web analytics


By ATWadmin On April 27th, 2007 at 8:15 pm

This one is lovingly dedicated to the EIGHT US Democrat Presidential candidates 😉 


By ATWadmin On April 27th, 2007 at 7:59 pm

Jose_Zapatero_kaffiyeh.jpgYes, we know that the Spanish Government led by little Zapatero are paella-eating castanet waving surrender monkeys. So we can’t be surprised to discover that a Spanish judge has indicted three U.S. soldiers in the 2003 death of a Spanish journalist who was killed when their tank opened fire at a hotel in Baghdad. Sgt. Shawn Gibson, Capt. Philip Wolford and Lt. Col. Philip DeCamp were charged with homicide in the death of Jose Couso and "a crime against the international community." This is defined under Spanish law as an indiscriminate or excessive attack against civilians during war.  Following the incident, then-Secretary of State Colin Powell said the troops responded after drawing hostile fire from the hotel. He said a U.S. review of the incident found the use of force was justified.

But Spain is trying to curry favour with the Islamic guys still kinda upset about that pesky 1492 "tragedy of Andalusia" business. And so it will issue meaningless indictments which show the AQ guys that Spain is on its knees, ready to submit, prepared to flail at the USA. That’s what happens when Euroweenie leftists get into power.


By ATWadmin On April 27th, 2007 at 7:43 pm

palipeace.jpgThis one gave me a laugh. It’s a demonstration against violence. Only with the Palestinians, eh? 


By ATWadmin On April 27th, 2007 at 7:07 pm

This is for those who continue to pretend that there is NO LINK between Iraq and Al Qu’eda…..

The US says it has arrested one of al-Qaeda’s highest-ranking operatives, as he was on his way home to Iraq to plan future attacks. A Pentagon spokesman said Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi was now in Guantanamo Bay. He was heading to Iraq to take over al-Qaeda operations and possibly plot attacks on Western interests, he said


Running away from Iraq and declaring the war lost a la Reid will only ensure that AQ’s generals follow us back home. My congrats to those US forces who captured this terrorist mastermind and I hope the interrogations are brisk and effective.


By ATWadmin On April 27th, 2007 at 6:58 pm

Here’s a real classic tune from a few decades ago – yikes – I remember buying the album from which it comes, this was a creative-high post Beatles I reckon… do you agree?


By ATWadmin On April 27th, 2007 at 5:53 pm

Britain hearts terrorists! Oh we just LOVE ’em. I see that two Libyan terror suspects have won an appeal against deportation from the UK in a major defeat for the government. The men, known only as DD and AS, argued they could be jailed and tortured if sent home, despite a special deal between the countries. But in the first test of the case, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission said the men could not be sent back.  Sending these two dangerous terrorists back to where they came would only endanger their human rights, so we have to keep them so that they can endanger our human right life. Once again, we see how the grotesque European Convention on Human Rights creates paralysis of justice, works in favour of terrorists, and ensures that we are the laughing stock of the world. We are NOT allowed to deport terrorists because the EU says so.  

Independent(?) Monitoring Commission

By ATWadmin On April 27th, 2007 at 4:59 pm

DUP deputy leader Peter Robinson welcomed the latest IMC report yesterday saying that it proved “Democratic” Unionist pressure had “brought the IRA to a standstill”.

What Mr Robinson seems to have forgotten is that he and his party dismissed the IMC when it was set up. The DUP position was that it was a body which would do little more than spout the NIO line and certainly wouldn’t say anything to upset the “peace process”. I shared that assessment of the IMC and, unlike Mr Robinson, I haven’t changed my view. Nor, apparently, has Jim Allister.

As Mr Allister points out the IMC sees no prospect of the IRA handing back its ill-gotten gains. Rather they “remain unable to determine how the organisation is dealing with the question of previously illegally gained funds”. That line pass you by Mr Robinson?

Mr Allister also highlights several glaring omissions, the most interesting being that there was no mention of a “South Armagh incident linked to a close relative of Minister designate, Connor Murphy.”

I wonder how David Simpson and Willy McCrea feel about that. After all, it seemed to concern them a while ago.


By ATWadmin On April 27th, 2007 at 12:18 pm

Wonder will Irish PM Bertie Ahern and his Party face election disaster as this article speculates? I’m not sure that Fianna Fail will meltdown as suggested but it certainly would be interesting to know the views of our Irish readers on this. Do you think that a change in Government IS likely and if so, what do you think would be the major changes in policy, if any?

Death of the Nation?

By ATWadmin On April 27th, 2007 at 9:15 am

David has beaten me to this in speed, but I have a link I’d like to present on this. Fulham Reactionary has really hit the nail on the head about this, calling it ‘Population Replacement‘. Like David’s comment about being a ‘rainbow nation’, I think this is wonderfully descriptive and sound, but I don’t know if it goes entirely far enough.

 What we are seeing is, no doubt, the replacement of large parts of the population. What this is, we can be in little doubt, is the ‘en-rainbowing’ (to throw in a neologism) of the nation. But perhaps this should give rise to the question of how we define a nation.

This is a massive issue, and I hope to have the time to scribble a proper essay on it later, but for now, a few thoughts:

Some time ago I was looking up the definition of the term ‘fascist’, mostly wanting to know what this term, used so often as an epithet or term of denigration and insult. I was very surprised to find, in the beginning of Wikipedia‘s definition, the statement that fascism "seeks to forge a type of national unity, usually based on ethnic, religious, cultural, or racial attributes". What puzzles me about this is that, prior to post-war Britain and the opening of the borders, it’s my understanding that this was all there was to any understanding of a nation. (Thus, simple common sense becomes thought-crime by being branded ‘fascist’. Was there ever a greater gift to the liberal leftist than the fascist phenomenon of Mussolini’s Italy?) My admittedly spotty knowledge of history suggests that it shows us that there have been times (and sometimes these times have been quite frequent) in which nations have not only been at war with each other but with themselves over exactly these questions of religion, of culture. And frequently at war with one another over, oddly enough, which race will dominate a certain landmass.

 But even stating it like that, I fear the point may be missed. Until recently, how much was it accepted ‘wisdom’ that we are all the same really? Tell me, Irishman, (being of the same colour and roughly the same creed) how warm was your reception when you first landed on English shores and lived among us? How different were the Germans considered to be by Milgram and his researchers before they found that, under sufficiently authoritative conditions, most people will do nearly anything if they don’t have to get close enough? And how concerned were Kipling and his contemporaries with the issue of, not only the universal brotherhood of man (a question which, to this day, is not so much answered as begged) but of the universal sameness of man when White Man’s Burden and the Jungle Book were written?

Somehow this is meant to be liberating. Somehow, in ‘discovering’ that we are all the same really (clearly, such an enlightened and wonderful notion could never have been made up to further a cause) we are to be made more free in our obligations to each other than we would be in our freedom to be charitable of our own volition to people we know to be different and therefore deserving of unusual consideration. I don’t follow the logic, myself.

But we were looking at the concept of nation. Looking at the ‘fascist’ definition of nation as one of ‘national unity, usually based on ethnic, religious, cultural, or racial attributes’ , and the historical growth of the nation-state, it isn’t hard to imagine a group of tribes, say the Angles and the Saxons, or the Heruli and their neighbours, finding that they are beset with an unfriendly world on all sides and that there are much worse threats than these people with whom they have so much in common, banding together to create a larger unity of people. Eventually a large enough group of people with the same ethnic, cultural and religious background becomes a nation in its own right, sets up borders and boundaries, and is able to operate in freedom and love within a ‘them and us’ paradigm which, far from necessitating the emnity people would have us believe it inexorably creates, creates a real freedom to be charitable and loving to those both within and without the group. The alternative, as I have mentioned, is simply a top-down imposition of a forced obligation to treat everyone as kith and kin.

 Which leads us back to the kernel of the question. If everybody is meant to be accepted as ‘us’, what does that leave of ‘we’? When the racial question is begged to the extent that the fact of a doubled number of immigrant or immigrant-descended children is met not with ‘what about our native children?’ but of ‘how can we best kowtow to the newcomers?’, we have a problem, racially and ethnically, as a nation. When a country with strong Catholic roots has to bend over for those who will force it to accept the promotion of homosexuality in school curriculums, that country has a problem religiously as a nation. When a nation’s own cultural lights are forcibly replaced within the education system with foreign cultural lights, simply because they’re foreign, that nation has a problem culturally.

We’re not the same. Historically, culturally, religiously, we’re very different indeed, and it’s foolish to claim that we’re not. Suicidal to go blindly forth claiming that if we only ignore all differences of all degrees, then all will be well. It won’t. Increasingly, people in the overrun nations are looking around in bewilderment and wondering why they’re not allowed the simple question. The question that would go right to the heart of their justified concerns and fears. The concerns and fears which are not only unaddressed, but exacerbated and glorified by those responsible for both their inception and for the power to assuage them.

The question, then, is simple:

 "Dude, where’s my nation?"


Cross-posted at NC. Hat-tip to Fulham Reactionary, Christianophobia Watch, and Righteous Indignation.


By ATWadmin On April 27th, 2007 at 8:51 am

Isn’t multiculturalism wonderful? Today comes the news that one in five schoolchildren in Britain is from an ethnic minority – almost double the figure a decade ago. The annual school census reveals a Britain where one in eight pupils speaks a language other than English at home. The record figures include more than 40,000 children from Eastern Europe who have enrolled at schools since the enlargement of the European Union in 2004. Meanwhile, the number of primary pupils alone who do not speak English as their first language increased by seven per cent from last year to 448,000 – or about one child in seven. From talking to friends in the teaching profession, the cost and complexity of this vast intake of non-English speaking kids is putting a great strain on their efficiency. But hey – we’re a rainbow nation and THAT is what counts, yes?