Archive for June, 2007

Iran Delenda Est

Joe Lieberman has come out and said what needs to be done—what has needed to be done since 1981.

I think we’ve got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq…And to me, that would include a strike over the border into Iran, where we have good evidence that they have a base at which they are training these people coming back into Iraq to kill our soldiers.

Of course Harry Reid immediately took the Democrat standard position on America’s enemies and issued a pre-emptive surrender before war has even been declared.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid rejected on Monday another prominent senator’s call for a military strike against Iran, saying a U.S. attack would destabilize the Middle East.

Could someone tell that fool of a man from Nevada that destabilization of Iran is exactly what is needed? That a stable regime of the mullahs means more dead Americans? That the mullahs have financed the murder of Reid’s fellows for a generation?

Or better yet: Just ignore such weaklings and get on with the business of war.

The math is simple: Iran has been dedicated to terror since the fall of the shah and creation of the regime of the mullahs. We need not repeat the numerous outrages this regime has inflicted upon five continents and hundreds of thousands of human beings since its wretched birth. Simply type into yahoo search ‘Iran terror’ and you will have at your fingertips 27,000,000 references.

Take your pick.

Iran is Islam writ large. If you ever wondered what the world would look like if Islam actually dominated the world, take a look at how the mullahs treat all of their enemies real and imagined. They stone teenage girls to death. They silence with prison, torture or death all critics within their grasp. They finance killing, kidnapping and terror around the globe.

Iran is Islam purified and concentrated—and in your face.

The mullahs in Iran are hate-addled fanatics but they are not stupid. They believe that they can defeat the US given the right circumstances. What might these circumstances—what political scientists call “the correlation of forces”—be?

Iran desires that the killing in Iraq and Afghanistan of American servicemen continue or even increase. She knows that the American media will revel in every death. Iran thinks that keeping the US busy and distracted in both places will eventually cause the American people to tire of both wars.

This is the center of Iranian strategy. She might be right. After all, the mullahs already have Harry Reid’s support.

We now see the meaning behind this:

A senior U.S. diplomat accused Iran on Tuesday of transferring weapons to Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan—the most direct comments yet on the issue by a ranking American official.

The Brits know this as well.

In Afghanistan it is clear that the Taliban is receiving support, including arms from … elements of the Iranian regime,” British Prime Minister Tony Blair wrote in the May 31 edition of the Economist.

We should not be surprised at this. Killing American servicemen is their policy. In other words, they are at war with us—and we have done scant little about it outside of Munich levels of appeasement.

As usual Iran threatens global retaliation if attacked—she has threatened this for 20 years. But if her words alone can cripple our foreign policy and cause the US to become a nation of dhimmis then we should just close up shop and go home. America will have ceased being a nation of any consequence.

Iran’s words are empty threats. If she had such power it would have long ago either been used or come into the light. In the real world her reach is seen as ‘global’ only because she can finance murder and mayhem around the world. But this is penny ante mischief, and such a ‘global reach’ is available even to Swaziland.

Iran exerts true strategic influence only in Lebanon, Iraq and parts of Afghanistan.

The rulers of Iran are in reality a criminal gang that survives through extortion, assassination and threats of violence. It functions in the Middle East as Al Capone functioned in Chicago—and likewise is involved with prostitution, the international drug trade and murder for hire.

The real issue here—the only issue here—is why a nation such as ours with pretensions of global responsibilities would allow such a pest as the regime of the mullahs to have survived more than a fortnight after 1981. Every single US president from the sainted Ronald Reagan to George Bush has allowed the Iranian infection to fester. Sanctions, diplomacy, patience—all have failed. War with the mullahs will not.

Let us not be beguiled by the Harry Reid types who wring their soft hands like schoolgirls and bemoan what they see as invincible Iranian power. The power of the mullahs cannot even effectively control parts of her own nation, especially where Kurds and Azeris dominate. The Iranian navy is almost equal to the Peruvian fishing fleet. The Iranian Air Force is nonexistent. The Iranian army is more suited to terrorizing women than engaging in combat.

What the Hell are we waiting for?

Every day that delays the destruction of that hostile and cancerous regime is another day that sees more dead US servicemen and more wailing of American widows and orphans. If Bush really wants to support the troops he can send them off to kill those who would kill their brothers in arms. That is their job. They are good at it. Damn good, in fact.

What the Hell are we waiting for?

The problem in the Middle East has always been Iran. Once we decide to end that regime we will see all sorts of other annoyances end as well, including the problems of Iraqi anarchy and Hezbollah terror.

What the Hell are we waiting for?

The regime must be extinguished as completely as was Carthage.

Islam’s Flight From Reason

All the world has seen—and continues to see, alas—how Moslems get all riled up when somebody says anything about Islam. When that happens the usual thing is for them to do their rabid cattle shtick: rampaging, burning, screaming, murdering, blowing stuff up and such. We have seen it so often and for so long that when Moslems take to the streets for some offence no matter how trivial, a normal person simply shrugs and says, “There they go again.”

Let us compare the reaction of Islam to the reaction of Bible thumping Christians when their faith is insulted. I wrote these words three years ago.

Say what you want about those fundamentalist Christians, they sure seem a rather calm lot. Insult them, take away the prayers of their God from schools, make fun of them in the media, use all sorts of legal wiles to keep them far away from abortion mills, remove their Ten Commandments from public spaces, make movies where Jesus marries, write plays where He practices sodomy, write books that call the whole edifice of Christianity a sham, and what happens? Not much. They keep going to their churches to pray for their enemies—and they seem to have lots these days. Yet they always turn the other cheek. You can create a piece of ‘art’ called Piss Christ or one with dung spread all over an image of the Virgin and all you will get for your time will be a few complaints and more of those prayers for your soul. That’s it.

We can break down these fun facts even further to include most faiths.

When a Catholic gets angry he goes to Confession. When a Protestant gets angry he gets on his knees to God. When a Buddhist gets angry he spins a prayer wheel. When a Hindu gets angry he sighs that he has not yet achieved a higher existence. When a Confucian gets angry he mourns the loss of modesty. When an agnostic gets angry he mumbles to himself over a scotch and soda.

Ah, but according to the defenders and apologists of the ‘religion of peace’ when a Moslem gets angry he has the right to go on a killing spree.

Oh…and guess who Islam blames for all this murder and rapine? If you guessed the Jews, move to the head of the class. Here is an ex-Prime Minister of Malaysia speaking four years ago about a bombing in Morocco where Moslems blasted to pieces other Moslems. Please keep in mind that Malaysia is an Islamic nation said by many to be advanced and enlightened.

The Prime Minister said that the series of terrorist suicide bombing attacks in Casablanca were a direct result of Muslim anger at the “aggressive policies of Israel against the Palestinians.”

So let us get straight his line of reasoning: when Moslems kills Moslems it is because of the Jews. When Moslems kill Jews it must also be because of the Jews. When Jews kill Moslems it is of course because of the Jews.

Got it.

Here is another gem, from Egypt.

Egyptian newspapers claimed that chewing gum Israel was selling in Egypt was laced with sexual hormones that aroused insatiable lust in young Arab women. Palestinian officials later followed with charges that Israeli chewing gum was a Zionist plot for turning Palestinian women into prostitutes, and “completely destroying the genetic system of young boys” to boot.

So Moslems are threatened by Jewish chewing gum?

And I love it when Islam gets right to the point.

On March 22, 2004 Sheikh Atiyyah Saqr, former head of the Al-Azhar Fatwa Committee who in the past issued a Fatwa declaring Jews “apes and pigs,” was asked the following question this week in an online chat room: “What, according to the Qur’an, are the Jews’ main characteristics and qualities?” The following is his answer: fabricating; listening to lies; disputing and quarreling; hiding the truth and supporting deception; rebelling against the Prophets and rejecting their guidance; hypocrisy; wishing evil on people; feeling pain at others’ happiness and feeling happiness at others’ afflictions; rudeness and vulgarity; murder of innocents; mercilessness and heartlessness; breaking promises; cowardice; and miserliness.

Did the good sheik leave anything out?

To make things really entertaining, would you like to be a Jew living in a Moslem land? But oddly enough, the freest Moslems in the Middle East are citizens of—now prepare yourselves all you dhimmis and Paulistas—Israel.

But Islam has another enemy as well. One that threatens the very foundation of the faith. It is the Barbie doll.

Stick-wielding Saudi religious police were raiding toy stores and gift shops in the desert kingdom to seize anything related to the Western holiday season, including flowers, candles, stuffed animals, Barbie dolls and other items considered evil.

There has been no word yet about Ken. 

Does not all of this seem a bit odd? As if there has been in Islam a tremendous flight from reason?

If any of your friends or associates suddenly began to believe in such things what would you think? How would you react if you saw them curse chewing gum and behead Barbie dolls? Quite right, you would say that they have gone mad. You would consult a psychiatrist.

Yet when Islamic nations prattle such obvious nonsense they are to be taken seriously. Ambassadors are exchanged, scholarly studies are written, Islamic Study Centers appear on US campuses and so on. How can an action that when practiced by an individual be recognized as insane, yet when practiced by a whole host of nations be termed respectable?

The one reason—the only reason—we pay attention to these irrational and spiritually impoverished people is  oil. If the Islamic Middle East were known primarily for tasty Macadamia nuts no one would give it the slightest notice. Its importance in American life would be on the level of, say, Ghana.

Of course, there are always the appeasers among us, those who blame America for all things goof-ball and deranged in the world of Islam. They constantly bleat and wring their schoolgirl hands about our reputation in Moslem lands, seeking an answer to the question they themselves always pose: “Why does Islam hate us?”

My answer is, “Why should we care?”

(Note: An excellent source for translations of newspapers from the world of Islam is MEMRI.)

Islam And World Conquest

I have written a series of essays over the years about Islam—its politics, history, culture and society. They always generate responses, especially from those who cannot believe there is anything at all unusual about that faith—it is a ‘religion of peace,’ as our own George Bush proclaimed.

Some Westerners have so swallowed the Islamic line that, for all intents and purposes they have become a dhimmi, a non-Moslem living either in the West or in Islamic lands who defends Islamic causes above all others. Dhimmi is thus a synonym for quisling.

Whether one whose mindset has led him to dhimmitude or one whose hatred of his own culture has led him to champion Islam, there is in both cases an ignorance of Islamic history, a history that anyone can easily discover by the simple act of opening a book.

Once that has been achieved one sees that Islam acts today exactly as Islam acted yesterday, exactly as it did from the time of Mohammed (570-632). Assassinations, beheadings, genocide, suicide murders, imperialistic warscivil wars, disturbing sexual beliefs and practices, off and on Jew hatred—all have been present since the beginning.

What follows are three historical events that read as if they were written yesterday. Of course, they could have been.

World Headlines One

Moslems based in Libya seize US ships and hold their crews for ransom. The US president sends the navy to blockade the Libyan coast and to bombard Libyan military installations. US Marines then attack and take the Moslem capital.

Sound familiar? When did this occur?

In 1800 Moslem pirates based on Africa’s Barbary Coast seized American ships, enslaved American sailors and demanded ransom. They declared war upon the US because that fledgling nation refused to send more money for tribute. President Jefferson sent the military and the problem was solved. Thus the Marine Corps anthem, “…to the shores of Tripoli.”

World Headlines Two

Islamic assassins murder in secret and in public an entire range of both Western and Moslem leaders. Terrorist attacks on Western outposts are a continuous threat. Suicide attacks are common. Potential recruits are promised a life filled with virgins and wine after they die. Bases of these fanatical killers were in Iran and Syria.

Sound familiar? When did these events occur?

The highly secretive group of Assassins (perhaps from the word hashish, as the Moslem killers allegedly used the drug) was formed in Iran in the 1090s AD. These early Islamic fanatics sowed murder and terror throughout the Middle East. The sect was exterminated by the Mongols c. 1250 AD.

World Headlines Three

Fed up with Islamic attacks on Western cities, a coalition of Western nations forms to defeat the Moslems. Surprisingly the Moslems suffer a catastrophic, rapid and unexpected defeat, leaving the entire world amazed at the Western victory.

Sound familiar? When did these events occur?

In 1571 a group of Western nations organized and commanded by Spain engaged the Turkish navy at Lepanto. The Moslem Turks were defeated and 30,000 Christian slaves were liberated. Cervantes fought in this battle.

You see my point. All of the above seem to have come from any newspaper of today. Now recall all of the reasons given by the those after 9/11 who were against the war on terror. “We were attacked because of American support of Israel!” shrieked some. Others like Ron Paul and his supporters sniff that the US deserved the attack because of all of her meddling in the Middle East. Some claimed that Islam was only responding to Western imperialism and that Islamic grievances were thus justified.

Some history, please. All of the above events occurred before the US had any interests in the Middle East, all were before the 1947 formation of the state of Israel, and all of the above Western military responses were defensive in nature and were the result of unprovoked Moslem attacks.

From its foundation Islam began to attack the West long before the West had ever heard of anyone named Mohammed. Starting with the Byzantine Empire (c. 630 AD) Moslem armies began to raid and plunder Byzantine territory—all of which was Christian. Byzantium had just fought and won a 30 year war against Persia (another in the long struggle between Iran and Christianity) and was exhausted. Soon all of the territory of what we now call the Middle East and northern Africa was in Moslem hands.

It was without a doubt the most rapid and permanent military conquest in history, an astounding achievement that equals anything done by the Roman legions. This area includes the modern nations of Syria, Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco—all once Christian and except for tiny Israel all now Moslem.

Islam did not stop, but invaded Christian Spain in 711 and penetrated into northern France. It was only the supreme military effort of Charles Martel (“the Hammer”) and his Carolingian army of Christian soldiers at the battle of Tours in 732 that kept the Moslems out of Europe north of the Pyrenees. Christian Europe had had a very close call. Had Martel been defeated all of Europe might have become Islamic. The Moslems then fought the remaining Christians in Spain for over 700 years. Islam was finally defeated in Spain only in 1492.

Historical note: We wonder how Spain could conquer the great Mesoamerican and Andean civilizations so quickly, easily and with such a paucity of soldiers and materiel. But tell me, what shape would your military be in if it had had to fight a ferocious and competent enemy for 700 years? Practice does indeed make perfect.

Now for some perspective: From 626 AD until the Crusades more than 500 years later Islam was mostly victorious everywhere, whether in Iberia, Africa or Asia. Her armies were seemingly invincible and her god unconquerable. But then came a check, the 1st Crusade (1096), really the West’s first attempt at counter-attack. Many are those who mention the Crusades, and they usually do so to slander either the West or Catholicism.

But the Crusades—in Spain, north Africa and the Levant—were nothing but an attempt by Christians to reclaim what had been Christian land. They also were what we would now call preemptive wars. Islam had made no secret of its desire to exterminate the West—as the Turkish sultan said, to “stable horses in the Vatican.” He came close to doing this very thing. (And recall that al-Qaeda once tried to bomb the Vatican. Once these guys get an idea in their heads it stays there.)

The Crusades petered out after 1250 or so, but by then Eastern Islam was engaged in a terrible and losing series of wars against the Mongols. The West had a breather—but not for long. The Mongol tide came and went, staying only in Russia. By the middle of the 13th century Islam, furnished with new blood from the ferocious and expansionist Ottoman Turks, once again began to assault the West. After the Fall of Constantinople (1453) which destroyed the Christian empire of Byzantium the Moslems controlled all of Anatolia (modern Turkey) and pushed into Eastern Europe, taking what is now Greece, Macedon, Albania and threatening Poland and Austria—and all were Christian lands.

And twice the Turks were at the gates of Vienna. At the second siege (1683), by the way, the Moslems were aided by the French (you are not really surprised at this, are you?) and the West was saved by the Poles—who would continue to give the world examples of true heroism.

Thus the history of Islam—whatever the truth of its theological doctrines—was simply one of making unprovoked and imperialist war upon Christian lands, wars the Christians did not ask for and did not want. Why should we be surprised that these wars continue today? Islam is doing what it has always done. The West is responding as it always has. We have seen it all before. Truly, “there is nothing new under the sun.”

The wars of Islam and the West are part of the ongoing struggle between East and West. It began at Marathon (490 BC) and continues today: Thermopylae, Salamis, Plataea, Arbela, the Punic Wars, the Mithradatic Wars, the wars of Rome and Parthia, the siege of Constantinople, Manzikert, the Crusades, Lepanto, the sieges of Vienna, Gallipoli…all are but episodes in this 2500 year-long war. Since 640 AD this long war of East against West has been waged by Islam. It will end when one side is utterly and permanently defeated and not before.

Believe it, this is war. Close your eyes to it, deny it, blame and hate your own civilization and excuse the other—none of this will change a thing. Our enemies certainly are not deceived at all. They know this as war. All of their actions, their sermons, their writings and their political and military maneuverings are those of a civilization at war.

As I have written before, when civilizations go to war it is to the death. Rome and Carthage, Macedon and Persia, the Union and the Confederacy, the Allies and the Nazis, the US and militaristic Japan, the US and the USSR: one ceases to exist. So either the West or radical Islam. Take your choice. Should I ask you what the world would look like if radical Islam is victorious?

And let us not have any of that silly and lachrymose sentiment that claims Islam brings much good to its people. There is nothing particularly Islamic about this. Any religion offers it. Zoroastrianism offers it.

But “Live and Let live!” you say. Impossible, for radical Islam will not allow this. Wherever Islam has gone she has brought war. For her there are only two worlds, that of Islam (Dar es Salaam) and that of war (Dar el-Harb). Peace will come only when the entire world is Islam. In almost all of the wars being fought as I write these words one or both sides involve a Moslem group or nation.

From the first Islam preyed upon the Arabs, then the Jews, then upon fellow Moslems—thus the Sunni – Shiite split. Then upon Christians, then Persians, then Hindus—and my God how Islam made war upon the Hindus! We read of cities of skulls, of walls of corpses, of towers constructed of human heads, in the Moslem invasions of Hindu lands. Any confusion now why India and Pakistan are for all intents and purposes at war still?

And what of the Taliban´s destruction of Buddhist statues in Afghanistan? Radical Islam even makes war upon stones. And should I mention Islam’s war against the Jews? But Islam is also at war with itself—in Algeria, Syria, Lebanon, Somalia, the Palestinian-occupied territories, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia we can see the awful slaughter of Moslem killing Moslem. In the fading light of its long-gone glory, Islam is really at war with the entire world, with modernity itself. Recall that bin-Laden has many times expressed his desire to return the Islamic world to what it was 1000 years ago.

And what must certainly be humiliating to bear is the knowledge that Moslem political society has no mechanism to prevent this killing. The result is that the US, a Christian nation, has become the savior of Moslems in Kuwait, in Somalia, in Afghanistan, in Indonesia, in Kosovo, in Iraq. Without the US Moslem history would be even more incarnadined.

And the response from the Moslem world when the US saves untold millions of Moslems from murder and famine and poverty and tyranny? She is bombed; her embassies are destroyed; her people are murdered; her buildings are demolished; her airplanes are bombed out of the sky; she is called ‘the Great Satan;’ and at every instance of this terrorism Islamic rabble dance in the street. Even to help Moslems is to invite their hatred.

This is one of history’s tragedies, for Islamic civilization from 900 AD until 1100 was a shining glory, in some aspects even surpassing that of Western Europe. The Moslem cities were gleaming metropolises of learning, science and the arts. Their governments were by and large humane and tolerant, and at times provided a haven for Jews in a hostile world. Their mosques were (and are) wonders of the world, their poetry and art hallmarks of refinement.

All of that is gone now, save for what is left of their monuments, literature and architecture. The poverty, ignorance, illiteracy, theological obscurantism, misogyny, violence, tyranny, envy and mind-boggling Jew-hatred one sees in the Islamic world today are a far cry from what once was a marvelously brilliant culture.

Here is an example of Islam then—the Blue Mosque of Istanbul.

Here is an example of Islam now.

After 1400 years of history Islam can do little more than create the most degraded people upon this earth, a people who murder each other over cartoons.

Please keep all of this in mind when those anti-war types, the dhimmis, the media and the apologists for Islam begin their predictable and silly America and Western civilization-hating diatribe. There are many well-educated fools among them—Noam Chomsky, Gabriel García Márquez, Ron Paul, Norman Mailer, Gore Vidal, Howard Zinn and the entire leadership of the Democrat Party all come to mind.

I wonder what the average Moslem thinks when he strolls into a relic from his own past—the Blue Mosque for example. There is hardly anything built by human hands as stunningly beautiful as that. Yet modern Islam can no more design and build its equal than it can design and build a sewer or light bulb or running shoe.

The Blue Mosque was built by Moslems 400 years ago. What has happened since? Why is Islam so mentally and spiritually and materially impoverished? And why is it so bloody? And why do so few Moslems speak out against its bloodshed and terror and violence?

(Note: This essay is a summation of several essays I have written over the years. They have been edited and updated.)

This War Of Wars

Michael Hodges is in love with Islam. He is the complete, the fulfilled, the utter and absolute dhimmi. All he lacks is the turban—which he might by now have acquired—and a willingness to strap dynamite to the bodies of his children and send them happily off to blast to pieces any passing Jew.

Hodges is to Islam what Monica was to Bill and performs for it a similar service.

This fellow and his type are the effete and cosmopolitan intellectuals who fancy themselves far and away at a higher moral plane and possessing of deeper levels of understanding than we hoi polloi. We see such in our own nation scribbling away at articles for the New York Times.

Here is what this idiot writes about his new love, Mohammedism, and the radical changes it is bringing to England. When you read his bubbling excitement with all things Moslem, remember that we in America are on the same path. What appears below might seem a joke, a satire or from The Onion. Is Hodges for real?

But rather than fear the inevitable changes this will bring to London, or buy in to a racist representation of all Muslims as terrorists, we should recognise both what Islam has given this city already, and the advantages it would bring across a wide range of areas in the future.

He goes on to gush about the glories Islam would bring to London in the areas of Public Health, Ecology, Education, Food, Inter-Faith Relations, Arts, Social Justice and Race Relations.

This must be a parody. If Hodges is serious, any reasonable society would send him to the nearest nut house. Or perhaps simply expel him to any number of Moslem lands where he could experience up close and personal what they are like.

And what are they like?

Let us look at all Islamic nations and see what all more or less have in common: poverty, disease, tyranny, misogyny, illiteracy, terror cells, obscurantist theology, violence, corruption, sterility, ignorance, Jew hatred. The total exports of the Arab part of Islam would scarcely equal the output of tiny Finland. Islamic law busies itself with mutilating thieves, beheading women and stoning to death blasphemers. While the Vatican and Paris and London and New York are open to everyone, any non-Moslem caught in Mecca or Medina would be murdered. Few Moslem nations can even supply clean water to their people. It is exactly as C.S. Lewis said, that “horrible religions make horrible nations.”

Want more?

In the world of Islam it is dog-eat-dog, a world gone nuts and mad and spooky with crazed theology and murderous intent: Iraq invades Iran and Kuwait—all three are Islamic states; Algeria murders 200,000 of its own—all Moslems; half of the Sudan—the Moslem north—literally enslaves the other half—the Christian south; The Moslem Taliban terrorized an entire Moslem nation—Afghanistan; Moslem al-Qaeda makes war upon the spiritual center of Islam itself, Saudi Arabia; Islamic Somalia is at war with itself and with Islamic Eritrea—and both of these Hobbesian nightmares join with their Moslem brothers in the Sudan to sexually mutilate their adolescent girls; Moslem Syria sponsors terror brigades in whatever is left of Moslem and Christian Lebanon; Moslem Turks slaughter Moslem Kurds; Sunni hates Shiite; Palestinian mothers exult when their sons and daughters march off to the oblivion of suicide bombing; and on and on and on—always more blood, always more terror, always more degradation. In almost every part of our globe wherever there is violence you can bet that one or both of the parties is a Moslem group or nation.

Here is the real Islam, not some bubbly fantasy cooked up in the psychoses of the weak minded intellectuals of the West.

England is gone, at least that much is clear—and has been clear for some time. Let us surely lament the eclipse of a once great nation. But let us not pass therefore into a lachrymose sentiment suitable for schoolgirls. Let us stand as men, and as men understand the nature of our foe.

We are engaged in a great war, a war for the ages. It is an ideological struggle that would be instantly recognizable to Rome and Carthage, to Greek and Persian, to Grant and Lee, to America and Japan, to Patton and Hitler, to the US and the USSR. At the end of each of these wars one of the cultures was eliminated. It will be the same in this one. But which culture will survive and so inflict its ideology upon this world?

Hodges has one answer. The United States Marine Corps and its brothers in arms have another.

(Hat tip: Dinocrat)

Works And Days

This summer I am doing something different. Usually when school is out at the end of May I would travel to South America for some solo backpacking or head out with Jeep and .44 Magnum revolver to Wyoming. This year I have taken a job managing high school and college kids who work on a tree farm out in the wilds of Oklahoma.

It is rewarding work but consumes much time and energy. Though I get up at 2 AM I find it difficult to get all of my daily things done—reading, writing, exercising and generally keeping my apartment reasonably well-stocked with food and an adult beverage or two.

And it is hard to keep up with blogging and responding to all commenters. So I do the best I can. It is never good enough but since God Himself has given me both blogging and the summer job, I will call upon Him to help me in each.

His will be done.

The tree farm employs many Hondurans. I was first in Honduras in 1983 and found that country a hidden delight, filled with jungles and forests and absolutely superb backpacking. I have returned many times since and might even head back in December for some relaxing walks along the Mosquito Coast.

The Hondurans are surprised that anyone has even heard of their nation, let alone has often visited it. And those folks work harder than I do. Certainly the tree farm and all of its myriad responsibilities reminds them of the sort of work they did in their own nation.

Honduras is still even today mostly a rural country empty of foreigners. It is a simple matter to get out into the wild forests there and disappear with pack and tent for as long as your heart desires and for as long as your tick repellent holds out.

So I will spend all summer working in the woods rather than playing in them. And of course the mind wanders from work to play and back again.

Only God knows when my summers will once again be a time for walking alone in the wilds of His handiwork.

His will be done.

Paulism

There is something rather peculiar in the foreign policy thinking of those who follow Ron Paul. Their thoughts are an odd farrago of irrationality and historical nonsense I call ‘Paulism’. It is as if the disciples of Paul have no knowledge at all of something called ‘Islam’. Truly they are and they remain innocent of Islam’s history.

For a True Believer in Paulism Islam was peacefully existing in its Middle Eastern arcadias minding its own business. But then along came the United States of America. This imperialistic nation, using force, guile and mendacity began to interfere in everything Islamic, seizing territory and oil and waging incessant war upon the followers of Religion of Peace. These noble fellows responded just as our Founding Fathers did and resisted the invader.

Everything Islam does, has done and plans to do is therefore justified. It is a case of an oppressed people doing whatever it can to throw out the Americans who have brought such misery to Moslem lands. September 11 was simply payback—Paulistas use the term ‘blowback’—for the horror the US had brought to Islam was now being brought to America.

It is a simple case therefore of cosmic justice. America’s chickens are coming home to roost. She deserves it. She has earned it. If our nation really wanted peace she would withdraw from Islamic lands and allow the peaceful Moslems to return to their own business.

That is the core of Paulism.

Many Paulistas have written about my views of Paulism. I responded as best I could, but neither history nor logic could penetrate their mindset. They refused to abandon their beliefs that Islam was innocent and justified and America was guilty and deserving.

Here are two Paulistas who well represent their dedicated brethren. Consider the view of Islam held by this Paulista who will not believe that a despotic Islam hates a free and democratic America:

The simple fact of the matter is that Islam was every bit as unmodernized in 1928 as it is now, and the United States was, if anything, more free than it is now.

So if Muslims hate us for our freedom, they should have hated us even more then than they do now.

Strangely, the Hoover administration did not have any problems with militant Islamic terrorists attacking US interests.

Now why might that be?

Well, it embarrasses to remind this fellow that Islam could not get to the US in 1928. And it is again odd that this Paulista has no awareness that in 1928 Islam was rather busy wrapping up the murder of 1,500,000 Armenian Christians—one of the greatest genocides ever recorded. What in Heaven’s name did these Armenians do to deserve this ‘blowback’ from Islam?

The Paulista continues, providing in a nutshell the core thinking of Paulism:

The simple fact of the matter is that the absence of militant Islamic attacks on the United States prior to 1948 make it obvious that the roots of militant Islam’s hatred of the United States are political and not cultural, and that those who would try to make this a Huntingtonian clash of civilizations are deluded.

Here is all of it: Innocent Islam, guilty America, Islamic hatred therefore justified. It is impossible to break down this core belief.

Another follower of Paulism gets right to the center of all of this:

The US military is occupying their lands, installing tyrants to rule over them, and interfering in their internal affairs. These people are pissed and fighting back the only way they know how. And, unfortunately, that means attacking citizens.

Translation: Islam had no tyrants before the US intervened in Islamic lands. And now anything Islam does in response is justified.

Again: Islamic innocence. American guilt. Islam justified in responding however it can.

Paulistas see no evil in the world except in the heart of America. Through the core of their faith runs the propaganda of bin-Laden, Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore and Ward Churchill. There is nothing in Paulism that demonstrates a knowledge of Islamic history or an understanding of America’s place in the world.

Delusion, ignorance, fanaticism, irrationality—all traits of Paulism. And all traits of Islam as well. This explains why Paulistas have no problem whatsoever with Islam.

In all foreign policy essentials Paulism and Islam are identical.

Paulistas

I recently posted a couple of pieces about Ron Paul. This caused quite stir among his supporters who immediately rose to the defense of their hero.

Some posted lengthy and eloquent explanations about Paul. Some stressed Paul’s good points—and like all madmen, he is not mad at every point and all the time. Some were simply dolts. But all illumed for me thenuttiness of Paul. He and his followers remind me of Lyndon LaRouche and his.

Quite simply, Ron Paul is a kook.

There is no difference between the foreign policy of Ron Paul and that of Michael Moore. Both compare our Founding Fathers with Islamic killers. That at least was clear from the writings on my site.

But read them yourself. And no, I will no longer respond to their writings, but I will allow them to write. They amuse and educate.

And something else was clear. These ‘Paulistas’ will excuse any action of Islam and place blame for its every outrage at the door of their own nation.

For some clarity about what passes for thinking among the Paulistas, see this video.

Ron Paul will of course never see the inside of the White House unless he schedules a tour of it. No doubt his followers will shout about conspiracies—as did those of LaRouche.

Neither Ron Paul nor his supporters can possibly come up with an explanation of Islamic terror. Concerning the recent attempt by Islamic killers to murder thousands of Americans:

The story is always the same: radical Islamic terror. The storyline is the same, too. But an element of Western opinion always wants to obscure it, turning a blind eye to the ideology of hate that motivates these would-be murderers. The root-causes crowd has little interest in that root cause. No, it must be poverty (even when the terrorists turn out to be comfortable, well-educated, and fully employed); or the Palestinian issue (even though organizations like al Qaeda have barely mentioned the Israeli–Palestinian dispute, and some terror targets, like Bali, had no rational connection to it); or, it goes without saying, George W. Bush and “his” war in Iraq (no matter how many attacks occurred before his presidency).

What would a Paulista say other than to blame America? 

One cannot reason with the Paulistas. One can only marvel at the political wisdom of our Founders to have created a political system that will forever keep a Ron Paul from the presidency.

(Hat tip: Moonbattery)

Our Mexican President

There is something that I just cannot figure out. I have wondered for some years why George Bush does the bidding of Mexican presidents and ignores the desire of Americans.

What is going on here?

Vicente Fox ruled Mexico for 6 years (2000-06). His number one desire in Mexican-US relations was immigration reform—that is, the US should be the one doing the reforming, not Mexico. Fox called his plan ‘the whole enchilada.’ This included the rights of what Fox called ‘undocumented workers’ and what Americans call ‘illegal aliens.’ Bush calls such folks ‘undocumented workers’ too.

Fox was outraged when the US proposed building a 700 mile fence between his nation and the US. “Shameful,” he screamed. Fox’s Foreign Secretary Luis Debrez said

Mexico is not going to bear, it is not going to permit, and it will not allow a stupid thing like this wall!

He went on to describe those Americans in favor of the wall—that would be most of us—as ‘myopic,’ ‘blind’ and ‘xenophobic’—slander that our own president has picked up and repeated about Americans. Mexican newspapers called Bush a ‘rapist’ and a ‘racist’—a strange juxtaposition of words, yes?

And so the wall has yet to be built. Bush heard the cry of his people—the Mexican political elite—and obeyed them.

One of those Mexican elite types is a fellow named Jorge Castañeda. He deserves special mention.

Castañeda began his public life as a communist but apparently moderated his tone enough to be appointed to the Fox administration as Secretary of Foreign Affairs for 3 years (2000-03). Since leaving the Mexican government Castañeda has written extensively about US-Mexican relations in general and about immigration in particular.

He calls the latest immigration bill ‘hateful.’ Why? Because of the wall for one thing, but also because he has actually—unlike Bush— read the bill. Castañeda scoffs at the part of the bill that requires illegals to return to Mexico to ‘regularize’ their immigration status, writing that

it is hard to imagine any Mexican already in the US voluntarily returning to, say, Zacatecas to wait patiently in line for a new visa.

Indeed. Castañeda admits what is plain to anyone save for the political elite in the US: No illegal will be returning to Mexico. And he states right out that the bill grants amnesty.

Castañeda is no fool. Our own political elite, however, thinks that we are.

The present ruler of Mexico, Felipe Calderón, maintains the Mexican hard line on immigration.

Before meeting with President Bush in March 2007, Calderon openly expressed his disapproval of building a wall between the two nations.

Then there is this morsel.

Like his predecessor, President Vicente Fox, Calderón’s goal is to achieve a comprehensive immigration reform before President George W. Bush leaves office.

Why the rush to get immigration reform before Bush departs office? Is there something the Mexican elite has on George that they will not have on the next US president?

I really would like to know why Bush is so obeisant toward the Mexican elite while so disdainful toward his fellow citizens.

These are only questions with no answers—not yet anyway. Any revelations must be left to future US historians, assuming there will still be such a nation.

Ron Paul Redux

Ron Paul is a bit of a moonbat. He established this when he said that America was partly responsible for 9/11. Once he said that anyone other than a crank or a nut job dismissed the fellow. After all, who in his right mind wants to be at the same intellectual level as Rosie O’Donnell?

But—and there is always a but—that does not mean that everything Paul says is equally kooky.

Here is a list of things Paul believes in. These were gathered from his web site and from a site whose owner likes him.

In no particular order of importance Paul wants to abolish the Federal Reserve, end Federal involvement in drug enforcement, abolish the income tax, dismantle the entire welfare state, get the U.S. out of the U.N., restore the gold standard, end or allow private currency production, end all subsidies and eliminate virtually all Cabinet-level agencies.

These are discussed in detail on his web site under the headings Debt and Taxes, American Independence and Sovereignty, War and Foreign Policy, Border Security and Immigration Reform, Privacy and Personal Liberty and Property Rights and Eminent Domain.

Before you roll your eyes, hear Paul out. I assure you he does not always drool and gibber.

He wants to abolish the Federal Reserve—what hip economists call ‘the Fed.’ Now, I am not going to cause your eyes to roll by going into great detail about the Fed. It is enough for you to know that Scipio is well versed in economic lore both macro and micro and he understands how the Fed works.

Milton Friedman did not particularly like the Fed either. He believed that it could be used by the government as an engine of inflation that would reduce government debt by passing its costs on to savers. Friedman was spot on, and so is Paul.

Paul wants to end federal involvement in drug enforcement. Well, the guy is a libertarian after all. To such fellows morality exists only as a ploy by Jerry Falwell types to restrict human freedom. A libertarian really can have no problem with porn, pedophilia, public sodomy, NAMBLA or bestiality. All of these charming habits fall under the rubric of ‘human freedom.’

But remember that when a libertarian says ‘freedom’ he is confused. He really means ‘license.’ To a libertarian any government restriction on any human activity is pure fascism. This is why they have no problem with drugs—that is, they regard the government getting involved with making anti-drug laws and then actually enforcing them are harbingers of a police state.

But Friedman had a problem with our drug policies as well. He thought that marijuana should be legalized. Paul does not go so far as that, but William F. Buckley did. Perhaps they are right.

Paul wants to abolish the income tax. Well, Hell yes. This tax and the accompanying structure that enforces it—the IRS—are hallmarks of a police state. The IRS lays down incomprehensible laws, sends out wrong information about them, punishes the taxpayer for not understanding them and claims the right to one-third of your blood, your sweat and your tears.

The income tax was sold to Americans as a lie and has been allowed to grow as a cancer in our body politic. It survives because politicos garner power though spending your tax dollars. They surreptitiously remove the tax from your paycheck, thereby keeping from you the full amount of what you pay. If payroll deductions were not done, every April you would be hit with a tax bill running to tens of thousands of dollars. Even San Francisco sodomites would revolt.

Of course, illegal aliens would not care at all because George Bush does not require that they pay a dime in taxes. But I digress.

So good for Ron Paul. The income tax is Marxist and confiscatory. It is the mark of a slave nation not of a free people.

Paul wants to do away with Welfare both foreign and domestic. I say ‘go for it.’ Why should the US subsidize loser nations like Mexico and Indonesia and…well, most of the world is comprised of loser nations. Let these fools and mountebanks care for their own.

Paul wants us out of the UN. Well, yes. It has been pagan, anti-Israel and anti-American for 40 years. And we pay for this monstrosity. We pay for foreigners to come upon our hallowed soil and insult us. What the ****? Send those fine specimens of human debris that infest Turtle Bay anywhere in the world but in the land of the free and the home of the Marines.

But enough about Ron Paul. He is not entirely a madman. He is of course in no way suited to be president, but he would make a superb congressman from, say, Texas.

Which he is already.

George Of The Bungle

George, I have two words for you—no, not those two, these two: Go away. Now.

I am sick and tired of you. I am sick and tired of being slandered by you. I am sick and tired of you preferring Kennedy and the Emirates and the Saudis and illegals over your own Republican base.

You speak never a word against your political enemies—the Kennedys and Pelosis and Murthas and the Reids—but let loose your bile against those who put you into office.

What conservatives and Republicans must recognize is that the White House has broken with them. What President Bush is doing, and has been doing for some time, is sundering a great political coalition. This is sad, and it holds implications not only for one political party but for the American future.

The White House doesn’t need its traditional supporters anymore, because its problems are way beyond being solved by the base. And the people in the administration don’t even much like the base. Desperate straits have left them liberated, and they are acting out their disdain.

I wish you would leave before you can do more damage to this nation and to the Republican Party. Resign and let Dick Cheney finish your term. He might not be better, but for the love of God he could hardly be worse.

And I wish I had written this:

I voted twice for this man and his abdication of the most fundamental executive responsibility, to protect our country from foreign invasion, is cause for regret.

Talk is cheap. The most responsible course of action that this president can take on immigration is to do nothing. Leave it for the next president. Focus on Iraq and then go home.

Signing this bill would render what little good he has done meaningless by comparison.

I wish he were already gone.

So do I.

My God, what a disappointment.

(Update: Would somebody shut George Bush up? He keeps digging deeper and deeper.)

President Bush sounded like he hoped to sever ties with the remaining 30 percent who like him when he went after critics in his party this week over opposition to his latest immigration plan.

“I feel passionate about the issue. It’s something I have felt strongly about ever since I was the governor of Texas,” he said.

True enough. And just in what shape is the Texas border with Mexico? George, I don’t think I would boast about that if I were you.

“Texas is a very diverse state, Houston is a very diverse city, and through that diversity, if you’re open-minded, you get a great sense of how it invigorates the society,” said Bush.

So our diversity is our strength? OK, let us them invite in 12,000,000 more Mexicans and get even stronger. Oh what the Hell, how about 12,000,000 Zulus—now that would be one diverse bunch!

Oh dear! We in the Republican base just are not open minded enough for George. He is so open minded his ideas of patriotism and national identity have fallen out.

George W. Bush is the president of the United States of America. But it is a different United States of America than the one I live in. Mine ends at the Rio Grande.