Tag Archives: islam

Jesus and Mo: it’s time to pick a horse


http://lawyerssecularsociety.wordpress.com/2014/02/03/jesus-and-mo-its-time-to-pick-a-horse/

By Lawyers’ Secular Society Secretary Charlie Klendjian (H/T Old Holborn for the link)

A few weeks ago I appeared on the BBC1 programme The Big Questions to discuss, well, a big question: “Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?” You can watch it on YouTube here.

I very much enjoyed the experience, and not just because of the limitless KitKats the production company generously laid on. What I haven’t found so enjoyable, though, is subsequent events.

On the programme were two friends of mine, Chris Moos and Abhishek Phadnis of the LSE Students Union Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society. They were on the programme because they had recently got into trouble with their university for the hideous crime of…wearing “Jesus and Mo” t-shirts at the LSE Freshers’ Fair in October of last year.

The LSS fully and unequivocally supported Chris and Abhishek and we condemned the LSE’s disgraceful reaction to such a harmless act (see herehere and here). I’m pleased to report that Chris and Abhishek did eventually receive something resembling an apology from the LSE but unfortunately this was only after my student friends had formally instructed a Matrix QC and Leigh Day solicitors to help them. You can read Chris and Abhishek’s joint statements about what happened at Freshers’ Fair here (day 1) and here(day 2); you can read Abhishek’s fantastic blog post about it here; and you can read their joint statement in response to what they see as LSE’s “half-apology” here.

The Big Questions showed the t-shirts Chris and Abhishek were wearing, though they didn’t show any close-ups. Sitting next to me on the programme was Maajid Nawaz, who is the Liberal Democrat prospective parliamentary candidate for Hampstead and Kilburn and the co-founder and chair of the Quilliam Foundation, a counter-extremism think tank. Nawaz made it very clear on the programme that he, as a Muslim, had no objection to the t-shirts.

Shortly after the programme went out Nawaz tweeted a picture of one of the Jesus and Mo cartoons from the t-shirts – the same picture at the top of this blog post – saying:

“This Jesus & Mo @JandMo cartoon is not offensive&I’m sure God is greater than to feel threatened by it الله أكبر منه”.

And then things got crazy: there were death threats against Nawaz and a petition calling for his de-selection as a PPC.

So far, so bad.

Then things got crazier.

Last week two of our flagship news programmes, Channel 4 News and BBC’s Newsnight, in covering Nawaz’s plight, refused to show the cartoon he had tweeted. Displaying an inexplicable impatience to get into the Easter spirit in January, Channel 4 News decided to use what looked like a “black egg” to cover the image of Mohammed:

J and Mo.jpg censored

Newsnight didn’t even do that; they just avoided it completely. As the eccentric Christian blogger “Archbishop Cranmer” put it, this is how Newsnight depicted the cartoon:

Jesus and Mo BBC

In censoring themselves Channel 4 News and Newsnight not only failed in their task of reporting the news to their viewers – to enable their viewers to form their own opinion about the cartoon – but they also reinforced the very religious taboo that Nawaz had received death threats for challenging and which had landed Chris and Abhishek in hot water with the Libyan School of Economics – sorry, the London School of Economics. As Nawaz tweeted:

“Thank you @Channel4News you just pushed us liberal Muslims further into a ditch #LynchMobFreeZone #TeamNawaz”.

I am appalled at the treatment of Nawaz and I am appalled at the editorial decisions ofChannel 4 News and Newsnight to censor the Jesus and Mo cartoon. Religious censorship is bad even on a good day, but when it prevents discussion of the actual news item at hand it becomes surreal.

It’s high time we all faced up to a very unsettling reality here: sharia law is alive and kicking in the United Kingdom in 2014, and so is its deadly blasphemy code. After Nawaz had tweeted the picture Mohammed Shafiq of the Ramadhan Foundation referred to him as “Gustake Rasool”, which means “Defamer of Prophets”. This is a religious and legal charge punishable by a death sentence in Pakistan. Nawaz travels regularly to Pakistan and has family there. Shafiq also tweeted that:

“We will notify all muslim organisations in the UK of his despicable behaviour and also notify Islamic countries”.

It’s tempting to think this is a difficult legal or moral conundrum. It isn’t. There are difficult legal and moral issues out there but this is not one of them. The question before us is very simple: do we have the right to depict Mohammed? It’s a simple question and so it deserves a simple answer. The answer is either yes or no. My answer is yes. If your answer is “yes, but”, then sorry that’s just not good enough. If you have to pause for thought before answering the question then you’ve probably already decided the answer is no.

“Oh but we have to be respectful because depiction of the prophet Mohammed is forbidden in Islam and so it’s offensive to Muslims”, I hear you say, clutching your dusty GCSE Religious Studies certificate proudly (I have an ‘A’ grade myself; it was one of my favourite subjects).

You’re wrong.

Point 1: there is a history within some strands of Islam of depicting Mohammed.

Point 2: all Muslims are individuals. Some of them will find a depiction of Mohammed offensive and some won’t. Why are you more concerned about the Muslims that want to enforce blasphemy codes rather than those challenging them, often at great risk? In choosing to instinctively sympathise with those seeking to enforce blasphemy codes you make it even harder for liberal and secular Muslims to rise up. As Nawaz says, you push them “further into a ditch.” You side with the oppressor rather than the victim. Think about that, carefully.

Point 3: notice how you just belittled all Muslims as unhinged individuals with hair-trigger tempers who cannot handle their ideas being challenged – in this case a picture of a man with a beard. Which other group of people would you treat like that? Is that showing “respect” towards Muslims? Or is it showing disrespect? Or is it possibly even de-humanising them?

Point 4: if someone is offended, so what? Do you know how offended some men (and women) were at the idea of women having the vote in this country? Do you know how offended some white people were at the idea of racial equality in the US and South Africa? Do you know how offended some Christians were at the Life of Brian and the work of the wonderfully irreverent late comedian Dave Allen (Allen also received death threats, incidentally)? Do you know how offended some religious people are at the idea of gay couples marrying? Challenging power always offends those who hold the power, or those who benefit from the power, that’s being challenged.

Point 5: this isn’t just about a cartoon, or Maajid Nawaz, or LSE students. It’s about our democracy asserting the vital principle that no idea is beyond challenge, criticism or even ridicule. Free speech and free expression are our safety mechanisms; without it there is no limit to harm.

Point 6: if you say we should censor these images out of “respect”, is that really the right word? Or when you say “respect” do you really mean “fear”? As I have said before, if you’re scared about something then for goodness sake just say you’re scared. There’s no shame in that whatsoever. But there is shame in saying you respect something when actually you don’t respect it, or when you’re scared of it.

You might be thinking to yourself, “Ok, so what can I do?” Well here’s the good news. The solution is simple. You just have to be honest when talking about religion, and in particular Islam. And when I say honest, I mean ruthlessly honest. If you find the enforcement of sharia law in the UK abhorrent, please say so. If you find the willingness of 18 out of 56 UK mosques to conduct child marriages abhorrent, please say so. If you find the al-Madinah school in Derby abhorrent, please say so. If you find gender segregation in UK universitiesabhorrent, please say so. And if you find the imposition of Islamic blasphemy codes byChannel 4 News and Newsnight abhorrent, please say so.

Don’t think you can straddle both sides of the Jesus and Mo argument, arguing in one breath how free speech and free expression are important but in another breath how we have to be “respectful” and not cause offence, like a Hollywood stuntman expertly riding two horses. At some point those horses will go their separate ways. Pick a horse now – while you still have something of a choice.

The events of the last few weeks have demonstrated something that secularists are only too aware of: the urgent need for absolute honesty when it comes to discussing religion. After we had finished filming The Big Questions a gentleman from the audience came up to speak to me. It’s fair to say we were on different sides of the debate. When I told him I was a secularist he remarked dismissively and mockingly, and almost salivating at his own quick wit, “well I suppose someone has to be”.

Yes, he’s bloody right.

Someone has to be.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Views expressed are not necessarily those of the LSS.

You can sign a petition in support of Maajid Nawaz here.

Chris Moos and Abhishek Phadis have been jointly short-listed for the National Secular Society’s “Secularist of the Year” award. More details here.

Very bad law


David Davis

This will play into the hands of the more fanatical Islamists who are playing into the hands of the GramscoFabiaNazi fat-controllers.

If a woman is (a) either happy to wear a burkha, or (b) is fool enough to go along with her mail-chauvinist “partner” in being forced to wear one, it is no business of ours or Nicolas Sarkozy’s or of the French Government.

Personally, I think Burkhas are  a very very silly and immature thing to want to wear. It signals nothing but distrust by men in other men, and in their own women. It is also impractical I think, if a woman wants to go to the toilet (I do not know.) It is a hangover from a barbarian pre-liberal age. But it’s not our business. However, murdering butchers, anywhere in the world, are and ought always to be our business whether or not we have any “vital interest”. Like Saddam, whom we happily caused to be hung some years ago.

Apologising for slavery


David Davis

This caught my eye quite accidentally: I was not intending to write anything about slavery today, with the possible exception of a suitable comment about true things that White People are not allowed to say.

It occurs to me that _if_ West African Tribal Bigmen had refused to trade their (own slaves) people for Spanish and Portuguese money and beads, then history might have been different. Absolutely all the helots would have got carted off by their ears either way (The HispanoPortuguesi had guns by then) and ther tribal Big-guys would have been slaughtered, but then at least “antislavery campaigners” would have been able to absolutely claim the moral high-ground from the very beginning. WE’d not have fallen, through being asleep on the ideological job, into the trap of being _blamed for slavery_ through being the dominant Atlantic-Maritime power in the times when we were trying actually to abolish this pre-capitalist, pre-liberal, Euro-Imperium-friendly barbarism.

It riles me, that _we_ have had to “apologise” for slavery, when _we_ were the first nation to unilaterally outlaw it everywhere and for all time, planetwide. Naturally, there is no mention whatever of the role played either by tribal chiefs, or by the Arabs, who as is well known, still “do” slavery bigtime, and who were not bit-players in the atlantic slavetrade either, with their trans-African communications.

Libertarians of course don’t agree with slavery. You own yourself and your justly-acquired goods, and can dispose of either as you will. But I think an exception could be made for major GramscoFabiocrats and their children (the Koran says that it says so) in the event of a libertarian revolution that’s far-reaching enough and rapid enough. There are after all things posing as “religions” which allow slavery and regulate it as a means of social intercourse. Either, these are religions and can therefore enforce behaviour-codes on willing submitters, or else they are not relgions and their strictures and codes can be disregarded. If the Libertarian “Minsiter of Human Skills Co-ordination” (a tautology) was to convert to Islam, then he could indent all ex-“Hospital Trust Managers” (for example) as (his) slaves, and they’d have to do his bidding at all times. if he can’t do that, then Islam is not a religion, but something else, and we have to start that deiscussion.

My quote of the day: from Charles Moore in the DT, on Afghanistan


David Davis

I have called this one _MY_ quote, because I know that a majority of libertarians, especially in Britain, think we ought not to be militarily involved in Afghanistan – or anywhere else for that matter. Therefore I will not annoy and insult these people by calling it the “Libertarian Alliance Quote of the Day” (although it ought to be.) I take responsibility for it instead of the august think-tank for which I have the privilege to be allowed to blog.

These libertarians, and others, know that I have never failed to support war in Iraq, or Afghanistan, and that I say [regularly] that the West _must_ take war, if need be everywhere that is required, to all those who cheerfully, frankly and materially oppose individual liberty anywhere. The people the West is trying to resist are not “insurgents”. They are not even “terrorists”, which is why the notion of “The War On Terror” is so glib, shallow and meaningless – these people are willing soldiers for a cause, they really believe what they are saying and they mean to destroy us: they are the willing agents of purposeful and committed deconstructors of everything they think we stand for and love.

Here’s Charles Moore:-

If we truly want to win the war in Afghanistan, we need to challenge its opponents much more fiercely. Politicians such as Nick Clegg, who congratulate themselves on asking the necessary, awkward questions, need to be interrogated about what they actually want. Do they want the first defeat of the most powerful military alliance in history at the hands of a small band of fanatics armed with little more than rifles and IEDs?

Do they have any conception of what such a defeat would mean for the world order, for the stability of countries in the region, or for civil peace in every European city? Do they not understand that this fight will be seen all over the world not as a battle for control of some jagged mountains, but between values, and that, if our values do not win, they will lose?

Please read old Charlie Moore on the whole thing: he puts some sharp perspectives on war, its roles – good or bad they may be – in intercivilisational conflict, and where we ought to go from here. I already said a couple of days ago that the alternatives are only (and ever) victory or defeat, and what it will mean. He’s probably read Sir John Keegan. I doubt most of our present politicians have even heard of the bugger.

Marching about


Michael Winning

I saw this just now.

its actually quite interesting to see the link between the fascist far British left and international jihadists and Caliphiles. Just look at this, I mean:

Things you didn’t know about Trafalgar Square


Michale Winning

You could have a little look ere it is quite entertaining.

I don’t usually comment on this sort of thing….


One sort of knows, in the background, that it goes on, but one is rather tired from striving to pay Gordon Brown and all that stuff….and Yemen and Afghanistan are rather far-away countries right now, of which we know little…

…but I even wondered about this picture for a LA caption competition – just look at the poor LITTLE girl’s face: this is her wedding photo, the poor mite – he’s “about 40″, and she’s eleven:-

David Davis

...you mean, I have to shag THAT?...

...you mean, I have to shag THAT?...

In my mind, there is no problem for a woman to marry an older man, in principle. I am 16 years older than my wife, and even the Director, Sean Gabb, married his dear and nice wife whom we know and love, when she was at the time about 12 or 13 years younger than he was. They have now caught up in age together, as you do, and as we have done. My wife is still 16 years younger than I am, but we are both now old warring scrag-bags together.

But I think for the wife to be “eleven”, as in the above picture, so it is said, is pushing at the boundaries of the envelope” a little bit, or even a lot. If this is what is going on, then I as a Libertarian who believes that individual humans have Natural Rights, believe this sort of process to be disgusting. If we believe that children are children up to a “certain age” (about which there can be some argument but broadly we all agree it is “about” 16 (or so) and therefore cannot consent legally to serious interpersonal arrangements or other sorts of contracts under that age, then that must be the case for all humans. It cannot be that our children here can’t do it, but Yemeni (or other) children can, for some spurious and quasi-religious or other pre-Renaissance pre-capitalist reason.

Ragged pre-capitalist, pre-classical-liberal, and barbarian-warlord-survival-guides, cleverly promoted and peddled as “religions”, and dealing with the disposal of debts, animals, defeated tribes, the enemy’s widows-of-beheaded-warriors, and his relict children, his men’s and boy’s severed heads, and his slaves and concubines, are no help to these poor children in the photo. Not at all.

Libertarians, when they will have regained The West (a long job, Boyo!) will have their foreign-policy-work cut out for some time. But perhaps not as long as against Lithuanian EU Commissioners who hate light bulbs.

This is the real, primary sort of Enemy-Class enemy that we ought to be “servicing”. We can then, having secured our civilisation, “service” people like that “Taliban” bloke who seems to be able to get lots of interesting and exciting weapons to attack our boys with. I can’t find a correct wikiref to “service”, which in the Cold War, meant “kill on the battlefield”. Sorry.

Nine-Eleven, plus eight


David Davis

It occurs to me every time this anniversary comes round now, that the time interval is already very much longer than the entirety of the Second World War. The proper response to this previously unimaginable atrocity, the conception of which can only have been encompassed in the minds of pre-capitalist and perverted anti-liberals, has been blunted and turned off-course on purpose, by the denizens of the Enemy Class at home in both the UK and the USA. Eight years on, and all we have accomplished is:

(1) The death of Mr Barack-O’Sin-Binliner

(2) The just and right removal and killing of the murdering butcher GramscoSaddam

(3) The beginning (only) of the writing-down of a “Taliban”, whatever that is (but it’s clearly bad) in Afghanistan.

The persons, politico-machine-spinners, media-channels and droids still walk this Earth who fail to speak sufficiently evilly, or evilly at all, of the enemies of the Western Canon of Civilisation. After eight long long years, to someone of my age and generation, this is difficult to comprehend. Yet they are pleased to bask in the lights of its benefits.

Furthermore, persons, droids and others exist that maintain 9/11 and its horrors to have been deliberately perpetrated (that’s worse than just “not prevented”, and possibly libellous) by “our” politician-shits, rather than those of another persuasion. Analogous allegations, to my mind, would be that Chamberlain “suggested to Hitler” that he might asssault Poland in order that the British Empire could go to war “for oil”. (I thought we’d invented Arab oil?  – Ed.)

Of course, it must be right to listen to “film” “stars”, above all others, and heed their grave pronouncements, which are dispensed when they seek to advise us who is responsible for the ills and disasters in our civilisation.

it woz 'im wott dunn it!

it woz 'im wott dunn it!

For they are Gods: they are divine and divinely inspired, and they can neither think no do any wrong. Their wives are pretty or have been so at some time, so they must be intelligent and wise and worth cultivating for opinion as to the fate of the world. (Can anybody tell me who or what the film actor thingy “Charlie Sheen” is, please? I do not know.)

If Western Civilisation did not contain the awful vulnerability of free discourse and allowable individual seeking of paths to truth, then things like this would never have happened. We would not be being berated by the likes of Charlie Sheen – whoever he is – and Michael Moore, for our supposed institutionalised and therefore irremediable faults. But we, as the lefties tell us, we “can’t turn the clock back now”. Libertarianism would never have come into being if the Enlightenment had not made possible the thoughts that “things could be better than they now are”.

Tell me how many Honestiores/Humiliores-type civilisations begat an articulate and well-intellectuallty-researched and founded movement for individual liberty. When you have done that, I will put up a ration-voucher for a case of TWELVE recyclable-small-bottle-emulators (USSR standard Gulag Pattern) of State-Champagne-Substitute.

Oh, and to the truthers reading this, if you have the good fortune to be directed here….if Bush _HAD_ either ordered 9/11 or been “complicit in letting it happen” (watch out for what we call “Libel” – or the US equivalent, whatever it may be called!) how many people do you think would have had to be in the loop, and their silence bought or enforced?

(I expect there will be a well-considered riposte from at least one well-known commentator, and soon.)


The headline says everything about liberals, and about GramscoStalinists


David Davis

Here you go. I will also have more to say about this one later in the context of the earlier post by me here and below.

I would like to discuss, how it is that otherwise ordinary chaps do what they do, if their Officer is in the poo. It is probably a uniquely Anglospheric thing, although I would not want really to suggest that other European Armies’ privates would not do the same for their “Blokes” (or whatever they call their NCOs these days) given the same scenarios.

Moslems are not the problem…the Enemy Class is


David Davis

I doubt very much if any Mosques have actually _/asked/_ for this….but “Avon and Somerset”*** Police have volunteered it.

It just makes the job of eradicating GramscoFabiaNazism even harder, since these buggers clearly really do believe the West is NOT Best.

If we believe that one civilisation is objectively better than others, then it would behove us to force our State-NGOs and other public-sector outfits, however Gramscian their leanings, to behave as if we believed it. Insofar as we have to tolerate the bastards for the time being.

Moslems themselves, whether “Fundamentalist” of not, are not actually the problem or even part of it. The Koran is manifestly and quite frankly not a book about a peaceful religion, but that can be fixed by a dialogue in which we will deploy the Asse-Hatt, to add the right notes of non-committment and ennui to its entire decontamination-proceedings:-

They are being used as a catspaw by the GramscoFabians, and will find themselves being eradicated later as inconvenient objectors, along with all other whole categories of persons who displease the Gramscoids’ idea of Future-World Order.

***Part of the wicked and evil 1970s-“Heatho-Walkerian-boundary-erasure-retrogressions”.

Congratulations! Nobody told us!


David Davis

Old Holborn has converted to Islam!

Given how western GramscoFabiaNazis have corrupted large parts of Islam, are using it as a cats-paw to overturn this civilisation (Islam ought to watch out what’s to become of it once they have done their “Useful Idiot” thingy with it and don’t need it any more) and currently are winning the strategic war, it seem a good tactic in the short term – say about 10 or 15 years.

Very very dangerous people, and it’s the fault of our own laziness that we shall see more and more of…


David Davis

…them….as the earth cools down, and the perverted science of “climate change” sinks its pustulent claws of falsehood, further into the consciousnesses of uncurious media consumers.

Greenpeace”, as a word, could have been invented by Goebbels, or Darré. Bloody clever, you have to admit…

Greenpeace, IFAW, PETA, ALF, and FOE, and their like, are essentially anti-libertarian, collectivist-intellectual fronts for fascist “ruralisation” movements, such as the Khmer Rouge and its foul post-Bandung cousins. There is no place for these dangerous, crazed mountebanks, on a nice cosy crowded spaceship in which everything works, hurtling through the Galaxy against an astronomical timer, whose bell-striking times we do not yet know, and at which points one or more of the Musical Chairs will get removed: they do not have the interests of the rest of the passengers at heart.

We ought to take these people far, far more seriously than we now do, and regard them as the real enemies of Western Civilisation, their plans for which they have always been cheerfully and disarmingly frank about. We just did not listen or take them “seriously” when we could (as Stalin would have said,) thinking them to be unmotivated cranks: so it’s our fault not theirs that they and not we are currently driving the planetary agenda.

“Fundamentalist Islam” is merely a distraction: its Western-Leftist-driven campaign of terrorism will ultimately founder in the face of an assault by pretty young girls armed with cashbags containing $20,000 each: one per terrorist. Muslims are being taken for suckers by the other lots named above.

And still we never learn: get a load of this then….

Speaker, it’s time to resign. Douglas Carswell tells it like it ought to be


David Davis

In the midst of all this Tulkasian levity, which we seem to be able to generate as is right and British about our travails, it’s time for the Scumbag-Speaker Michael Martin to do the right thing and resign. Nothing very much will change, about our Enemy Class, at least not this decade, or the next, but a point can have been made.

In time, people who feel the need to “enter Parliament” will be rather older than is now usual. Gordon Brown for examploe is much too young to know how to behave, and David Cameron is a mere boy who has done nothing whatsoever that had value as a way of givng value for reward received, before he “entered” Parliament. David Davis’s contributions are not quite so marginal, but he is still a bit young to be taken quite seriously, specially as he had a portico built onto his house.

The right people will have already completed the bulk of the great actions of their lives, in Classical liberal occupations.

They will feel no need to gain more money from the Treasury, since they will have more or less enough to do what they need, and they of course will want only to offer the benefit of their wide world experience and wisdom to those of us who know what should be done in a minimal State: a State whose function is to prepare and possibly provide only against “preventable evils”, but we outside this groupare busy, and have not the time or the resources to help it out.

These people will have the leisure time to do their Good Works by authorising monies for the building, say, of a Public Park with statues of Great Historical Figures who discovered The Universe, and the like. In it, perhaps, there will be a full-scale model Coal Mine, down which primary school children can descend on Saturdays and Sundays, for no money.

The LPUK offers hope here.

What they have done will be such as:- (in no special order)

manufacturing,

soldiering in reality, with guns, while States or Quasi-Religious-Pre-Capitalist-Conqueror-Memes  (such as socialism and some “religions”) yet threaten humankind,

selling things that people would like to buy,

or epic Scientific Discovery, and the endowment of free and independent institutions of Learning and Philosophy.

We want, insofar as these people are prepared to give up time in the evening of their lives to help direct the small and ample resources of a State, to what we can still regard as “the common good” (even as the libertarians we are), to be able to respect them, and not to despise them for petty Wireless Tele Vision type venality about things such as money.

All very sad and embarassing, we look like prats


David Davis

It seems all the 12 dudes arrested on suspicion of alleged terrorist offences have been released. They may well be totally innocent: time will of course tell.

Either we here are not very good at this sort of stuff, and have fluffed something bad, which is historically inconceivable,  or else All-that-Quazzera is much, much cleverer than we think.

In either case, don’t the UK’s Muslims start to think they are being set up by a power-crazy, success-hungry socialist government, which has not their, or our, interests at heart?

These dudes are far more dangerous than deeply-respected scholars wearing silly hats, and…


…we have not seen the last of them yet.

David Davis

GreeZanis and AmilaR-nights-scumbags probably represent the largest single danger to ordinary civilisation in The West. The Muslims have been set up as a stalking-horse, to divert real anger from these other guys instead. They should rebel amd perhaps seek damages from this administration.

Well, who would have thought it!


David Davis

“Sources” sat that the Police “believe” that “an Al Quaeda cell” was “days away from“…doing something a bit down south from this type writer here. Better install a few weaponised dustbins inside the Trafford, to be on the safe side….

Maybe they were, maybe they weren’t. Who now can tell? 

I don’t watch the broadcast MSM “news” any more, finding it as I do rather sensationalised and unhelpful in discerning the truth of matters. But I expect this is all over it already. Gordon Brown and our MPs are sinking fast and need to be make to look big again, with some security-theatre: why? Because everybody slumped in front of their Idiots’ Lanterns has already totally forgotten whatever it was Carla Sarkozy and Michelle Obama were wearing at G20 – and how it was designed by Sarah Hobbsbawm on an inspiratory revelation from the Dear Leader Himself. (Her reward was to get to borrow a £9,000 bra, and only have to pay 10% of the price…)

._._._._.

Let us now play an informal little war game together:

Let’s pretend that there actually are (for there may be some) dudes out there, inflamed by certain pre-Rennaissance and amoral-barbarian beliefs, egged on by a number of “deeply-respected” mountebanks and pisstaking mysogynisticoNazi scumbags who stand to gain a lot out of the result, that the West is comprised of sub-human turds who have turned our faces from God, deliberately underdress their women and other sex-slaves, and thus surely deserve to die – as must be obvious to everyone.

Now are these dudes doing what they allegedly have just been doing  _because_  we have decided to assault the buggers in faraway countries who put them up to it? This is predicated upon the notion that the vast majority of adherents to these ideas want nothing at all to do with blood and gore and explosions – which is patently clear although none of them seem to want to come out and say so….

Or, would the said dude-droids be doing it anyway regardless,  _because_ certain “belief-systems” explicitly exhort that this is the right thing to do, and it’s fun to kill people you don’t know in very large numbers? I incline to the latter.

Thus, the “War on Terror” (a conflation of ideas substantively empty of meaning as we all agree) has been talked up as an excuse by the new ruling Enemy Class of the West, to introduce control of individuals’ lives more typical of those Police States which the detonating-buggers come from, than of a Classical liberal civilisation.

Look now. We here always, always get blown up by successive historical swarms of evil fat-heads, not because of what we have done to the afforesaid fat-heads at sometime or other, but  _because_ they are innately evil (“they just are”, as a British teenager would harrumph, inarticulately unable to acticulate exactly why) and can’t stand to be outshone by real civilisations: it happens to us all the time. It’s an occupational hazard of being right.

The fat-heads’ ultimate unimportance and actual destructiveness and negative value is threatening to them, for they would if made to operate as normal humans merely fade away and become sad meths-drinkers and hobos: deep down, in what passes for their hearts, they know fully that it is as I say. They are those who would be helped to a dignified death by concerned old ladies and retired, heavily-decorated wing-commanders.

We must just stop being so wimpish and accept the fact that if we want to be “The City Upon a Hill”, we shall continue to be attacked by those who still inhabit the cesspools.

May we live in interesting times


David Davis

I don’t mind that. Not really. It keeps you awake, keeps the brain oiling over, and does what dear Jeffrey Archer says it does on the tin: “A Man is immortal until his work is done”.

My attention was drawn about five minutes ago to a change in the linkage of a post we did almost two years ago. Here it is. The original article to which I referred has “been withdrawn” (thank you Tony, old friend, for alerting me.) It irritates me only with my engineer’s hat on, since the main point of the post has been largely negated. You can get the sense of it by going to The Times (online) and seeing the comments which have been left on, but that’s poor fare really.

From now on, This Blog says:-

The interweb thingy has been severely corrupted by scumbag-sellers-of-technology-to-narks, GramscoFabioTrotskyists who want money for enslaving people, “private-sector-partners-in-IT”, and the like, to the extent that, functionally, whatever we write here or whatever I email to friends, or whatever websites we go to without exception, is “public” knowledge –  in that the State or the local Police Gauleiter can demand it at any time.

In view of this, I do really urge all conservative (which is to say, ordinary liberal and human) bloggerists, to remotely store _ALL_ source material taken off the MSM to which they would like readers to refer, somewherem er, else. Again, I could not say where: that is up to you.

But the cyberworld we live in is no longer like a paper library, where a book has to be physically burnt, by a Gramsco-Marxian Mob, to expunge it (and even then people won’t listen.) There may be only one chance to ref something the Enemy Class fears or does not like. Broken links in our archives will irritate not just us but people we want on our side.

So we have to be able to virally retransmit the stuff later.

There shouldn’t need to be all those Policemen there…


not to mention the obscene, nasty barriers.

David Davis

Update by Charles Moore, the Torygraph 14th March 2009

 

So how do you give them flowers then?

So how do you give them flowers then?

What sort of a country are we living in? What the f*** is the matter with this place, and why have the multicultiGramscoFabians done it?  

And why does Islam go along with it? It should know better, since Allah is merciful and good and all-powerful….isn’t he? Isn’t he just Leibnitz’s same God? They Moslems ought to be on our side, against statists.

If they bastard Gramsco-Fabians would have merely let us alone, we could have let them, the blasted wastrels, just live out their functionless lives shagging each other’s wives and daughters amid boring lefty books, if they’d only let us have Capitalism and liberty and let us get on with it. Good triumphs when evil Men do nothing: all they had to do was…nothing, and everything would be fine.

Why do socialists want to ruin our world, as well as their own? I think it’s a mental disorder, and they should be sectioned.

Hate-leaflets against soldiers in Luton (of all places, who’d have thought it?)


UPDATE1:- Charles Moore in the Torygraph, 14th March 2009

Here. very sad, and probably paid for by the Gramsco-Fabians, who will, sadly I am sorry to say, simply have to go. (I don’t care where, just not anyhere on this planet where they could interfere any more with normal people.)

Libertarians are mostly, I find, against the UK’s involvement in war in Iraq for certain, and to a large extent against our being in Afghanistan too. As you all know, I have always found this position to be a strange one. But a libertarian government in the UK, which comes closer with every move the Enemy Class and its apparatchiks make against liberty here, will need armed forces, not least against what will turn out to be surprising and un-looked-for enemies. I could not begin to make myself name any here now.

Right now, I view trashing of the Armed services as an anti-libertarian act, to be remembered later. I hope we are not at Versailles, and then heading for Weimar, and what followed.

I blame the Fabians, and Telly, for this: also beards, Islam, the Police, and manufactured Gramsco-Fabian racist incidents


…..for this.

David Davis

And this. It is a grand beard and he should be pleased that we notice it. The bugger must have grown the thing on purpose, it can’t have got onto his face by accident. And it knocks Karl Marx into a cocked hat. Much much better. Good stuff, wish I’d had the patence and the limitless budget for shampoo.

But if I was his wife, and I still was of the age where I had to be shagged by him, then he would either have to cut it off entirely (beards and hominid sex do NOT go together, no , not) or I would leave him: the alternatives would be repellent.

The English people notice noticeable stuff about their friends by lampooning them. that is how surnames evolved. The sooner this bugger learns that, and fits in, humouresquely and psychologically, the better he will get on with us here, and the more pints we shall buy him in the pub.

Of course, if he’s been specifically put in, to the Police or anywhere else, as  Gramsco-Fabian plant, by the Gramsco Fabians or their even fouler and even less-cultured friends the Gramsco-Marxians in Universities (most of which will just have to go) to create an institutnioally-racist-incident, or whatever the bastards and other embedded socialist psychopaths among us call this stuff now, then the situation is different.

Then, I would say that he is deemed to be part of the enemy personnel but wearing Allied Uniform. He is a “plant”, and then knows what risks he runs. See “Battle of the Bulge” and “Skorzeny”, on Wikipedia. See what happened to poor Germans captured in US uniforms behind the lines (we are _ALL_ behind the lines, in today’s Gramsco-Fabian Britain: that is what gives it the potential tone of a coming Civil War.)

This poor, and probably used, man should very very quickly find out who his real friends are (please could he google http://www.libertarian.co.uk and http://www.lpuk.org … now please! ) and stop allowing himself to be used as a pawn by the evil and wicked British-Gramsco-Fabians, before it’s too late to save him and his innocent family.


No music tonight, just this.


This.

The Night Duty Boy-First-Class Type Writer, commanding his Chimpanzee Shift, might put some music up as it’s Saturday: we shall just have to see.

Hat tip The Landed Underclass. That blog just gets better and better, and he will outlive us in The Line.

Some people are more equal than others now.

The Policeman concerned has found a clever and opaque way of saying he’s not the friend of all people: just those of them that happen to be powerful today.

Well then.

On totally unrelated matters, readers might like this book.

Is this YET _another_ anti-English smear, or do we actually torture people?


I have to say that I don’t know. But torture is “institutionally” non-English, and does not originate here. Asia, and other places, are where the Europeans learned it, from having undergone it by defending against invasive incursion in things such as Crusades (I am not allowed to say against what we were defending, for then my son would get suspended from his history course.) And to   _not_   torture while investigating, is essentially an English practise. Read your Paul Johnson: “The Offshore islanders” – chapter ref: “this Realm is an Empire”.

David Davis

This article here is full of implications and non-sequiturs. You lazy indolent buggers out there had better read the entire thing. The  (shifty-looking)  [allegedly] “up for it” guy ( = dude) walked off the plane, in the UK, to his family and to his “law_yers” (if you wozz a state, wott  seriously, regularly, “did” people, in the basement of the “Ministry” for a living, really, like Nazi Gramsco-Marxian scumbags habitually do) then would you let a torturee do that? Walk off the plane in front of camerae? No, I would not either) but the text implies he was tortured at the command of the British “security services”.

There is, as my old co-director used to say about bailiffs, Health-and-Safety-Gestapo, and other fascistically-motivated non-marketeering State-predator-scumbags who used to be paid, out of our taxation, to psychologically-torment us and functionally-impede us in the course of our business, “MORE TO COME ON THIS ONE, SON”. I take great exception to the entire thing, but I will report back tomorrow when it has all got cooked a bit more and I can smell the rats floating in the air.

Sean Gabb at the Oxford Union, 26th February 2009


Thursday, 26th February 2009…a date to watch, for some fireworks…..

At The Oxford Union,

Dr Sean Gabb of the Libertarian Alliance

shall oppose the following  motion:-

“This House Would Restrict The Free Speech of Extremists”.

Sean Gabb has often said that…..


…the “war on terror” is a thinly-veiled excuse to set up a Police State in the UK.

David Davis

I was initially not agreeing with this, thinking that the “terror” does actually exist, and was, is now and will in future be real, and is spoken of in public, with disarming frankness, by our civilisation’s enemies: often on the BBC in the name of even-handedness. But I am now coming round to Sean’s point of view.  However, IMHO the “terror” has not gone away, and anyway is just a tactic of a certain kind of war which is cheap to fight against the civilisation of a sleepy and drugged enemy, like the British population.

The problem is that most people, most of the time, don’t care enough about “terror”: in the absence of a real and immediate war, on the doorstep or overhead, it’s not really possible to keep up a sufficient state of stress in this day and age. I blame the government, its education policy (a real one, to dumb down people truly and on purpose), their friends in the broadcast media who work to this objective also, and i blame “people” themselves, for falling for it all and lying back (not) thinking of England.

Regarding terror, this state subsists for so long as they have been drugged into the statist stupor of thinking that “The Government” is “doing something” and “bringing in tougher laws”…it all sounds so as if someone is “in charge”…..so we can all get back to the latest Jade Goody stuff (poor woman, she’s dying, can’t be long now…please please put us all our misery out-of quickly, will someone (Yoda again)) and “Big Brother” and the X Factor, whatever that is.

The Devil, Peace be Upon Him, quotes from an article by Chris Dillow of Stumbling and Mumbling, focussing on the British Police State issue which is where I meant to come in. From tomorrow, it will be an offence in the UK to take photos of the Police.

(So you’d better not or else you’ll get your computer(s) seized. And your DNA forcibly taken and reverse-engineered – this I think is much worse than what it would mean for you children….who knows if they’re not going to try to clone suspect “extremists”, so they can then security-theatre-arrest them, in the years to come, thus reinfocing the fear of terror?)

There is a very interesting comment thread on the Chris Dillow article.

Libertarian Alliance Bulletin


Director’s Bulletin
14th February 2009
Introduction
Libertarian Alliance Publications
Media Appearances
Speaking Engagements
Libertarian Alliance Events
Libertarian Alliance Book Recommendation
Libertarian Alliance Conference
Negative Scanner Needed

It is cold. I am working hard to finish a book before April. My Baby Bear is now running about the house with more hands than the average Indian goddess. The other Officers of the Libertarian Alliance are also busy. Even so, there is something to report.

Our first publication of 2009 is Anthony Flood, Is Anarchy a Cause of War? Some Questions for David Ray Griffin, Philosophical Notes, No 81
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/philn/philn081.htm
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/philn/philn081.pdf

Our Editorial Director is working on several other publications at the moment, and we expect to bring out at least as much in 2009 as in the past few years.

While on the subject of publications, I will take the opportunity here to announce to the whole world what I have been telling people for several years in e-mails of response. If there is anything published by us that you want to republish, on the Internet or in hard copy, please feel free to do so. We do not ask for payment. We do not require to be asked in advance, or to be sent copies of republished material. In return for this general licence, we ask the following:

  • That the Author and the Libertarian Alliance should receive full attribution in any republication;
  • That the Author’s words should not be edited to bring him or the Libertarian Alliance into hatred, ridicule or contempt;
  • That if a work is republished by any organisation that normally pays for material, the Author should receive fair payment.

I am on the radio sometimes three times a week. Sadly, I am usually too disorganised to record the event. Here are details of the only two recordings I have been able to make this year:

4th February 2009, BBC Radio, “Was the BBC right to suspend Carol Thatcher for racist language?”
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2009-02-04-sig-thatcher.mp3

I wrote at some length on this issue in my essay “On Golliwogs, One-Eyed Scottish Idiots and Sending Poo Through the Post“, available at:
http://www.seangabb.co.uk/flcomm/flc180.htm

12th February 2009, BBC Radio, “Was it right for the British Government not to admit Geert Wilders to show his anti-Islam film?”
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2009-02-12-sig-islam.mp3

This one needs a little explaining. Geert Wilders is a Dutch politician who has made a film that claims Islam to be an intolerant religion. He was supposed to come to England last week to introduce a showing of his film in the House of Lords. However, after protests and threats of mass protests by various Moslems, the Home Office told Mr Wilders he would not be allowed into the country.

The BBC is a pro-ruling class propaganda organisation that masquerades as a public service broadcaster. This usually means that it will support the Labour Party on any issue. When it thinks it can get away with it – for example, in claims about “climate change” – the BBC will openly lie and then refuse to give airtime to dissenters. In other cases, it will set up token debates that can be waved at anyone who complains later about bias, but that do not allow opposing points of view to be fairly put. My 12th February debate was of this second kind. A lawyer who is also a Moslem and a woman was allowed to speak about three times longer than I was. She was able to claim without any pretence of hard questioning that Islam was a religion of love and peace and that this was evidenced in The Koran. She insisted that the Gert Wilders denial of this was deeply offensive to Moslems and that his film should be banned.

I was finally allowed to make my response, knowing that I might be cut off at any moment. I made two rapid points: first, that modern public order laws are a blank cheque to anyone able to put a mob on the streets; second, that if this woman wanted to live in an Islamic state, she should consider moving to Iran or Pakistan. I added that, as a woman lawyer, she might get the occasional bucket of acid thrown in her face, but would never have to feel upset about her faith.

Why do I take part in these Potemkin debates? I do so first because they sometimes turn out to be real debates. The BBC is an increasingly totalitarian organisation, but not every minute of airtime is yet controlled. I do so second because, however compressed or bluntly, it is possible to utter truths that the listeners might not otherwise hear. The listeners, of course, already know the truth. But it can brighten their day to hear it put from within the lie machine itself.

Sadly, while I am in continual demand for programmes like Drive Time Cumberland, I am never allowed on Question Time and hardly ever on Newsnight. Such, however, is the nature of the BBC.

I have agreed to speak at the following meetings:

Monday, 16th February 2009, 7:30pm – Conservative Future meeting, Westminster. I will probably denounce the Conservative Party. If I do, I shall certainly receive a polite hearing. The difference between the two main parties in this country is that Labour is evil in root and branch, while the Conservatives are just too stupid to understand what has been done to us since 1997. I think this is a closed meeting. If not and you wish to attend, you should contact Lauren Mc Evatt <lmmce86@hotmail.com>

Sunday, 22nd February 2009, 2pm – Marlborough Group meeting, The Town Hall, Marlborough, Wiltshire SN8 1AL. I will speak about the need for conservatives to bear in mind that all the things they have defended for the past hundred years have now been destroyed or co-opted, and that conservatives must start to think how conservative values in the future can be embodied in what may have to be a revolutionary settlement. If you are interested in attending this meeting, please contact Robert Francis <remfrancis@googlemail.com>

Thursday, 26th February 2009, The Oxford Union. I shall oppose the motion “This House Would Restrict The Free Speech of Extremists”.I think these meetings are restricted to members of the Union, and I do not know if they are recorded. But I am to speak at one.

Tuesday 17th March 2009 between 6.30pm and 8.30pm – The Second Annual Chris R. Tame Memorial Lecture and Drinks Reception, at the National Liberal Club, One Whitehall Place, London SW1 (nearest tube Embankment). Professor Kevin Dowd: Lessons from the Financial Crisis: A Libertarian Perspective. Full details at:
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/conferences/crtmemlec09.htm

Society for Individual Freedom

I often refer to the Society for Individual Freedom as a “sister organisation” of the Libertarian Alliance. Since the LA is actually a breakaway organisation from SIF, it is more correctly our mother organisation. Whatever the case, its quarterly magazine, The Individual is now out. You can find SIF at:
http://www.individualist.org.uk/index.htm

My very dear friend, Richard Blake, has now had his second novel published by Hodder & Stoughton. The Terror of Constantinople has been received with universal applause. You can buy copies from Amazon at http://tinyurl.com/bgx5a2. You really should buy a copy – preferably two or three dozen copies.

I also recommend the following from Civitas: Nick Cowan, Total Recall: How Direct Democracy Can Improve Britain, Civitas, London, 2008. This is one of the few Civitas publications that I can wholeheartedly recommend. It suggests radical democracy as a cure for the New Labour dictatorship. You can order it from Amazon at http://tinyurl.com/c93jr6

This has been set for the last weekend in October 2009 at the National Liberal Club in London. As yet, we are unable to make any announcement regarding speakers or subjects. However, bearing in mind the continuing economic collapse, we have decided for a second year to keep the conference fee at the old rate of �85. So many of our friends have now lost their jobs and are facing hard times in the year ahead, that we feel obliged to dip further into our reserves to subsidise the conference. Do stand by for more detailed announcements.

I have several thousand negatives from the Chris R. Tame collection of photographs. I want to have these scanned in for upload to the Internet. Is there anyone out there able and willing to lend me a good negative scanner?


Sean Gabb
Director, The Libertarian Alliance
sean@libertarian.co.uk
Tel: 07956 472 199

http://www.libertarian.co.uk
http://www.seangabb.co.uk
http://www.hampdenpress.co.uk
http://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com

FREE download of my book – Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back
Wikipedia Entry

Libertarian Alliance home

Derek Draper is funnier than the music we were going to put up. Modifications.


I forgot I’d put something like this up before. never mind, Derek can fume twice.

Friday night was supposed to be music night… and we missed that, and we even missed today, but…

David Davis

The whole “achievement” of the topic and also – more importantly – the comment thread, is really quite astounding.

Truly, there is no humour in socialism: there are no jokes: everything is utterly serious. Like Islam.

Oh, and Iain Dale better jolly well stop linking to Guido, or he’ll get spanked. For the children.

Derek Draper is funnier than the music we were going to put up.


David Davis

The whole “achievement” of the topic and also – more importantly – the comment thread, is really quite astounding.

Truly, there is no humour in socialism: there are no jokes: everything is utterly serious. Like Islam, whatever that may be. Perhaps both will actually have to go, after all.

Ummm…..which one did I mean, that should go…??

Geert Wilders, Islam and fundamentalist Christianity: further analysis


David Davis

Dizzy Thinks that some counterfactual thinking is in order. Hat tip Guido Fawkes.

We learn now that Geert Wilders is to be charged with “hate speech“-  whatever that might be. And this is intruigingly disarming and frank about what the problem is we face in the West.

Geert Wilders speaks on Fox News about his film “Fitna”


It is sad, and a bit unfortunate, that there are now fewer and fewer people who either believe, or want to say, that there is such a thing as an absolute scale of goodness or evil.

It is not shameful to believe, and to believe it strongly enough to defend the same, that the values and achievements and liberal civilisation of the Classical liberal West indeed  _are_ better than all other competitors for the honour of showing The World How To Live.

It is distressing that there are not more chaps like this strange-looking Dutchman, who reminds me of one of my maths teachers in the 1960s.

Further to Mr Geert Wilders’ movie-making and travel complications, an elucidation of the last days’ events.


David Davis

By The Landed Underclass. Read his entire and most plausible analysis here.

Geert Wilders (never ‘eard of him.) But let’s see how quickly he gets beheaded in the street in London, and then decide who’s more liberal.


Here.

UPDATE2:- This is what Obnoxio the Clown thinks of the matter. I didn’t even know Geert Wilders was a Dutch MP and that he’s been kicked out due to some threat or other from some crack-heads from upper-Jipoopooland: sorry, you see we live in Lancashire, we don’t really get multiculti-crack-heads here, ‘cozz it’s miles away, thank God at least that Copper Wire has been discovered, so I can say something and you’ll hear it by August next year…..

UPDATE1:- I gather he’s been deported. Can’t think that Keeley Hazell would approve of that, although of course she might, it’s her choice. However – let us suppose, hypothetically, just suppose – that he’d made a movie about how misogynistically-repressive the Catholic Chruch was, about women.

That it said, for example, that they don’t allow women to be priests….or that women should ordinarily “submit to their husbands’ “demands” ” – whatever that may mean…or, even – wait for it – a movie about “what a Jesuit is really thinking”. You know the sort of thing: sinister backlit shots of faceless, unrecognisable “Jesuits”, silhouetted, saying unmentionable things, such as there is Right and Wrong……

……and that “some things are good, some things are bad”.

D’you think Wilders would get deported for that?

Neither do I.

P’raps it’s because he looks like every young female Gramsco-Marxian teacher’s nightmare-phantasm of a socialist Nazi SS trooper blond beast?

…and…he ought to have worn a nice red tie…..the blueish one is death on stilts…..

Dangerous man, young, white, sinisterly-nordic, politically-incorrect,

Dangerous man, young, white, sinisterly-nordic, politically-incorrect,

Modern Police-Britain and the Spanish Inquisition: astonishingly good article by Legiron


David Davis

I ought to ask The Landed Underclass to join the Libertarian Alliance’s 100-Chimpanzee-typewriting-and-Research-Nissen-Hut “team” 0f assistant executive liberty-promotional-associates, or whatever places like Apple retail outlets call their shop-staff these days.

He has, unlike me and the Chimpanzees, been “reading around”. He came up with this. Here is the ref, from Legiron, for the book in question. I’d buy it while you’re still allowed to:-

[Source: The Spanish Inquisition, a history, by Joseph Perez. ISBN 1-86197-687-9 in case anyone's interested. The English translation by Janet Lloyd, was published by Profile Books, London, in 2004.]

Legiron asks why the “Righteous” are incensed, and scream “racist!” about anyone who thinks of voting for the BNP. His point if I understand it right is that the BNP are only exactly as autoritarian and control-freakish than the Righteous parties (which is all of them except the LPUK) and also come without the baggage of unpopular foreign wars and the EU. The Libertarian Alliance has always made clear that the BNP is merely another corporatist/state-collectivist party just like the other biggies, and that the British left hates and fears it because it competes with it for the same part of the Franchise.

I don’t like that.


David Davis

I am indebted to Brian Micklethwait for the image. I will discourse more later, about what liberalism is up against. Again.

jewsplacard

Israel Gaza UN hospitals death: here we go again, and it’s only today.


David Davis

I’ve just come in after helping a few people, and now the global world community opinion MSM amplifies it to this.

Israel drew a chorus of international criticism on Thursday after its forces attacking Gaza hit several hospitals, offices used by international media groups and the United Nations aid headquarters.

(quoted from the DT – see link above.)

What are brave little plucky Hamas up against, you people? A bunch of Nazis or what? Get real about who really has your civilisation’s interests at heart, and who does not.

Oh…….

…..and hitting the

offices used by international media groups

is of course a capital offence. Scumbags they are, lice and

Should better have known!

Hit the f*****g BBC you should have!

(Yodaquote Service plc.)

So I’m not really totally alone after all.


David Davis

Here you all go! Here’s the actual article.

The heat’s really on the Jews now.


UPDATE3:-

JANUARY 13, 2009 – During the past months, Canada has increasingly become one of Israel’s staunchest supporters as reported today in The Toronto Star.

“OTTAWA–Canada stood alone before a United Nations human rights council *** yesterday, the only one among 47 nations to oppose a motion condemning the Israeli military offensive in Gaza. (*** what is that please?)

The vote before the Geneva-based body shows the Stephen Harper government has abandoned a more even-handed approach to the Middle East in favour of unalloyed support of Israel, according to some long-time observers.

Thirty-three countries voted for the strongly worded motion, which called for an investigation into “grave” human rights violations by Israeli forces, while 13 nations, mostly European, abstained.

The United States, regarded as Israel’s greatest ally, is not a member of the council.

Marius Grinius, Canada’s representative on the council, said the language of the motion, which accused Israel of sparking a humanitarian crisis, was “unnecessary, unhelpful and inflammatory.”

He said the text failed to ‘clearly recognize’ that Hamas rocket attacks on Israel triggered the crisis.”

The report can be read in its entirety at: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/569872

UPDATE2:-

Call to move Arab League to Venezuela

KUWAIT CITY (AFP) – A Kuwaiti Islamist MP called on Wednesday for moving Arab League headquarters from Cairo to Caracas after Venezuela expelled Israel’s ambassador because of its onslaught on the Gaza Strip. “I call for moving the Arab League from Cairo to Caracas,” MP Waleed Al Tabtabai said during a special debate in parliament over the Israeli offensive. Tabtabai said that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez “has proved that he was more Arab than some Arabs”, after he expelled Israel’s ambassador to Caracas on January 6. Israel retaliated a day later, saying it was expelling Venezuela’s charge d’affaires.  - Jordan Times, January 14, 2009.

(When Hugo Chavez weighs in against you, you know you are right.)

UPDATE:- Actually the phosphorus bit is quite old….here it is on All-That-Jazzera from Monday just gone (12th.) From Moliberty’s newsblog. And here’s some moral relativism from Carmenscafe.

David Davis

Oooooooh……tut tut tut !!! White Phosphorus….what naughty boys….been raiding the chemistry-lab cupboards then, have we? Even that boy Saddam (always persisted in playing with guns and killing his fellow pupils) didn’t do that….not after he gassed the Kurds anyway, and got a bit of a fright witht he ADI he got in 1991.

And hitting a UN building building which would be inevitably and predictably full of top Hamas thugs too (probably smoking indoors)…..wonder if Israel will get a detention for that one? Or will it be an ADI? *** …or, even….EXLUSION FROM SCHOOL?

Will the punishment be mitigated because the occupants were smoking? I think we should be told.

Officially the Libertarian Alliance has nothing that could be described as a foreign policy, in regard to the various wars going on around us today. Insofar as these interest most British Libertarians, if there is no vital british interest at stake, then we should take no position and not become involved. that’s fair enough.

However, the libertarian issues of interest to this blog, which is concerned about creating and maintaining a world in which libertarian ideas can spread and become effective, are that “world opinion” seems inexorably to be turning in favour of totalitarian thugs who oppose Western-style democracies however imperfect, and against the same said democracies. In the UK in particular, much of the same media bias is in favour of the setting up of a Police State that will structurally resemble a theocratic one – although outwardly cloaked in a non-religious legal system.

We should watch the progressing demonisation of Israel with trepidation.

Look at all this hearsay:- (from All-That-Jazzera)

Doctors in Gaza City have told Al Jazeera that people have been admitted suffering burns consistent with the use of the controversial chemical white phosphorus.

Human rights campaigners say that Israeli forces have used the munition, which can burn away human flesh to the bone, over Gaza City and Jabaliya in recent days.

Al Jazeera’s Ayman Mohyeldin, reporting from the Shifa hospital in Gaza City, said: “Doctors here say they are seeing unprecedented levels of deep burns.

“They cannot categorically say that white phosphorus is being used, they are saying that the munitions being dropped are unprecendented.”

Residents in densely-packed Jabaliya have described Israeli forces exploding shells that drop scores of burning fragments and spread suffocating smoke.

“Its the first time we see this type of weapon, it must be new and its seems like its phosphorous,” one resident told Al Jazeera.

“Its suffocating and has a deadly poisonous smell that I am sure will cause a lot of sickness and disease on all of the civilians here,” he said.

***All-day-Isolation

How history will show that George Bush was right.


David Davis

Andrew Roberts will be proved right about Bush here. (UPDATE:- for the majority-commentariat who view Bush just slightly less positively than I do, Andrew Roberts is more famous than I am and makes a lot more (than no) money out of his opinions.)

And Bush was right here:-

I wonder if Keeley Hazell thinks he was right? I suspect not, since she has been on SkyNews telling everyone how she’s in favour of stopping climate change:

but like Andrew Roberts, she can tell people what to do:-

keeley-2

Osama bin Laden will continue to remain dead


David Davis

Here. And here he is, speaking on tape while dead:-

Perhaps the West should release a tape of this stuff below, with a pic of “the West” leaning beside a SA-80 and praising God:-

Time for some plain plane porn I think:-

Getting at Prince Harry: the new lefty bloodsport (allowed of course)


David Davis

Prince Harry has been publicly lynched (again.) About three hundred years ago, he jocularly referred to one of his soldier mates as a “Paki” – which is what he was, and still is I think – in good humour, in an airport departure lounge in front of the other young soldiers. I don’t recall any complaints or Daily Marxist Mirror headlines at the time, do you?

Worse follows! Apparently he’s “offended” all “British Asians” – has anybody asked the Chinese, the Japanese, the Iranians, the Iraqis, the Indians, the Nepalese, the Khazakhstanis for that matter, and all the others, if they have been “offended”? Or the Siberian Esquimos…or have I offended these by failing to class them as “Inuit”?

As Auberon Waugh would have said, “I’m not suggesting that it’s yet time to summarily shoot all people who own phones with video-cameras in them”….but do you get the impression that there are some people about who, on purpose, use liberating Western technology to bring back the Endarkenment?

Perhaps I should be offended to be called a “Brit”. I happen to think it’s chav, low, horrid and insulting, and far far far worse than “Pom” or “Rosbif”.  “Brit”  of course ought to offend all English Englishmen, or even British British-people (so of course the BBC uses the awfully repellent word “Brit” all the time as often as it can – just as “Paki” is supposed to offend all Pakistani Pakistanis, is it not?

Oh, and I DON’T think Harry was wrong to go to a party four years ago wearing a swastika armband.

(1) It was a party, you wear silly stuff, and get drink while satirising bad-people.

(2) They were all young. This is their job.

(3) WE can’t aribrush nazis socialists who killed people more scientifically and industrially than other socialists did or still do, out of history, out of a desire to be “nice”, by pretending they didn’t exist. Further to this matter, look as this assinine piece of supplication by bureaucrats.

Hamas does not need to attack Israel: discuss.


David Davis

The pointless slaughter being described, although no different qualitatively from all other pointless socialism-induced-slaughters of blameless civilians which have ever occurred and will ever occur in the future – as they will – is the result of just one thing: a Stalinist outfit deflecting our gaze from its own deliberate uselessness as regards the supposed requirements of “its” citizens captives, and towards instead a pretend-enemy: in this case Israel.

Israel is an increasingly vulnerable target of course, as memory of three things as follows: the historiographic-philosophical reasons why Jews think they exist as an identifiable entity (largely un-understood), the Holocaust, and 9/11, all recede into folk-legend….or, worse……..cease to be aired on British mainstream “Wireless Tele Vision”.

In the minds and dark hearts of people such as Hamas, whatever that might be, and its friends, whoever they may be at any given time, it is easy to demonize Israel. Israel , seen across a barbed-wire fence, represents the negation of all their deeply-held beliefs about how rights and duties work. Israel has made the Hamas-driven poverty in the Gaza strip hideous, because Israel, just a fence away, has shown what can and will be achieved instead in a pluralist democracy. Israeli democracy is not perfect, but then neither is Gordon Brown’s, Nicholas Sarkozy’s or Tony Blair’s. But it is a galactic distance improved from that exercised by Hamas, if they do at all, inside Gaza.

I cannot think of a war, in those centuries of history which I have studied, in which either or both sides did not accidentally or even deliberately kill “women and children”, or even civilian non-combattants generally. I’m not sure either what today’s British lefties are silent about the fact that there’s a poor woman trying to save her “nine children” from Israeli shellfire.

Rather than blame the Israeli Navy for threatening her children with its shrapnel, should they not ask why Hamas has not arranged doctors to prescribe her the “Morning After Pill”, to be obtained at any secondary school “student services office” near her home?

Why should she have nine children, but any of my teenage students, if they wish, ought not to? She probably started when she was 14 or 15. Why ought they then not to? We ought to celebrate diversity and adopt it surely? No?

Where is the moral equivalence that we seek from these lefties, when we need it the most?

Hamas is saying it’s going to do a Stalingrad:-

A Hamas delegation travelled to Egypt to discuss ceasefire terms but its leaders vowed to continue the rocket attacks and said its were committed to attack Israeli troops “in every street, every alley and at every house.”

So what do “ceaefire terms” mean, then, when you say you’re going to do FISH to the end regardless?

I thought Israel was (a) suppling electric power, (b) sending in “aid” (consisting of food and medicines etc) and (c) had evacuated the Gaza Strip of Israelis some years ago?

What do the buggers want? Spaghetti?

it also does not look to me, a bumpkin from Lancashire, that the Ghazis are doing much growing of stuff. look at this Googleearth image:-

Don't grow stuff if the enemy gives it you!

Don't grow stuff if the enemy gives it you!

Israel, Gaza and a load of crap. Happy new year.


David Davis

I know! I’m French! F*** les docteurs et les chirugéons! Let me through….I’m an énarque! L’état: c’est moi!

I’ll tell the Israelis to send in loads of food and medicine to the enemy!

In return for which Hamas will see if they can stop firing rockets and any other sorts of stuff, against the same said Israelis!

Gordon Bennett…..

Very logical as you can see.

Why ought Gaza to need aid? What is wrong with its government and its polity, that it can’t provide for itself? Why has “aid” always to come from whom it says is its sworn enemy? What is Egypt (not) doing, and why not? What is Iran (not) doing and why not?

And where’s Saudi Arabia in all this: where’s the money gone? Don’t come crying to me that some “princess” has auctioned her lingerie for food for Gazans….And don’t all you lefties come in here and tell me that Israel won’t let the stuff in. Bastards you are, liars and scumsucking turds.

If Israel goes down, it will be a setback for liberalism. You’ll all have to work much harder, later, for less certainty. You heard me say this here, read my lips, on the LA blog, on 30th December 2008, at 19.44 GMT. Out.

UPDATE: Counting Cats sums it all up. But nobody will listen.

Gordon Brown pretends to wear his Christianity on his sleeve when it is convenient….but…


…he has nothing at all to say about this matter. As a 10-year-old boy he unwittingly invites in a hoodlum and then makes capital out of it when he needs to lambast “Tory Cuts” – I expect that’s what will be spun out of it later.

David Davis

I wonder what aspect of the “Muslim State” they were criticising? To me, the phrase “Muslim State” is either tautological or else a truly frank expression of what the objective of Islam is.

Ah, that’s what it is…..pleaded guilty to making seditious comments “with intent to bring hatred or contempt against the president or the government”.

Personally, I’d want to do what they have done, if it’s true, to about 95% of what pass for “governments” in poor benighted Africa. But I haven’t got enough moral fibre, sorry. So I just blog

I’ll probably get rotting cabbages thrown at me….


David Davis

….but in 1967, the world MSM, the UN (implicitly) and all politically-consicous individuals who had any education whatsoever, sided with Israel in the “six-day-war”. In my school, I was in a minority of two, among 551 boys and about 45 masters.

Today, David Miliperson “calls for” lots of stuff about ending the violence.

As a libertarian, I ought, ought I not (?) to be concerned about violent threats to the only approximately-functioning Western pluralist democracy in the Middle East – and I didn’t mean Iraq, or even Jordan (at least it’s run by Sandhurst graduates, we should be thankful for small mercies there) both of which are still even more approximate.

In a world entering endarkenment, and where some states still partially if imperfectly resemble democracies bent on individual liberty in principle if not in practise, it is not sensible to do nothing or (worse) to have no opinion, or (even more worse!) to have the wrong one. Just as it was not sensible not to attack Axis Powers with bombers when we had nothing else.

Approximations of political pluralism – such as Israel –  are less harmful in the short term than refutations of it – such as “Hamas”. Sorry. I can’t help pissing myself in hysterical mirth….I think of “hommous” in Waitrose, of all places. How can you seriously project a grave and important image, and expect unbrainwashed Western  Telestalinised masses (not many of those now) to take you seriously, if you sound like a holiday-food they eat in “Greece” or “Turkey”?

(The afforesaid masses don’t know where those places are…..they flew there. And the young Chingfordettes who thought they’d married the hairy barmen they met last week at the Taverna, have also been flown back….)

This blasted ongoing business in the Muddle East has got to stop. What now comprises “Israel” was a pile of dessicated rocks lightly coated with congealed dried blood, until the British saw sense in 1917 and allocated it to the prevailing ethnic majority in possession – Sephardic Jews. Fascist cockroaches unwittingly – and it would certainly have been unintended if you’d asked the bastards V. I. Ulianov and his chums, followed by their later chums Hitler and Stalin – did it a favour, by causing a leakage to it of Askenazy talent and population. If the surrounding populations didn’t like that, then there was – and is – still plenty of dessicated rocks and dried blood for hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds of miles, all about the place, for them to inhabit.

I don’t think many libertarians could take issue with the position that if Israel keeps on getting rocketed, by outfits laregly supported by western fascists like the EU and the UN, then it ought to be allowed to defend itself, if needed by draining the swamp: that way the “violence” will stop……for a bit. After all, it was all right when Russia did it to Georgia, wasn’t it….. (anybody heard anything of Georgia recently? Tony, any ideas?)

It’s very interesting how, in a mere 40 years, the whole direction of world discourse can turn 180 degrees. i faind that very very fast; don’t you?

Don’t worry. We WILL post a libertarian alliance Christmas message, even though it “is evil”. (But not 4 abt 8 -10 days yet, gotta write it.)


David Davis

Anjem Choudary thinks we ought not to. All right then, Anjem, old bean, come and do your worst! Pull down my children’s Christmas tree, while they wait!

(I’ll email you when it’s up, so you can get up to Lancashire, if you can find it.)

Poor old socialists, they’ve bust the Banks so they’re sitting about in the Student Unions, with nothing left to do for now….

Conspirary Theories, and fun.


David Davis

This blog here, already thinks that the Bombay terrorists thingy is a “false flag” operation.

Nah. I do not think so. I think the Islamists want to pull down India, like they are doing to Britain and the USA. India will be free and liberal if they are not careful and can’t stop this in time. And it has Nuclear Weapons (thank God…..for now… unless some other people get control of them.)

What do YOU think?

What do YOU think?

I think that a Islamic terrorist is wearing an orange band (even if he is), and whatever that is or may be, to make the gullible self-hating-Western media think that this is a “false-flag” operation, and that he is a Hindu whom the organisers have not properly dressed.

I do not think that the very clever Indians, in their government, if they had done such a plan, would allow an actor to go “on stage” while still yet “improperly dressed”. It is a simple matter of continuity. we used “girls” to check that sort of thing in the days when Hollywood made good fillums.

Here’s a fillum:-

Islamic terrorism … India, being the next country to succeed to get out of the Dark Ages, wil be hit.


David Davis

I mean, it’s obvious, isn’t it.

If any country shows signs, from now on, of encompassing liberty, whether economic or social or both, then HIT IT.

Fortunately, India will take some pulling down. We took some good stuff, and over four centuries of trial and error, made it even better.

Then, they will have to go fo China. I don’t fancy their chances there much. But it’s a pity that we’ll have long been anihilated, or worse, and won’t be allowed to view on the interweb their destruction at the hands of the logical Chinese, who will see liberty as better than pre-capitalist desert-warlordian barbarism.

Interesting analysis of the historiography of something which has been troubling me.


David Davis

Here at David Thompson.

Nah.


David Davis

No, sorry. This is a wind-up. There are not thousands of Moslem young men after our blood, here, in the UK. Yes there may be a couple, maybe two or three, here and there in sad places like Luton and Leicester, and maybe (even sadly as it’s North?) Bradford…or even Blackburn (a sad socialistically-socialised city – just try driving round it sometime) or even somewhere else. But “they’ve” got tabs on the poor sad buggers. This is just all part of the Police-State-thingy that we whinge about.

These poor young men are not really trying to kill us all. I now believe Sean Gabb more than I did before.

No: they just want to have sex with other Year-10 and year-11 girls, just like their chums do, who are Christian secularised.

Atheist buses, what a fun idea. Quite appropriate…who’d travel on a bus for God’s sake!!!???


David Davis

Hat tip the Devil.

So where does that leave you, “militant” Islamists, then? Arrestable on charges of fraud?

Here’s the bus…don’t miss it like those fascist pigs in Europe said we would:-


What in heaven’s name drives these people, if not hatred? … or is it confident bullying?


David Davis

I have no idea what the “X factor” is. However, it seems to be some organisation which has released a charity single for british soldiers.

Look guys….we Christians don’t go about threatening all sorts of dire and unspecified retribution to other religions, pre-capitalist desert-survival-guides, crank hypotheses and weird belief-systems, and their strictures, saying that things they do and say are “anti-Christian”.

How about you reciprocate? Otherwise people will think, increasingly, and possibly with justification, that you lot are just humorously twisting our tails and bullying us because you know you can get away with it.

And that would never do, would it!

You say you are a religion of peace. Be one.