name in her Dutch asylum request.”

Now the Dutch government can’t protect Hirsi from Islam’s emissaries, because she no longer lives in the Netherlands. It’s her adopted country, the US, that ought to pick up the slack. How can a Dutch detail shield her when away from their turf and legal jurisdiction? This commentary is so typical of the Fix New mindset: never criticize the US, even if it comes at the cost of rigorous reportage.

Hirsi ought to have been given the option to apply for a Green Card. She’s self-supporting and possessing of the attitude and aptitude so short in supply in the US—and everywhere in the West.

I guess all the Green Cards have already been allotted to the favored electoral constituents: Mexican illegal illiterates.

I should know. As I related in this essay, not so long ago, U.S. immigration law enforcers apprehended at the Canadian border—and stripped of her American permanent residency with an intimidating display of machismo—a known Bandido: my daughter.
At first I was mad, but not for long: I know they need all the Green Cards they can get to give to illegals.

Oh, with respect to my previous post “Exporting Women To Make Benefit Glorious Nation of USA,” perhaps we can import Ali, and export to Saudi Arabia a few million American tarts. They would cripple the Jihadis like no bomb would. In no time the Jihadis would sink into an orgy of depravity—sex, sloth, and stupidity.

Hillary Blabbers About Bhutto

Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, Islam

“Hillary Clinton is demanding answers about the death of Benazir Bhutto.” She is also demanding that the fracas in Pakistan be internationalized—call in the UN, says she. And above all, put pressure on the already impotent President Pervez Musharraf to usher in democracy. Or hold “free and fair elections,” as she puts it. As though Musharraf alone is what stands between the people of Pakistan—who apparently yearn to breathe free—and democratic institutions and the rule of law.

The harridan Hillary differs very little from Bush: she announced her belief that America is obligated to shore-up civil society in Pakistan and address the “root causes” of the restive, ever-seething Muslim Street in that country. (To quote Clinton: “I’ve talked to President Musharraf about the necessity for us to raise the literacy rate, to reach out with healthcare and education that would help the Pakistani people to really concentrate on civil society.”) Can you say Nation Building?!

This is a meddler with paws stickier than Bush’s.

Above all, in her reaction to Bhutto’s assassination, Hillary has demonstrated that she is a deeply silly woman, having learned nothing from the adventure in Iraq. Forcing democracy down Iraqi gullets—now that worked out really well, didn’t? How about in the Palestinian Authority? At our insistence, democratic elections were held in the PA, and voila! The freedom loving Palestinians voted for Hamas, which the US then promptly boycotted. Egypt anybody? Think the Muslim Brotherhood, which would likely gain a majority if American idiots got the better of a recalcitrant Mubarak and forced him to democratize.

Be careful what you wish for in Pakistan, Hillary! They say about 50 percent of Pakistanis support the al Qaeda Islamist elements and the resurgent Taliban.

As for Bhutto whom the liberal media has hurried to canonize: No doubt, her death is tragic. But you have to admit that she was utterly reckless, bobbing up and down from sun roofs in unarmored, unprotected, rickety vehicles. Musharraf ought to have kept her under house arrest for her own good.

Nor was Bhutto such a saint; her niece certainly disputes her sainted status. Nor was she much of a “democrat”—for what it’s worth in that part of the world—during her time in office. Had she come to share power with Musharraf, she’d have supported an ongoing American presence in Pakistan. That might have also raised some of her countrymen’s hackles.

Updated: Ron Wrong on Islam, Right on Foreign Policy

Elections 2008, Islam, libertarianism, Ron Paul

Does it follow that because Ron Paul is wrong about the threat of Islam, and about the cause of Islamic terrorism, that he is also wrong about foreign policy? Not at all.
I cannot stress enough that I depart from Rep. Paul on quite a few issues, chief of which is the cause of Islamic terrorism. True, our foreign policy doesn’t help matters.
Still, irrespective of where one’s sympathies lie; regardless of how one views the cause of Muslim insurrections the world over, one must surely recognize that—for whatever reason—Muslims are at the center of practically every bloody conflict in the world today.
Is it possible that Muslims are right and that the “infidels” of Lebanon, Israel, India, Russia, Sudan, Indonesia, The Ivory Coast, Kenya and Nigeria all deserve to be visited by Islamic violence? Not if you live on terra firma.
Scholars such as Efraim and Inari Karsh, for example, have shown that “Middle Eastern history is essentially the culmination of long-standing indigenous trends, passions, and patterns of behavior rather than an externally imposed dictate.”
It’s a great shame Paul has adopted the received wisdom of the far-left, according to which the Arabs were (and remain) hapless and helpless victims of the West.
Strategically, moreover, it’s unwise for a presidential candidate to keep sounding as though he blames America first. That gets people’s backs up and is not conducive to his sensible message with respect to foreign policy.

Update: New participants on the blog are always welcome. However, I am getting tired of the odd individual who stumbles on my blog and website, and post facetious, rude csious comments withough familiarizing himself with hbut can we ask politely that before you post about Islam and Dr. Paul’s perspective, that you familiarize yourself with your host’s perspective first. I think you will find a far more comprehensive analysis of what is at stake vis-à-vis the West and Islam here than in Dr. Paul’s writings.

So if our foreign policy is just the minor player what is the major cause of Islamic “terrorism”. Our freedoms? I am interested…