web analytics

france

By ATWadmin On May 1st, 2007 at 5:58 pm

Im in France, looking after ‘les invalides’ but still managing to appreciate that lifestyle that Monsieur Chirac so sneeringly cherishes and which Simon Jenkins covers in "The French do it all wrong but still get life so right" here – some of which i echoed a year ago here, (particularly re Sarkozy, whats to come in France and multiculturalism which the French will never agree to :)) Certainly id agree protectionism has its plusses – their State actually runs a health service and transport system to envy. They do actually have civic pride and spend on it and they maintain a rural and urban environment that puts many western nations to shame. Chirac recently sneered that to pursue British policies, anglo-saxon ideals, might mean having to accept a British quality of life, eg less of the aforementioned, less holidays, shock horror (we have around 21 days in the UK vs, not so bad really). "His audience laughed. The risk was unthinkable".  Yes and remains comfortably distant in part thanks to magnificent London. Only last Friday before i left to come here i chatted with some of the many French students working in my office. Good jobs and some have great prospects. None seemed too much in a hurry to rush back to France Monsieur Chirac! But equally Jenkins is right to point to just how many people are migrating to France from the UK (the ‘salt and peppers’ as they are called and I suspect others, including families, to boot) precisely to enjoy that family friendly lifestyle. I hope Sarkozy wins. For many reasons as per the post i linked to. But one is that he wont put paid to the French quality of life in search of what makes the anglo-saxon economies tick. His admiration for the latter will probably see him draw on ideas to suit France rather than moulding France to suit globalisation and all that this entails. That much you can bet on and good luck to him. The elections however you can’t bet on and im not so sure at this point its a foregone conclusion. The debate between Sarkozy and Royal is tomorrow night and Ill try and get a post up for anyone who’s interested. Sarkozy is being advised how to debate with a woman without coming across as a bully lol (he once threatened to smash a colleague’s head in).

go Secularists

By ATWadmin On May 1st, 2007 at 5:47 pm

Hat-tip: DB, supporting the secularists, a seperation of political religion from State… & you can understand why. Mustafa Attaturk who founded Turkey to create a modern, democratic and secular state based on Western principles of governance for whom Tens of thousands of Turkish nationals are rallying in Istanbul – in opposition to the threat of even moderate Islamic political parties gaining power. They come out and want to fight for it, the army drives home the message and the Court it seems, under pressure, agrees.

A newspaper in Turkey ‘Hurriyet’ (Ankara*), prior to the big rally, reported on the growth of violent anti-Christian sentiment in the country. This followed the death of a German and two Turkish nationals who had converted to christianity. They were tortured and their throats were cut in an area known for extremist violence. (There are currently 100 000 christians in Turkey). ‘We tend to dismiss such people as thugs or Islamic terrorists‘ he says ‘but actually they are just ordinary men who want to protect Turkey and Islam‘. ‘Because thats what theyve learned from the media pundits and politicians’. Doesnt that all sound a bit familiar closer to home? There’s that propaganda they feed off rearing its ugly head again – and probably why its right not to promote the sort of demos we see outside Paddington station. Consigning them to irrelevance to dampen their propaganda drive whilst not ignoring them outright as a non-issue is a tough one in a media age and where an issue needs a spotlight. How do you get the balance?

The journo goes on to compare the situation in Germany where Turks are given access to mosques and live in tolerance. ‘What does that say about Turkish civilisation and humanity?‘ he asks. At least he asking the question though. They (islamists) want to drag Turkey to the dark ages,” said 63-year-old Ahmet Yurdakul, a retired government employee who attended the huge protests for secularism.

Strong voices.  From the very people we want to hear from.

But in a polarised debate, the ‘Left’ (other than, say, Mr Blair who has said exactly this) generally aren’t too keen on this sort of message (eg Islam is backward) and the Right is scared of secularism. So who IS supporting Turkeys brave secularists at this worrying time? And where does this leave Turkey and the EU?

*for whom i dont have a link + it would be in Turkish – however – you can see an in-part translation, along with the Polish story about tragic Alicja’s battle, in British weekly ‘The Week’ published weekly but not available on-line)

jihad in a scout hut

By ATWadmin On May 1st, 2007 at 5:15 pm

The Pub Philosopher has some interesting perspectives on the Dancing Slags case.

"On my return, I was please to see that another gang of would-be terrorists has been convicted and banged up. I was particularly interested in this case as it was close to home. When we moved house, Lady P and I stored some of our books, CDs and records at the depot where the plotters hid their bomb-making materials. While we were coming and going to shift our stuff, the gang were stashing fertiliser and the place was being watched by MI5. Being a paranoid type, I often wondered about some of the things that might be stored in the depot’s cubicles and whether the staff had a clue who came and went. As it turned out, one member of staff, Emma Wallis, was very vigilant and thanks to her the explosive materials were discovered…"

He adds: "It is fashionable to blame every act of violent Muslim radicalism on the Iraq war, or to say that the world changed on 9/11, or even to blame Tony Blair for the rise of Islamic extremism in the UK…

In this case, though, by the time Blair came to power, ten years ago today, Omar Bakri Mohammed was already running the jihadi school in a Crawley scout hut where plot leader Omar Khyam was a pupil. By 9/11, Khyam had trained in Pakistan and Afghanistan and by the time of the Iraq war he had enough connections to set up his own extremist cell.

Chilling reading.

He must be doing something right!

By ATWadmin On May 1st, 2007 at 4:45 pm

W.H. Auden famously wrote that:

To the man-in-the-street, who, I’m sorry to say, is a keen observer of life, the word ‘Intellectual’ suggests straight away a man who’s untrue to his wife.

To me, the word suggests, rather more prosaically, a useless parasite, who in his entire life has contributed nothing of value to anyone, and never will do so, but who talks a good fight, with plenty of regurgitated quotes from fellow parasites (notably Michel Foucault), and who is, of necessity, left-wing. You don’t need to be particularly intelligent or talented to earn the status of ‘intellectual’, so long as you vote for the left and quote Foucault. Just ask the next humanities professor you meet.

All of which is a roundabout way of asking, should Nicolas Sarkozy be at all concerned that 100 French "intellectuals" have published an open letter attacking him?

The letter, signed by such notables as Jeanne Moreau (who?), Georges Moustaki (who?), and Francois Ozon (again, who?) has suggested that a Sarkozy victory would lead to "a France at war with itself". This reflects the recent threat of French Muslims to riot if Sarkozy wins. It does indicate that the left-Islamic axis is very frightened, if they’re prepared to threaten violence as a means of getting their own candidate elected. Perhaps Sarkozy really would do something to improve the situation over there!

The public certainly seem to think so. Sarkozy has led Segolene Royal through most of the campaign, and the three recent polls displayed at the French Election 2007 blog show him with a lead of between 4 and 6%. With Muslims rioting in the streets, and Muslim thugs establishing a dominance over some areas that even the police fear to challenge, France needs a solution. Sarkozy may offer it, and it is to be hoped, for France’s sake, that she elects him. Royal is the candidate of appeasement, and if France elects her we will be watching a nation commit suicide.

U.N. posts lies, half-truths and twisted facts

By ATWadmin On May 1st, 2007 at 1:07 pm


Let’s trace a news story in the Middle East. Human Rights Watch is there on the scene as the story breaks; perhaps an eruption of gunfire in Palestine. An onlooker is approached and asked questions. The onlooker says that 12 civilians have been killed by the Israeli Army because someone fired an RPG into Israel, destroying a home and killing two people. In actuality, two people were killed, one militant and a passer-by and several people were injured, but Human Rights Watch, perhaps knowing that the source is unreliable, takes the information anyway and posts it on a mega news provider and information source known as ReliefWeb (which claims to have 70,000 subscribers). In addition, certain facts are eliminated including the reasons for the conflict that may have caused the events (i.e. action taken by Israel against terror etc.) and the Palestinian Authorities absolved of all blame.
This organization exists as a supposedly human-rights focused organization, under the auspices of the U.N. Many of its stories are false and misleading, and derive from heavily ideologically-driven organizations such as:

Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, Amnesty International, B’Tselem, CARE, Caritas, Christian Aid, Defence for Children International/Palestine Section, Fédération Internationale des Ligues des Droits de I’Homme, Human Rights Watch, Mennonite Central Committee, Médecins du Monde, Médecins Sans Frontières, Oxfam, Pax Christi International, Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, and World Vision.

Considering the blatant lies, half-truths and twisted facts that are written in the Press from unreliable sources such as these, it’s no wonder we can’t trust what we read! However, considering that the source is U.N. based, it’s hardly surprising.
Check my EXCELLENT SOURCE as there is much I’ve left out.
Hat tip: Reject the U.N.
Cross-posted at RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION

Satan’s Gideon: Green Smoke and Cracked Mirrors

By ATWadmin On May 1st, 2007 at 12:55 pm


So what are the Greens really on about? In Australia, recent state elections producedpoor results for this extreme Left party; instead of making headway as they claimed, they ultimately lost ground. Check the source for the full story. It’s quite an eye-opener.
LUDICROUS EXTREMISM OR BRILLIANT STRATEGY?
Now that they’ve lost a lot of clout, never ones to throw in the towel, they’ve changed tack. Did they really think that the public would support the idea of Australia making an 80 percent carbon emissions reduction? Of course not, Even the most ardently environmental directives are not so extreme. But we’re not really sure about the 60% (suggested by Rudd’s Labour), even the most wide-eyed amongst us know that it would cripple our economy. Or at least we thought we knew. So why throw out that ludicrous figure into the public debate arena? Well, suddenly 60% doesn’t sound quite so bad, does it?
There is a very interesting book around at the moment called ‘The Wisdom of Crowds’. It talks about how the majority is influenced not just by the status quo thought but by every person in the crowd. Somehow, miraculously, almost every crowd will find the average as if by instinct. What does this have to do with the Greens and their 80 percent emissions nonsense? I quote this intro and comments of Ben Pearson of Greenpeace:

Pearson says there is considerably more strategy behind a lot of what Greenpeace and other, more extreme, groups say, claiming they often deliberately use their novelty value to try to shift thinking or focus.
“You place something that wasn’t previously part of the discourse on the table, it then becomes part of the debate, and then by redefining where the outer limits are, and then by being an effective, noisy advocate, you start to drag the whole debate towards you,” he says.

SO WHY AREN’T WE DOING THE SAME?
Brilliant strategy, you must admit. Christians among you may remember the story of Gideon’s army. For those of you who don’t know it, a little Biblical research may broaden your mind. *wink* The warfare strategic parallels are very interesting. Maybe we can learn from them and make our own Gideon’s Army!
SOURCE
Cross-posted at RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION

America Beware: The Thief is at the Door

By ATWadmin On May 1st, 2007 at 12:49 pm


Americans, your Christian leaders didn’t know about the HR254 bill when Catch the Fire pastors from Australia, Danny and Danny, came to the U.S. a couple of months ago to warn you. Your leaders gasped in horror as they were informed about this draconian law which would see them put in jail for life for saying something deemed (arbitrarily)to be offensive to, say, a Muslim or a homosexual. Has it gone away? CHECK THIS OUT

The Federal Hate Crimes Bill, H.R. 1592, is headed to the House, a vote is soon expected. This bill poses the greatest threat to our freedom that we have ever witnessed in the history of this nation. This piece of legislation if passed into law will give homosexuals above the law status that will create an atmosphere where homosexuals will able to harass and intimidate those who disagree with their lifestyles, leaving most Americans defenseless against the tyranny of the far fringe left.
Freedom of Speech, and of the Press will be limited under these laws, I expect a great backlash against the homosexual community if this passes, and they start prosecuting people for exercising their Constitutional rights.
We must contact Congress and tell them emphatically NO!
NO! to H.R. 1592, The Federal Hate Crimes Bill

We can’t afford to lose our vigilance now as the noose is tightening. It’s either fight or lose our liberty right here at home.
It’s happening in America and you can be sure it will happen everywhere else.
Hat tip: Stop the ACLU
Cross-posted at RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION

Night draws to an end

By ATWadmin On May 1st, 2007 at 12:10 pm

young_tony_blair.jpgSo it’s 10 years to the day since Tony Blair formed his hideous, spiteful, dishonest, corrupt and traitorous government. It’s been a long, oh-so-very-long decade. His malice for decency, morality and the ancient freedoms of the British people mark his regime out as rivalling even Clement Atlee’s in its long-term destruction of civil society. I would never have voted for a party led by such a truly dreadful individual, but my short meeting with him in 1994, soon after he became Leader of the Opposition, showed even then what an empty, untrustworthy man he is. I have detested him ever since.

I know, we will soon swap his reckless and destructive ways for the outright socialist thievery of Gordon Brown. But I’ve waited a long time to see the end of Blair and I’ll enjoy it while I can. I wonder though, is there anyone who will be sorry to see the tyrant him go?

The media and Hezbollah – partners in terror

By ATWadmin On May 1st, 2007 at 8:26 am

Hezbollah.bmpDamning‘ is the BBC’s response, following the publication of findings of an Israeli government inquiry panel into last year’s Israeli-Hezbollah war. In ensuring the public has the full picture, the BBC has published excerpts from the report, tells us of the pressure on Israeli PM Ehud Olmert and has even set up a (Don’t) Have Your Say thread on the findings – because the BBC is scrupulously fair in reporting Israeli affairs, no doubt. A pity then that the BBC doesn’t link to a recently published Harvard paper on the media’s reporting of the conflict. For anyone who ditched the MSM and followed the conflict by other means, the connivance of the MSM with Hezbollah terrorists was plain. Unfailingly uncritical in promoting the terrorist agenda, an army of quislings and dhimmis subjected a largely unknowing world to a torrent of terrorist propaganda, anti-Semitic lies and disinformation:

A close examination of the media’s role during the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war in Lebanon comes now from Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, in an analysis of the war the course of the conflict. And it quickly transpired that Hezbollah would become the beneficiary published in a paper whose subtitle should give pause to journalists covering international conflict: The Israeli-Hezbollah War of 2006: The Media as a Weapon in Asymmetrical Conflict. Bernard Kalb [note: actually, it’s Marvin Kalb. —ed.] , of Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, methodically traces the transformation of the media “from objective observer to fiery advocate.” Kalb painstakingly details how Hezbollah exercised absolute control over how journalists portrayed its side of the conflict, while Israel became “victimized by its own openness.”

The lessons from the Harvard paper go well beyond historic analysis. Kalb’s thoroughly and persuasively documented case points to the challenges to journalists in future “asymmetrical” conflicts in which a radical militia provides access only to journalists agreeing to the strictest of rules.

Journalists did Hezbollah’s work, offering little resistance to the Islamic militia’s effort to portray itself as an idealistic and heroic army of the people, facing an aggressive and ruthless enemy. With Hezbollah’s unchallenged control of journalists’ access within its territory, it managed to almost completely eliminate from the narrative crucial facts, such as the fact that it deliberately fired its weapons from deep within civilian population centers, counting on Israeli forces to have no choice but defend themselves by targeting rocket launchers where they stood. Hezbollah’s strong support from Syria and Iran — including the provision of deadly weapons — faded in the coverage, as the conflict increasingly became portrayed as pitting one powerful army against a band of heroic defenders of a civilian population.

Gradually lost in the coverage was the fact that the war began when Hezbollah infiltrated Israel, kidnapping two of its soldiers (still held to this day) and killing eight Israelis. Despite the undisputed fact that Hezbollah triggered the war, Israel was painted as the aggressor, as images of the war overtook the context.

the blame game

By ATWadmin On May 1st, 2007 at 7:27 am

The ‘fertiliser terror’ scum have been tried, found ‘guilty’ and justly given ‘life’, although I, along with many others, consider this the lesser sentence, but as the British judicial sysytem is precluded from the appropriate ‘death’ term, it’ll have to do. I say appropriate, because although these evil scumbags didn’t get to the point where they killed anyone, the intent was surely there!

However, the point of this post is to examine the response of almost all the newspapers and mainstream t.v. stations, which is to pounce upon the one perceived "failure" of the Security Services to pick up and follow through on the links between the ‘fervent five’ and the leader of the London 7/7 suicide club! In Alison’s post on this same trial, mention is made of the time and people needed to comprehensively cover all the suspects under surveillance, and I invite your focus to rest upon one statistic, and that is the 33,000 man-hours logged by the covering squads. Thirty-three thousand hours, and all the mainstream media clowns pick on is the fact that M.I.5 missed a connection between one bunch of fanatics and another!

We hear calls for the usual "Independent Inquiry" complete with some senior Law Lord to examine all aspects of this case, because ‘relatives of the dead need answers’. Are they all mad? Instead of a chorus of approval for a tough job, and an even tougher trial well done; all we hear are shouts of condemnation becuase one conversation and one linked car number were not followed through! All we heard last night were accusations from highly-paid but usually woefully ignorant t.v. newsreaders that M.I.5 had failed miserably, and those people who had failked should immediately be identified, tried and exposed to the British public as the fools and failures they were!

I have made this observation before, and will probably do so again, but I truly despair at the standards and behaviour of the people who decide what we read and see, both on t.v. and print! Why do they always head towards the negative? The answer, unfortunately, is neither complex nor devious; the bad news always makes for better headlines, for better sound-bites, for better ratings. Good news, such as the conviction of these would-be murderers, doesn’t sell newspapers!

Sad that; sad but true!