Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Monkey on a Stick . . . (who's the monkey? who's holding the stick?)

There is a feeling of unease, of disgust, of disaster looming, throughout this nation.


We are under . . . a  Two-Pronged Attack on the United States

one from Socialist-Fascists the other from the Moslem jihadists

whose side is our administration on?
ours?  or the other?

This is the eve before a storm

but . . . ever the optimists, we must see that there is . . .

a red sky

[in '76 the sky was red, and old King George couldn't sleep in his bed--Ballad for Americans, talking about the American Revolution]

but, red sky at night--sailors' delight

In the Meantime, Socialism and National Socialism (Nazism) not versus, because as far as the populace is concerned, both mean living under oppressive regimes:

Fending Off the Egalitarian Impulses of the Socialist State

Posted By Herbert London On September 20, 2009 @ 12:00 am In Culture, History, Money, Politics, US News

via http://neveryetmelted.com/2009/09/21/the-philosophy-of-envy/

Whether it is the socialism espoused by the Nazis or the socialism of the former Soviet Union or the socialism that is emerging in the United States, there is one overarching sentiment, however different socialism in these three societies may be. Socialism everywhere expresses envy of excellence by treating the contributions and wealth of the successful as the wages of sin.

The Nazis saw the sin as a Jewish conspiracy, the Soviets saw sin as exploitation by the bourgeoisie, and what is emerging in the United States is the sin of the wealthy.

In the Obama administration greed is considered the sin that must be opposed. But greed, whatever its deficiencies, is, as Adam Smith pointed out, an incentive for the promotion of capitalism which, in the aggregate, has a salutary influence on the economy. To combat greed, the socialists emphasize envy. Since equality is the goal, even trivial differences in income are exaggerated and the progressivity in the tax system is employed as a blunt instrument to impose equality.

Lincoln said “you can’t make a poor man rich by making a rich man poor.” But President Obama seems to believe that wealth is invariably related to the wages of sin and must be controlled or, to use his language, “spread around.” To make sure this happens, government must expand and, in so doing, the private sector will inevitably contract. That explains why socialism, which purports to represent the interests of the average person, ends in overwhelming government control or outright tyranny.

Just as greed has its excesses, envy manifests excess in schadenfreude, a desire to destroy rivals or, in this instance, penalize the alleged wages of sin. If you assume wealth is bad, invariably a function of illicit or inappropriate acts, it must be penalized, i.e. a surtax to pay for universal health care or a 40 percent income tax. Even though one percent of the population pays for close to forty percent of government revenue, it is still not enough for the masters of egalitarianism. They ask, why should so few, have so much? And they answer by arguing for leveling, i.e., a collision at the income mean point through transfer payments.

Of course, what the egalitarians never realize is that at some point the rich will take their assets to a safe harbor or, assuming there are restrictions on moving capital, will simply be less productive. Contrary to the supposition of the enviers, it takes only about ten percent of the population to be a catalyst for innovation and wealth generation. If there aren’t rewards for this portion of the population, there won’t be the technological breakthroughs that foster economic growth.

That, of course, is the rub for President Obama. On the one hand, he needs to tax heavily in order to generate the revenue for his ambitious domestic agenda. On the other hand, excessive taxation will most likely result in more disappointing revenue projections than he anticipated, since the wealthy will be less productive than they were in a low tax environment

That socialism cannot work is the inevitable conclusion of Ayn Rand’s Fountainhead and the historical experience of the twentieth century. If excellence isn’t the goal of personal achievement, conformity or mediocrity reigns. If wealth isn’t a reward for success, poverty reigns. And if success is a sin, failure is a virtue.

Yet, despite this reality, socialism is a persistent idea. My suspicion is that socialism is related to the belief that most people think they can be free-riders; they can get something for nothing by taking from the rich. But this Robin Hood psychology is, in fact, a form of theft. It subtracts from the fruits of one’s labor and, without apologies, contends arbitrarily that some people simply have too much.

Alas, socialism condemns “too much” and ends up giving too little. What it offers is an ideal, an abstraction of equality that is intoxicating. But its destructive influence inexorably becomes apparent. Why be productive if others produce for you? And why would you oppose high taxes if these revenues offer “free assistance”? As Hayak noted the Road To Serfdom is littered with promises of the golden age, a time when the government provides all that you need.

President Gerald Ford put this matter in perspective when he noted “that a government that can give you everything you want will be large enough to take everything you have.” It’s too bad President Obama doesn’t read history.
Article reprinted from Pajamas Media: http://pajamasmedia.com/
URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/fending-off-the-egalitarian-impulses-of-the-socialist-state/

So much for Fascism and Socialism that is staring us in the face.  What is its face?  Well, look at your TV screen, you'll see it all over the place.

And what about the jihad?  Do you feel safe with who's steering "the ship of state?"  Or is he in league (maybe just a little bit?  Or more?) with those whose ideology includes:

"But when the forbidden months [Ramadan] are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, And seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war."
- Qur'an-(9:5)

from http://www.thegreenarrow.co.uk/index.php/writers/arrow-straight/179-while-the-population-sleep

and from the same source. . .
One ex-Muslim put it like this, “Muslims act meekly when they lack sufficient power. Once in power, the Real Islam emerges from its shell of dissimulation and puts free people and their way of life to the sword.”

and . . .

A Picture of things to come?
Venezuelans  under Chavez

CARACAS, Venezuela (CNN) -- Venezuela's most-watched television station -- and outlet for the political opposition -- went off the air after the government refused to renew its broadcast license.

Radio Caracas Television (RCTV), which has been broadcasting for 53 years, was replaced by a state-run station -- TVes -- on Monday. The new station's logo began running immediately after RCTV went off the air.

Leading up to the deadline, police on Sunday used water cannons and what appeared to be tear gas to break up thousands of demonstrators protesting the government's decision to close the country's most-watched television station.

Rulers come and rulers go, however. (Something to be thankful for)


A play by Eugene O'Neill. Originally called The Silver Bullet, the play is highly effective as pure theater through its use of such elements as pulsing drums, gunshots, and the dramatic jungle setting. Dialogue does little to advance the action. Jones serves as a symbol for a debased humanity . . .

Eugene O'Neill Play Synopsis at


from http://www.curtainup.com/emperorjones.html, segments from the play

Talk polite, white man, talk polite. I'm boss here. — Jones

He is laughing at, and exploiting the islanders by levying huge taxes so that he can live in luxury. "From stowaway to emperor in two years -- that's going some!" he brags. His behaviour emulates white rulers. When he rings the bell to summon servants all that can be heard is the buzz of a fly.

. . . somewhere, in the background, an African witch doctor dances-- frenetically.

Now for the Title Piece of this post: Monkey on a Stick

Photo: Historical Photo from "The History of Toys" by Antonia Fraser

As to the Title of this Post:  "Monkey on a Stick"

Question is: "Who's holding the stick?"

George Soros?


Saul Alinsky?

William Ayers?

Jeremiah Wright?

King of Saudi Arabia?

Karl Marx?

Adolf Hitler?

All of the Above?

None of the Above?

the above-named personages either are already dead . . .

. . . or deserve to be

or, is . . .

. . . he who holds his own stick holding a fool?

And the monkey?  Holding his own stick?  thinks he's holding his own stick?  Hardly.

The following is paraphrased from a segment at The Coronation of the Emperor Jones http://islamicdanger4u.blogspot.com/2009/01/coronation-of-emperor-jones.html:

He is laughing at, and exploiting the citizens by levying huge taxes while he and his family live in luxury. "From Community Organizer (read "Rabble Rouser") to emperor in a few years -- that's some accomplishment!" he brags. His behaviour tries to emulate former presidents.

. . . somewhere, in the background, the ghosts of Saul Alinsky and a Kenyan absentee father dance -- frenetically

for the original see http://islamicdanger4u.blogspot.com/2009/01/coronation-of-emperor-jones.html

and . . .

. . . in Vulcan's workshop what is there being cast of silver?

while The Emperor runs endlessly through the jungle of his fears?

Monday, September 28, 2009

OBAMA SUCKING MORE AND MORE FROM THE PUBLIC COFFERS - while Afghanistan remains in limbo

While the sh*t or get-off-the-pot pressure and Obama's indecision about what to do in Afghanistan continues . . .

. . . this president, of uncertain persuasion and origins, continues his globetrotting hijinks this time with two women

From Texas Fred:

Barack Hussein Obama is taking a vacation to Copenhagen, Denmark, using Air Force 1, and all of the logistics nightmare that entails, all the power of the office of President, and doing it on the taxpayers dime, on the pretense of lobbying for Chicago to be awarded host status for the 2016 Olympics. Obama is hoping that the payoffs, kickbacks and usual Chicago corruption will filter back into his retirement fund without being discovered.

There, I rewrote the opening paragraph and told it truthfully. [-Texas Fred]


WASHINGTON (AP) – President Barack Obama will travel to Denmark to support Chicago’s bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics, projecting the highest-ever White House profile in lobbying for the international event.

Valerie Jarrett, a senior adviser to the president, told The Associated Press Monday morning that Obama will leave Thursday and join his wife, Michelle, in Copenhagen, where they’ll make the pitch to the International Olympic Committee. Obama would be the first U.S. president to actually appeal in person to the International Olympic Committee for an Olympics event.


For a lot more information about Afghanistan, see A Comprehensive Strategy: Afghanistan Force Requirements and the links given there

A Comprehensive Strategy: Afghanistan Force Requirements

September 21, 2009
Kimberly Kagan, Frederick W. Kagan

From the Authors

"President Obama identified a number of questions that must be answered before he can make a considered decision about whether or not to increase troop levels in Afghanistan. The assessment of General Stanley McChrystal, which appeared in the Washington Post on Monday, answers those questions. The assessment does not provide an estimate of the forces actually required, which were to be submitted in a later document.

The American people need to have a detailed explanation as soon as possible of what forces are needed, how they might be used, and why there is no alternative to pursuing the counter-insurgency strategy that General McChrystal proposes if we are to achieve the fundamental objectives President Obama announced in his March 27 speech, '…to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future.'

To inform the national discussion, therefore, we have produced a report that argues for an addition of 40,000-45,000 US troops in 2010 to the 68,000 American forces that will be there by the end of this year. The report illustrates where US, NATO, and Afghan forces are now and where additional forces are needed to accomplish the mission. It links the US force requirements to the growth of the Afghan National Security Forces on an accelerated timeline. It explains the methodology for assessing the adequacy of a proposed force-level. This product, and our recommendations and assessments, are entirely our own—they do not necessarily reflect the views of General McChrystal or anyone else." - Fred and Kim Kagan

Download the PDF Version

Download the PowerPoint Version

from http://www.understandingwar.org/press-media/commentary/afghanistan-force-requirements

also http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/21/fending-off-failure-in-afghanistan/#kagan

and How Not to Defeat al Qaeda
To win in Afghanistan requires troops on the ground. More analysis by Fred and Kim Kagan.

"No Alternative"-Guest Blog @ New York Times
September 22, 2009
Megan Ortagus
ISW [Institute for the Study of War] President Kimberly Kagan and American Enterprise Institute's Director of Critical Threats Project Fred Kagan present their comprehensive strategy for success in Afghanistan.

Further, see

Order of Battle - Combat Forces in Afghanistan

For more and continuing Afghanistan dicussions, also see How to Stop the Islamic Jihad

How Not to Defeat al Qaeda
To win in Afghanistan requires troops on the ground.


Saturday, September 26, 2009



"The agitator's job, according to Alinsky, is first to bring folks to the "realization" that they are indeed miserable, that their misery is the fault of unresponsive governments or greedy corporations, then help them to bond together to demand what they deserve, and to make such an almighty stink that the dastardly governments and corporations will see imminent "self-interest" in granting whatever it is that will cause the harassment to cease.In these methods, euphemistically labeled "community organizing," Obama had a four-year education, which he often says was the best education he ever got anywhere. Here are the words of Alinsky himself, quoted from Rules for Radicals . . . . Read carefully--and consider as you read: THIS--when all the BS is stripped away--is what Obama . . . tout[ed]  . . . as his "experience" to be President of the United States:

First, Alinsky himself on "The Process of Power":

From the moment the organizer enters a community he lives, dreams, eats, breathes, sleeps only one thing and that is to build the mass power base of what he calls the army. Until he has developed that mass power base, he confronts no major issues. He has nothing with which to confront anything. Until he has those means and power instruments, his “tactics” are very different from power tactics. Therefore, every move revolves around one central point: how many recruits will this bring into the organization, whether by means of local organizations, churches, service groups, labor unions, corner gangs, or as individuals. The only issue is, how will this increase the strength of the organization. If by losing in a certain action he can get more members than by winning, then victory lies in losing and he will lose.

Change comes from power, and power comes from organization. In order to act, people must get together.

Power is the reason for being of organizations. When people agree on certain religious ideas and want the power to propagate their faith, they organize and call it a church. When people agree on certain political ideas and want the power to put them into practice, they organize and call it a political party. The same reason holds across the board. Power and organization are one and the same…

The organizer simultaneously carries on many functions as he analyzes, attacks, and disrupts the prevailing power pattern…

Therefore, if your function is to attack apathy and get people to participate it is necessary to attack the prevailing patterns of organized living in the community. The first step in community organization is community disorganization. The disruption of the present organization is the first step toward community organization. Present arrangements must be disorganized if they are to be displaced by new patterns that provide the opportunities and means for citizen participation. All change means disorganization of the old and organization of the new.

This is why the organizer is immediately confronted with conflict. The organizer dedicated to changing the life of a particular community must first rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression. He must search out controversy and issues, rather than avoid them, for unless there is controversy people are not concerned enough to act…

An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent; provide a channel into which the people can angrily pour their frustrations. He must create a mechanism that can drain off the underlying guilt for having accepted the previous situation for so long a time.

Out of this mechanism, a new community organization arises…

The job then is getting the people to move, to act, to participate; in short, to develop and harness the necessary power to effectively conflict with the prevailing patterns and change them. When those prominent in the status quo turn and label you an “agitator” they are completely correct, for that is, in one word, your function—to agitate to the point of conflict…

Enter the labor organizer or the agitator. He begins his “trouble making” by stirring up these angers, frustrations, and resentments, and highlighting specific issues or grievances that heighten controversy…

And so the labor organizer simultaneously breeds conflict and builds a power structure. The war between the trade union and management is resolved either through a strike or a negotiation. Either method involves the use of power; the economic power of the strike or the threat of it, which results in successful negotiations. No one can negotiate without the power to compel negotiation.

This is the function of a community organizer. Anything otherwise is wishful non-thinking. To attempt to operate on a good-will rather than on a power basis would be to attempt something that the world has not yet experienced.

From, and more at, http://islamicdanger4u.blogspot.com/2008_09_01_archive.html

Must Reading:  "Obama, Community Organizing, and Saul Alinsky"

Friday, September 18, 2009

American Echoes to the UK's "The Start of The End Game"

Echoes to  A Warning to All of Us!
from the UK's The Home of The Green Arrow

From Papa Ray, West Texas,USA:

"They [Europeans, UK. ed] try to integrate with Muslims, they are accepting terrorism and bowing down to the sheiks." Yep, they are trying to intergrate WITH the Muslims, instead of the other way around. You know, the time honored way, where the immigrants intergrate WITH the inhabitants of the country that they migrate TO. Another clue: "You are the same flesh and blood they are - today's Germans are no more and no less capable of genocide than you or I.

Yea, we all are from the same blood, but as you know the human race as a whole is a murderous, barbaric bunch. It always has been. Its not any different today, its the same blood. The culture in different areas of the world dictate how thick the membrane is between the barbarian and the civilized person. Or how he reacts to danger. Does he call the police, or does he pick up a gun and confront the danger?

Even here in these somewhat United States, the culture differences are easy to spot. If you have been around this Republic or have put some study into it, you will know that Americans as a whole are made up of many cultures, but because of their "Americanization" (is that a word?) they are not like your average [e]uropean (old or new).

When you cross over into the south and southwest of this Republic, you have no trouble seeing that these people are really friendly. But if you study people, like some do, you might pick up on something else. "These" people are survivors, the membrane that separates them from the barbarians is thin, thinner than in other parts of this Republic and much thinner than some parts of the world.

So, yes, some Americans are more capable of genocide than other Americans and Germans.

Where I live, the most important thing is survival of the family, our children and our women. Nothing is higher than that except God. Our country comes right after our family and way before our lives.

Yep, we are willing to die for our country and for our families, but we don't intend to. We intend to make the Islamics die for their Allah. They seem to want to get there so fast, we will be glad to send them.

The foregoing was first discovered by me at

It's from Papa Ray, West Texas, USA
Redneck Texan

[bold emphasis mine, lw]


George Mason said:

I think that the jihadis will feel so emboldened that they will bring their destructiveness to our homeland. I also think that will be their undoing because I think Mr. and Mrs. Average American will clean them out of America.

What really concerns me, however, is that this may well precipitate another civil war within America. That war will pit those of the Left (the anti-Americans) against those of the Right (the pro-Americans). Wars may be necessary occasionally, but they are never good. Even the best have a real Pyrrhic victory quality to them. Recovering from a civil war would be as horrible as having one.
George Mason http://sixthcolumn.typepad.com/sixth_column/

Formerly called Sixth Column

America’s future requires a second revolution—but not before Americans are ready to do it right and do it completely. Our forebearers told us the “what”:

“The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on Earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but only to have the law of nature for his rule”; and “Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: First a right to life, secondly to liberty, and thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can." (Sam Adams)

"I have sworn upon the alter of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” (Jefferson)

A new light illuminating the future has given us the “why”: "Anyone who fights for the future lives in it today…man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute." (Ayn Rand)

As for the “how,” “It does not take a majority to prevail…but rather an irate, tireless minority, who keep on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” (Samuel Adams)

So far, Muslims have their greatest victory over us by making us shift into defensive living with regard to them. We tread with fear of "offending" them, of inciting world-wide riots by Muslims against us, and of always trying to curry favor with irrationalists. We used to go about life, guided by our own thoughts and desires, and no defensiveness. It is our fault that we let them dominate our behavior. STOP IT! Americans do not live defensively! Let savages fear us!


George Mason's incisive insights into the American dilemma, however, were not to be available for much longer.
In July,George Mason posted the following:

Summer Irregularity
We did not intend to be slow and irregular in writing and publishing this summer, but the Unexpected has been popping up, including some health matters. We will remain sporadic most likely across the summer.

Posted by George Mason on Wednesday, 18 July 2007 at 10:19
Comments (2)

Then in November 2007:

Health issues continue to interfere with our activity and will do so for a while longer. These blogs will remain active, but active-in-slow-motion, until we can get back in the saddle again.

Posted by George Mason on Thursday, 15 November 2007 at 06:48
Comments (5)  

But sadly, this was not to be . . .

from http://sixthcolumn.typepad.com/cubedseducationblog/:

November 24, 2007
George Mason is Gone

George Mason, My Beloved, the light of my life for over forty-five years, and the author of the websites Sixth Column Against Jihad, Brushfires of Freedom, The New Enlightenment, and Nous American, died unexpectedly on 21 November due to complications following surgery.

Thanksgiving was his favorite holiday because it celebrated the first governing document of the United States, our Constitution. His love for true rights, not the "rights" that our children are taught about in today's schools, drove him to defend and protect them fiercely as a senior Naval officer for 25 years, as a triple-boarded physician, and as a blogger.

His death was completely unexpected. I held his hand as he died, and I doubt I can recover from this loss. It is too deep and complete.

I intend to leave all the sites up, and perhaps one day I may write again - there is a desperate need for a major course change in education and philosophy.


Posted by Cubed on November 24, 2007 at 04:04 PM at
Project Education Renovation
Comments (14)

To conclude this post, we look again at . . .



Terrorism is the tactic of initiating aggression against civilians for a political purpose. Retaliatory force used by a government to eliminate a population’s support for aggression is not terrorism; it is moral and political justice.

* * *

William Tecumseh Sherman’s defense of his country, his Constitution, and his values offers a great lesson for us. We can preserve our own freedom only if we recognize ourselves as good, and act with clarity, purpose, and resolve. We should observe the parallels to the modern day, including the enemy that brought down the Twin Towers, its subjugation of women and "infidels" to a brutal totalitarian ideology, and its pursuit of nuclear weapons. And we should consider where we would be today had Sherman compromised with his enemy.

[close quote]

Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman and Total War

Thursday, September 17, 2009

Is There a Connection Between Obama and ACORN?

"Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now" - ACORN

"Community Organizer"

Text reads "ACORN members meet with Senate candidate Barack Obama"

from ACORN: "Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now"

. . . and what's it all about?

Monday, September 14, 2009

A Warning to All of Us!

from the UK's The Home of The Green Arrow

The Start of The End Game

The time is coming when you are going to have to make up your minds on where you stand in the coming conflict. With your kinsmen and culture or with those who would destroy it.

If you want a future for your children then you are going to have to fight for it now. Maybe not any time in the coming year but most certainly within two to three years.

At this moment in time the fight is thankfully still political but that will change regardless of how successful the Nationalists are in achieving political power. There will be fighting on the streets no matter what. What you are seeing now is just the "taunting" stage prior to the main event.

The colonisers are determined to take Our Land and way of life. They have been ordered to do it. They have been promised rewards in their warped idea of heaven and on earth also.

So all you people who still swallow the lies of The Establishment had better start thinking for yourselves. Go discover the truth and then grow some balls and join the British Resistance.


New Website

Sunday, September 13, 2009

The Universal Jihad Against Us

from http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/universal-jihad/

Universal Jihad: Radical Islam's Worldwide War on Liberal Democracies

By Vijay Kumar

On September 11, 2001, a war was brought to our shores by a band of men, bound by a militant ideology, in an act of mass murder. The response by the United States was a so-called "War on Terror," a reflex that has proved to be as ineffective as it has been costly.

We have spent more than a trillion dollars on invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. More than 5,000 American soldiers have died in the last eight years, and tens of thousands of American soldiers have been wounded.

What has this flood of blood and money bought us?

There has been no sustainable victory for the United States. There is no strategic victory; there is no political victory; there is no moral victory. And there is no peace. Islamic terrorism continues around the globe unabated.

The Obama administration lately wants to avoid any taint by the phrase "War on Terror," papering it over with even more ambiguity, calling it now an "Overseas Contingency Operation." It's still the same losing war, just as costly, just as ineffective.

The Bush and Obama administrations' "War on Terror"-by any name-has failed for a simple reason. It is because there is no such a thing as war on terror. Terrorism is a technique, a method, a weapon, a means to an end. Terrorism is not an enemy that can be named or identified, much less fought effectively. A "War on Terror" is a war on shadows, a war on nothing and on no one. It is a fool's errand.

Yet there is a war raging. It is a war that already had raged for 1,400 years before it was brought to our shores, a war that has laid waste to entire nations, cultures, and civilizations. The war is Universal Jihad: the eternal worldwide war on all infidel nations.

Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt were Christian nations before Christianity was supplanted by Political Islam. Afghanistan was Buddhist, Iran was Zoroastrian, and Pakistan was Hindu before Radical Islam consumed their civilizations and cultures.

The long-running Israeli and Palestinian conflict is not some unique standalone dispute over real estate or factionalism or any of the other wrong reasons given for it. It is simply another front in Universal Jihad's imperialistic war for the minds and souls of man. There has never been a lasting peace there because Political Islam has no interest in making peace with infidels-and every man, woman, or child anywhere in the world who is not Muslim is branded as infidel.

The crisis in the Middle East never ends because Political Islam never yields to another ideology. It does not believe in or permit of peaceful co-existence. The problem is not Jews or Israel. The only thing keeping the conflict in endless, irresolvable foment is a universal supremacist ideology that demands the conquest of Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Chinese, the West and sub-Saharan Africa.

The purpose of Universal Jihad, its mandate, its raison d'etre is conquest of the infidels and their nations-all of them-whether by conversion, domination, or death. In Political Islam, there is no fourth choice. It does not countenance any form of permanent peace with infidels.

Where Muslims are weak demographically and politically, they will propose truce. But we must understand the difference between truce and peace. Truce is a temporary ploy to buy time until one is stronger. Peace is lasting mutual respect. Muslims care not for peace, ever, with infidels, who are seen as inferiors. Where Muslims are strong they wage Universal Jihad, a worldwide war against the infidel. Jihad is the scriptural imperative of Political Islam, and the infidel is fair game.

For Universal Jihadists, therefore, any tactic, any means, any weapon is fully justified, so terrorism and mass murder are considered to be perfectly valid methods in attaining their theological and political goals.

The Lockerbie mass murderer was given a hero's welcome recently in Libya because in Islam's Universal Jihad he is a war hero.

The September 11, 2001 mass murder in the United States was a holy act, not only sanctioned but also celebrated.

The doctrine of Universal Jihad has a clear global goal: the supremacy of Islam everywhere in the world. It demands theological, political, and cultural supremacy-Islamic Imperialism-over the entire world. There is no room for political pluralism.

In Political Islam, there is no valid law other than the Islamic law, Sharia. The constitutions of liberal democracies are nothing more than the folly of fallible men and not worth the paper and ink wasted on them. Universal Jihad is a war on the cornerstones of democratic principles: individual rights and freedoms. It is a declared war on the very existence of democracy and the freedom of mind in the world.

Islamic Imperialism is the greatest imperialist force the world has ever seen. Until recently, the Western Hemisphere has been largely isolated and protected from Universal Jihad by geographical and technological barriers. Today, all of that has changed.

The United States merely is among the latest nations to be targeted for attack and invasion by Universal Jihad. It is infantile to believe that the Universal Jihadists have brought their 1,400 hundred years war to the West because of America's support of Israel. Universal Jihad predates the birth of the United States and of Israel by a thousand years, and already has conquered much the Middle East and parts of Europe.

America is falling prey to the same overt and covert strategies and tactics. Terrorism has been only one of those tactics.

Demographic conquest is the most permanent form of conquest. The infiltration of both legal and illegal Universal Jihadists to Western Europe and North America is fundamentally altering the very fabric of Western civilization. Political Islam is a State within a State no matter what nation it enters.

Political Islam views the world as being divided into two eternally opposing camps: Darul al-Harb (Land of Hostility, governed by the infidels) and Darul al-Islam (Land of Peace, ruled by Muslims). Any land that is not Islamic and not ruled by Muslims is considered Land of Hostility. Universal Jihadists have a theological obligation to conquer non-Muslim nations by any means and supplant the governments of men with Islamic theocracy. Hence, there is no such a thing as assimilation of Islam into a host society.

What the Western mind has failed to grasp is that in Islam, separation of church and state is categorically, scripturally, emphatically, and dogmatically impossible.

That is why the inherent imperialism of Universal Jihad is a greater threat to liberal democracies than Nazism and Communism combined. Unlike Islamists, Nazis and Communists lacked a transcendental metaphysics and global demographic strength. Nazism was defeated within ten years of its rise to power in Germany, and Communism has collapsed because of its own internal contradictions; post-Communist Russia and post-Nazi Germany became liberal democracies.

Not so the nations and civilizations conquered by Universal Jihadists.

A thousand years ago, the Indian Hindus were in the same predicament as is the Western world today. Their epistemologies were too rational, their metaphysical views too abstract and embracive. Their concept of non-violence even against those who wanted to annihilate them and their way of life was their greatest flaw. It was a fatal flaw. The Western world's present approach is reminiscent of the ancient Hindus.

The current crisis between the West and the doctrine of Universal Jihad is epistemological; it is a war of rationalism and intellectual freedom against virulent theological dogma. But it is a war. It was declared 1,400 years ago. Now it has been brought to America's shores.

Universal Jihadists have been winning through eternal patience and persistence engendered and empowered by their transcendental metaphysics, and their central belief that the entire world was meant to be governed by Islamic theocracy. What they lack in technology, they make up in demographic strength, geographic diversity, ideological clarity, and a fanaticism that is only "business as usual."

Compounding the threat is widespread ignorance among the rank and file. Of the purported 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, 90% do not speak Arabic, yet Islam's most lionized theologians claim that the Quran cannot be translated into any other language. By their measure, 90% of Muslims cling to the ragged edges of a dogma that they cannot hope to fully understand.

At stake are our intellectual and spiritual freedoms, and the most cherished principles of democracy. To preserve them, we must win this war not of our making. The alternative is unconditional surrender. Universal Jihadists are the product of militant ideologies and not vice-versa. Unless and until we confront that ideology for what it is, logically and persistently, all of our efforts are, and will continue to be, futile.

American politicians of both parties have failed or refused to define the true nature of the enemy and its intentions. The enemy is not Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Hamas, Islamic Brotherhood, or any of the hundreds of Islamic fundamentalist groups from Algeria to the Middle East to South Asia to Indonesia. Each of those is merely a tentacle of the same voracious beast called Universal Jihad. The very fact of the multitude of factions is nothing more than another strategy of Universal Jihadists to disperse and confuse and weaken the infidel by making him fight too many enemies on too many fronts. And it is working.

The only real enemy is Universal Jihad in all its manifestations. It is an existential crisis that threatens equally every non-Muslim nation, no matter what their culture, heritage, philosophy, or form of government.

The current military campaign by the United States and an ever-shrinking handful of its allies in the failed "War on Terror" (by any name) are beyond ineffective; it is suicidal. For eight long years it has squandered billions of dollars and thousands of innocent lives attacking the wrong enemies, while leaving the real seats of power of Universal Jihad unscathed, and even embracing them as "allies" and trading partners.

The war in Afghanistan is escalating, with the last two months alone having been the two deadliest months in the eight long years of U.S. involvement there. Yet Afghanistan is only a client state, a proxy, for Pakistan, one of the nations in the triumvirate that is the Empire of Universal Jihad. It is Pakistan's clandestine agency, Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), that rules Pakistan. Using Saudi money, the ISI created Taliban and Al-Qaeda. It is Pakistan's ISI that fosters Afghanistan's chief exports of heroin and terrorism, and that supplies refuge for Universal Jihadists. Yet we embrace Pakistan as an "ally."

The Seats of the Empire of Universal Jihad are Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Pakistan. These are Command Central. These are the declared enemies of democracy and of fundamental human rights and freedoms across the globe. Unless and until they are recognized, named, and treated as such, Universal Jihad will continue to ravage every non-Islamic nation and culture everywhere around the world into perpetuity.

The war being waged against humanity and democracy by Universal Jihadists can be won decisively. We can find a lasting and comprehensive solution to the greatest imperialistic threat Western civilization has ever seen. We have billions of willing allies in every place on the globe. But our success, our victory is predicated upon knowing and naming the real enemy, knowing the scope and reality of the threat, and taking decisive and directed action.

I maintain:

War against Universal Jihadists can be won globally in less than five years.
It can be won for less than one billion dollars.
It can be won without any more loss of American or Western Life.

In order to win this war that has been declared against us through no fault of our own, the first requisite is to acknowledge that it is an ideological war. It is the totalitarian Islamic theocracy against fundamental human rights and freedoms and against every democracy in the world.

It's also necessary to recognize that causes of poverty, illiteracy, and misery prevalent in Islamic nations are over-population, suppression of intellectual freedom, hostility to critical thinking, and a dictatorial theocracy as the form of government. Colonialism or Zionist or Anglo-American conspiracies are not the cause.

The conflict between Universal Jihadists and the West is philosophical. Strength is necessary to bring and maintain order, but force alone can never prevail. Reason, empiricism, and the scientific method are our greatest weapons against the religious fanaticism of Political Islam's militant theocracy.

Non-Islamic nations must correctly classify the doctrine of Universal Jihad as a subversive paramilitary political movement whose core ideology, of record, demands the overthrow of the existing forms of governments. Civilized nations recognize that such subversion, in times of war, constitutes treason.

And Universal Jihad is a declared war. It is a war of Islamic theological exclusivism against pluralistic democratic traditions. They are mutually exclusive. Islam's Sharia is the antithesis of individual intellectual and spiritual freedom. It stands in direct opposition to the very existence of any constitutional democracy, and to the very right to existence of any other religion or belief.

Therefore, in order to prevail in this war against the rest of mankind, we must do the following.

Build a global united alliance of nations against Universal Jihad. Jew and Gentile, Anglo-Saxon and Slav, Hindu and Buddhist, Norwegian and Nigerian-all have been victimized by Jihad. Never has any barbaric imperialism so universally threatened mankind without regard to national or ethnic or philosophical or geopolitical boundaries. Whatever our differences, in this war we are allies unified by a common ruthless enemy that will not rest until we and our cultures and nations have been conquered through conversion, domination, or death. United, we cannot be overcome.

Systematically remove all advocates of Political Islam's Universal Jihad from every nation of the Western world-which, by their own definition, is Darul al-Harb (Land of Hostility, governed by the infidels). The claims and requirements of Literal Islam's mandated theocracy call for overthrow of the American and Western forms of government in a declared war, and the supporters of Universal Jihad have committed and condoned acts of war on our soil against our people and our nations. That is treason.

As a united alliance of nations against Universal Jihad, cut off all trade and diplomatic ties to the Empire of Universal Jihad: Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. Enforce these sanctions until their governments publicly, formally renounce and disavow Universal Jihad by official proclamation.

As a united alliance of nations against Universal Jihad, use the combined resources of all affected nations to demilitarize, secularize, and democratize the Empire of Universal Jihad.

As a united alliance of nations against Universal Jihad, demand and exact compensation from the Empire of Universal Jihad for having supported global terrorism for at least the past half-century.

If any of these steps to victory seem draconian or undemocratic, pause to reflect that they are far more humane and civilized then the strategies and tactics of Political Islam and its 1,400 years war that has decimated entire civilizations and murdered countless millions. These steps are far more humane and civilized than dropping atomic bombs on civilian populations. These are not some "Modest Proposals" in the tradition of Swift. These are sober, attainable and necessary steps that must be taken if the rationality and freedoms gained by mankind over thousands of years of social evolution stand any chance of surviving the Universal Jihadist's onslaught of barbarism and mass murder to the end of totalitarian rule of the world.

To survive at all and preserve our cherished rights and freedoms, our cultures, our religions, our civilizations, we must declare an ideological war against Universal Jihadists. We must do so now. They long ago declared war on us.

copyright (c) CBSX, LLC


Use and distribute as you wish; do not edit and give us credit.

Friday, September 11, 2009

September 11, 2001 - Who is Responsible?

Health-Care Activism

Health-Care Activism with TOS‏

The Objective Standard (TOS):

Given the Obama administration’s efforts to nationalize the health care industry—and the Republicans’ rush to capitulate on the matter —we are making Paul Hsieh’s article “How the Freedom to Contract Protects Insurability“ (from the forthcoming issue of TOS) accessible on our website early and for free. Dr. Hsieh’s article shows that, contrary to proposals being put forth by Republicans, a genuinely free market in health insurance is not only moral, in that it respects the rights of producers and consumers, but also practical, in that it enables businessmen to solve problems for profit—which leads to more and better products and services at lower prices for consumers. Please forward the link to everyone you know who might be open to reason.

Two other TOS articles pertaining directly to this national emergency are:

“Mandatory Health Insurance: Wrong for Massachusetts, Wrong for America,” which identifies the theory behind the Massachusetts mandatory health insurance program, exposes the program as a fiasco, explains why the theory had to fail in practice, and sheds light on the only genuine, rights-respecting means to affordable, accessible health care for Americans—and . . .

“Moral Health Care vs. “Universal Health Care,” which surveys the history of government interference in health insurance and medicine in America, specifying the rights violations and economic problems caused thereby; enumerates the failed attempts to solve those economic problems by means of further government interference; and shows that the only viable solution to the debacle at hand is to gradually and systematically transition to a rights-respecting, fully free market in these industries.

America is slipping into statism, and, if we do not reverse course soon, we are going to slip all the way. Please promote these articles—which provide clear, principled, moral arguments for a free market in health care—in whatever ways you can. Our freedom and health are at stake.

Thank you,

Craig Biddle, Editor

The Objective Standard


Saturday, September 5, 2009

What in the Hell is Happening Here? (In the U.S. of A?)

Click on this: The Disinformation Campaign: Please think at least twice

. . . you will be taken to http://www.atcoalition.com/movies/mediasubversion.php

to see and hear the answers to the following:

Why was the massive pork-barrel spending in the economic "stimulus" bills of early 2009 barely reported on by the mainstream media? Why is there a general shift in the West toward socialism, including the restriction of free speech, restriction of gun rights and restriction of economic freedom? Why do Western governments – even supposedly right wing ones – work to increase the size of themselves and promote socialist ideas? In this video, researcher, author and political lecturer G. Edward Griffin interviews KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov, who may hold the key to what really happened in the West between the 1950s and 1970s. Be advised: This video will either confirm your longstanding suspicions or surprise you like never before.
--Courtesy of the Anti-Terrorism Coalition Copyright © 2003-2009 All rights reserved. http://www.atcoalition.com/movies/mediasubversion.php

NOTE: Although the interview took place circa in the Reagan era (you will hear the reference to Mondale), it applies to what is going on around you right now!  lw
Obama's approval Rating (from "Sunday Toonage")


The following is a tie-in to the above Disinformation Campaign:


Via Atlas Shrugs, with the reference, "Politically, he was a communist spy and traitor" posted as "Splash Kennedy" Death of a Spy, Traitor, Drunk, Murderer Sloth: A Leftist Icon Expires  and linking to Sweetness & Light (S&L) comes the following:

KGB Letter Details Kennedy Offer To USSR

This letter which details Senator Edward Kennedy’s offer to help the Soviet Union defeat Reagan’s efforts to build up the nuclear deterrent in Europe was unearthed by a Times of London reporter in the 1990s after the KGB files were opened.

It got little or no attention, however, until the publication of Paul Kengor’s book "The Crusader – Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism."

But even then the actual text of the letter (which is in the book’s appendix pp 317-320) has gotten short shrift:



Click on http://sweetness-light.com/archive/kgb-letter-details-ted-kennedys-offer-to-help-ussr

THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION POSED IN THE POST HEADING (What in the Hell is Happening Here? [In the U.S. of A?])

abu ahmad  said...

it is your fault gullible american, watch out the "change" is coming you vote for your own destruction. obama the socialist will destroy america from within.

from . . .
a Comment to the post . . .


Friday, September 4, 2009

Insight into the Obama Gang from Victor Davis Hanson:

. . . liberals assume that their cosmic humanitarianism and brotherly egalitarianism exempt them from following mere mortal laws (e.g., as in “We are so divine on the important stuff that we deserve a pass on small, insignificant matters”.) And two, in order to enact state planning, and superimpose an overarching government plan onto our own messy agendas, we must bow to a technocracy.

These gifted souls are like Plato’s Guardians —Übermenschen, trained at places like Harvard Law School, with government service at the Fed, years at this or that Cabinet post, or tenure in Congress under their belts, veterans of brief university postings. We are blessed with Geithners, Daschles, Obamas and others, and so can hardly demand they be bothered with minutiae like taxes, or following bureaucratic regulations governing gifts, whether Tony Rezko’s land deals or Friends of Angelo loan perks.


Examine also community organizing. The craft was caricatured by Rudy Giuliani at the Republican Convention as a sort of non-productive, busy-bodying, a dressed-up version of being paid to give out someone else’s money to someone arbitrarily deemed more deserving.

Be that as it may, the Obama mystique was wrapped up within such grassroots organizing and supposedly selfless public service. (Remember Michelle Obama’s referencing of how Barack could have been a cutthroat rich lawyer (I doubt that, since success in corporate law is not easy), but instead chose to go to Chicago to toil in the fields of the poor (alongside Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers)?)


Health-care reform envisions those who run the DMV or the cash for clunkers program deciding whether you really need that MRI for the lump on your neck.

Excerpted from
"What We Are Learning About the Era of Obama"
article at WORK AND DAYS
by Victor Davis Hanson
Read the whole thing at

Also, be sure to read Victor Davis Hanson's
Not This Pig


Well, the post-racial candidate had given us a 95% black monolithic voting pattern in the primaries against a fellow liberal candidate. Add up Rev. Wright, Father Pfleger, the clingers speech, an exasperated Bill Clinton’s assessment of “playing the race card on me”, “typical white person”, ‘wise Latina’, the Skip Gates mess, the Van Jones’ white polluters, the satraps like Gov. Patterson and Reps. Rangel and Watson reverting to blatantly racist scapegoating, and so on.

I fear that this is the most polarizing administration we have seen in matters of race since the 1920s. If those around Obama, and his supporters in Congress, had just substituted the word “black” each time they have angrily invoked the word “white”, they would have been branded abject racists.


Then we have the Al Arabiya interview, the Cairo speech, and the “I’m sorry” to everyone from the Europeans to Turks to South Americans. The common denominator has been agreement that the United States has been racist, oppressive, and exploitive rather than far less so than the alternative, given these transgressions of the past are the sins of mankind not those of Americans per se.

When I heard Obama in the campaign promise reparations (quickly retracted), and more victimization studies, I knew where we were headed: namely, that we have someone like the Chairman of the Ethnic Studies Department or the Head of the Sociology Department now running the country.

etc., etc., etc. at http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/not-this-pig/

Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Fjordman: "Barack Hussein Obama and the Triumph of Marxism" - A prophecy fulfilled

"Never did George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt. Martin Luther King Jr. or Ronald Reagan arouse so much raw emotion. Despite their achievements, none of them was raised to the rank of Messiah. The Illinois senator has no history of service to the country. He has done nothing outstanding except giving promises of change and hyping his audience with hope. It's only his words, not his achievements that is causing this much uproar. When cheering for someone turns into adulation, something is wrong. Excessive adulation is indicative of a personality cult. The cult of personality is often created when the general population is discontent. A charismatic leader can seize the opportunity and project himself as an agent of change and a revolutionary leader."

The following was obtained via listing at Klein Verzet The Fjordman Files THE WEST IN GENERAL

Published on The Brussels Journal (http://www.brusselsjournal.com/)

[As True Today as on the Day it was Written]

Barack Hussein Obama and the Triumph of Marxism
By Fjordman
Created 2008-10-27 17:08

One of the recurring themes in my essays is the realization that the West didn't win the Cold War as decisively as we should have done. A generation after we "defeated" Marxism, Marxist-inspired groups control much of the Western education system as well as Western media and form alliances with our enemies, especially Islamic ones. I have concentrated on Europe, but this is a problem in North America as well. Barack Hussein Obama represents the triumph of cultural Marxism; or perhaps we should simply say Marxism. One generation after Ronald Reagan led the USA to "victory," a person with Marxist sympathies could be about to be elected President of the USA. When the Nazis were defeated they were seen as evil, as they should be. When the Communists were "defeated," they were not seen as evil; they are misguided individuals with good intentions, a bit like Santa Claus with a bad hair day.

Journalist Stanley Kurtz has done an excellent job at tracking the many ties to radical organizations in Obama's personal history. Dr.Daniel Pipes lists some of the indirect ties he has to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Nation of Islam. Pipes states that "Obama's multiple links to anti-Americans and subversives mean he would fail the standard security clearance process for Federal employees. Islamic aggression represents America's strategic enemy; Obama's many insalubrious connections raise grave doubts about his fitness to serve as America's commander-in-chief."

In my view, it's insane that the United States can even contemplate electing a person such as Obama. Americans will look like a defeated nation to the rest of the world if they pick an individual who has for a generation been a member of an organization dedicated to hating the majority population of the country. That's exactly why so many of their enemies want him elected. Meanwhile, 7 years after Saudi Arabian Muslims staged Jihadist attacks against the United States, the Saudis are systematically infiltrating the Western education system at all levels with pro-Islamic propaganda. Americans are outsourcing their industry to China, their education system to Saudi Arabia and their breeding to Mexico. This is not a wise strategy followed by a country that wants to remain a superpower, or simply continue to exist.

A person with such a radical background should never have been close to nomination. The only reason why Obama got so far is because the media deliberately downplayed much of the most troubling information about him. The mass hysteria whipped up in favor of Obama in the press is disturbing. A person who had been a member of an openly anti-black or anti-Asian congregation for a couple of decades would never have been seriously considered for presidency, but being a member of an anti-white congregation is apparently OK. This tells us much about the cultural climate in the West at the moment.

The term "Fascist" is so misused that people no longer remember its original meaning. A "Fascist" is now any person to the right of Hillary Clinton, especially if he's white and doesn't like Multiculturalism. However, the personality cult surrounding Obama is a traditional hallmark of Fascist and Communist societies. When an average voter dared to ask a few critical questions about Obama's Socialist sympathies, he was virtually ambushed by members of the mainstream media. This is the kind of behavior one expects to see in authoritarian societies when someone questions the Divine Wisdom of the Great Leader. It is disappointing and not very reassuring to see it in the land of the free, home of the brave.As journalist Nidra Poller put it: "The chance encounter between Barack Obama and a commoner—Joe the Plumber—not only exposed the Hope & Change candidate's plan for redistribution of wealth, it also revealed his attitude toward the ordinary guys he has pledged to serve. Leftists everywhere love the wretched of the earth…as long as the poor stay poor and the downtrodden downtrodden."

The Iranian ex-Muslim Ali Sina, author of the book Understanding Muhammad, comments on the dark sides of Obama's personality:

Understanding Obama: The Making of a Fuehrer

"Never did George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt. Martin Luther King Jr. or Ronald Reagan arouse so much raw emotion. Despite their achievements, none of them was raised to the rank of Messiah. The Illinois senator has no history of service to the country. He has done nothing outstanding except giving promises of change and hyping his audience with hope. It's only his words, not his achievements that is causing this much uproar. When cheering for someone turns into adulation, something is wrong. Excessive adulation is indicative of a personality cult. The cult of personality is often created when the general population is discontent. A charismatic leader can seize the opportunity and project himself as an agent of change and a revolutionary leader."

"If Obama turns out to be the disaster I predict, he will cause widespread resentment among the whites. The blacks are unlikely to give up their support of their man. Cultic mentality is pernicious and unrelenting. They will dig their heads deeper in the sand and blame Obama's detractors of racism. This will cause a backlash among the whites. The white supremacists will take advantage of the discontent and they will receive widespread support. I predict that in less than four years, racial tensions will increase to levels never seen since the turbulent 1960s. Obama will set the clock back decades."

I don't agree with everything Sina says, but I am pretty sure an Obama presidency would dramatically increase racial and ideological tensions within the USA; I cannot see him "heal" anything. I agree that such displays of personality cult are always a sign of dark ideological undercurrents. Jimmy Carter was one of the worst presidents in American history. I don't recall that there ever was a "Carter Youth" movement in the 1970s or people claiming that he was the Messiah, but we do have an "Obama Youth" movement. This is unprecedented, a disturbing indication that the world's most powerful state no longer thinks in rational terms. Obama represents everything the American Founding Fathers tried to avoid when they wanted to make their young nation a constitutional Republic, not a mass democracy.

The dilemma is that both major parties ended up with arguably the worst possible candidates. The choice is between John McCain, an open-border fanatic with an anger management problem who isn't a real conservative, and Barack Hussein Obama, who has for a generation been a member of a church which is explicitly hostile to the majority population of his country, who has Socialist sympathies and ties to anti-American and Islamic radicals. As in the rest of the Western world, the radical Left has largely succeeded in moving politics to the left. The Republican candidate is now what the Democratic candidates used to be like, and the Democratic candidate comes from a background where open shows of hostility to one's own country are commonplace.

In 2007, a proposed immigration bill hundreds of pages long and supported by the Bush Administration would have amounted to the greatest changes in US immigration policies since the 1960s and de facto legalized millions of illegal aliens. As writer Matthew Spalding said at the National Review Online, "the devil is in the details. This legislation is long and complicated, with lots of details — and lots of devils." Yet its supporters were keen to have it implemented as soon as possible. "We all know this issue can be caught up in extracurricular politics unless we move forward as quickly as possible," said Senator John McCain, a key architect of the bill. The bill was stopped after massive popular resistance, but there is reason to fear that a future President McCain will support it in 2009 or 2010 as well.

There are both left-wing and right-wing Globalists. They have different agendas, for instance with left-wing Globalists putting emphasis on silencing free speech and promoting "international law" through the United Nations and similar organizations while right-wing Globalists concentrate more on the free flow of people across borders, just as they want free flow of goods and capital across borders. The presidential election campaign in the USA in 2008 between Obama and McCain is a race between a left-wing and a right-wing Globalist. Both want open borders, if only for slightly different reasons, and tend to think of countries as ideas, not as entities populated by distinct peoples with shared values and a common history.

This does of course not mean that President Obama and President McCain would follow the exact same policies in all areas. For instance, I fear that President Obama would be more aggressive in weakening the freedom of speech enshrined in the First Amendment than President McCain, although I could be wrong in this. Obama would most likely also be more active in pushing Socialist economic programs. When it comes to mass immigration, legal and illegal, I see little difference between them.

An Obama presidency would be bad for the United States but also bad for the world. Many Europeans seem to like Obama. I'm not one of them. Here in Western Europe, we are faced with increasingly aggressive Islamic colonization. How would the American political elites react if native Europeans suddenly grew a backbone and implemented serious policies aimed at halting and reversing Islamization? I don't think we should expect much sympathy from President Obama or the mainstream media. Since Americans are indoctrinated from birth with the idea that any person of European origins defending his cultural heritage is a white supremacist and a Nazi, I suspect we would be viewed as something along those lines. By that point it wouldn't be America Alone, as Canadian writer Mark Steyn says, it would be Europe Alone. Leftists have complained about virtually all American military campaigns except the NATO bombing against Serbs on behalf of Muslims.

For that matter, it isn't self-evident that President McCain would be wholly sympathetic, either. It is a great irony that the USA is vilified for its "anti-Islamic" policies. What anti-Islamic policies would that be? The American political establishment is dedicated to making the world safe for sharia. Muslim immigration to the US has increased since 9/11. The Bush Administration has sponsored the eradication of non-Muslim communities of Iraq, supports Turkish membership of the European Union and together with the EU awarded the ethnic cleansing of Serbs in Kosovo by granting Muslim Albanians their very own Jihadist state.

I'm not going to blame Europe's problems on Americans; we made our own mess and should deal with it ourselves. Besides, it is quite possible that the Americans will soon have their hands full with problems of their own and will be in no position to assist anybody even if they wanted to. Europeans can and should maintain good relations and cooperate with ordinary North American citizens, who live under the same Multicultural regime as we do, but we cannot and should not rely on aid from the American elites.

Barack Hussein Obama hasn't been elected President yet, and it is quite possible that the polls we are shown in the media do not accurately reflect the popular support he has, but the very fact that he has come this far represents an unprecedented triumph for radical Leftism in the heart of the largest state in the Western world.

Anti-Western ideologies have penetrated the very core of our societies at the same time as we are under siege from outside. This is clearly not a sustainable situation and it will need to be resolved if our civilization is going to survive this century. Regardless of who wins this November, the West is in for a bumpy ride.

Source URL:

Tuesday, September 1, 2009

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, Rahm’s brother and Obama’s Health Advisor, manages your Right to Life

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, health adviser to President Barack Obama...has written . . .about who should get medical care . . . and whose life is worth saving. Dr. Emanuel . . . re-defines a physician’s duty . . . working for the greater good of society instead of focusing . . . on a patient’s needs.

From Israel Commentary
August 31, 2009
Redacted from an article by Betsy McCaughey
The Wall Street Journal, August 27, 2009

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, health adviser to President Barack Obama, is under scrutiny. As a bioethicist, he has written extensively about who should get medical care, who should decide and whose life is worth saving. Dr. Emanuel is part of a school of thought that re-defines a physician’s duty, insisting that it includes working for the greater good of society instead of focusing only on a patient’s needs. Many physicians find that view dangerous, and most Americans are likely to agree.

The health bills being pushed through Congress put important decisions in the hands of presidential appointees like Dr. Emanuel. They will decide what insurance plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will have, and what seniors get under Medicare. Dr. Emanuel, brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, has already been appointed to two key positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research. He clearly will play a role guiding the White House's health initiative.

Dr. Emanuel says that health reform will not be pain free, and that the usual recommendations for cutting medical spending (often urged by the president) are mere window dressing. As he wrote in the Feb. 27, 2008, issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA): "Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality of care are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change."

True reform, he argues, must include re-defining doctors' ethical obligations. In the June 18, 2008, issue of JAMA, Dr. Emanuel blames the Hippocratic Oath for the "overuse" of medical care: "Medical school education and post graduate education emphasize thoroughness," he writes. "This culture is further re-enforced by a unique understanding of professional obligations, specifically the Hippocratic Oath's admonition to 'use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment' as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of cost or effect on others."

In numerous writings, Dr. Emanuel chastises physicians for thinking only about their own patient's needs!! He describes it as an intractable problem: "Patients were to receive whatever services they needed, regardless of its cost. Reasoning based on cost has been strenuously resisted; it violated the Hippocratic Oath, was associated with rationing and derided as putting a price on life. . . . Indeed, many physicians were willing to lie to get patients what they needed from insurance companies that were trying to hold down costs." (JAMA, May 16, 2007).

Of course, patients hope their doctors will have that single-minded devotion. However, Dr. Emanuel believes doctors should serve two masters - the patient and the society. Medical students should be trained "to provide socially sustainable, cost-effective care."

Dr. Emanuel argues that to make such decisions, the focus cannot be only on the worth of the individual. He proposes adding the communitarian perspective to ensure that medical resources will be allocated in a way that keeps society going. ... In the Lancet, Jan. 31, 2009, Dr. Emanuel and co-authors presented a "complete lives system" for the allocation of very scarce resources, such as kidneys, vaccines, dialysis machines, intensive care beds and others. "One maximizing strategy involves saving the most individual lives, and it has motivated policies on allocation of influenza vaccines and responses to bio-terrorism. . . . Other things being equal, we should always save five lives rather than one.

Dr. Emanuel concedes that his plan appears to discriminate against older people, but he explains: "Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination . . .. Treating 65 year olds differently because of stereotypes or falsehoods would be ageist; treating them differently because they have already had more life-years is not."

The youngest are also put at the back of the line: "Adolescents have received substantial education and parental care, investments that will be wasted without a complete life. Infants, by contrast, have not yet received these investments. . . . As the legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin argues, 'It is terrible when an infant dies, but worse, most people think, when a three-year-old dies and worse still when an adolescent does,' this argument is supported by empirical surveys." (thelancet.com, Jan. 31, 2009).

To reduce health-insurance costs, Dr. Emanuel argues that insurance companies should pay for new treatments only when the evidence demonstrates that the drug will work for most patients. He says the "major contributor" to rapid increases in health spending is "the constant introduction of new medical technologies, including new drugs, devices and procedures . . .. Dr. Emanuel says the United States should erect a decision-making body similar to the United Kingdom's rationing body—the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE)—to slow the adoption of new medications and set limits on how much will be paid to lengthen a life.

Dr. Emanuel's assessment of American medical care is summed up in a Nov. 23, 2008, Washington Post op-ed he co-authored: "The United States is No. 1 in only one sense: the amount we shell out for health care. We have the most expensive system in the world per capita, but we lag behind many developed nations on virtually every health statistic you can name."

This is untrue, though sadly it's parroted at town-hall meetings across the country. Moreover, it's an odd factual error coming from an oncologist. According to an August 2009 report from the National Bureau of Economic Research, patients diagnosed with cancer in the U.S. have a better chance of surviving the disease than anywhere else. The World Health Organization also rates the U.S. No. 1 out of 191 countries for responsiveness to the needs and choices of the individual patient. That attention to the individual is imperiled by Dr. Emanuel's views.

Dr. Emanuel has fought for a government takeover of health care for over a decade. In 1993, he urged that President Bill Clinton impose a wage and price freeze on health care to force parties to the table. "The desire to be rid of the freeze will do much to concentrate the mind," he wrote with another author in a Feb. 8, 1993, Washington Post op-ed. Now he recommends arm-twisting Chicago style. "Every favor to a constituency should be linked to support for the health-care reform agenda," he wrote last Nov. 16 in the Health Care Watch Blog. "If the automakers want a bailout, then they and their suppliers have to agree to support and lobby for the administration's health-reform effort." Is this what Americans want?

Ms. McCaughey is chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former lieutenant governor of New York State.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 01:59 AM Comments (0)
August 29, 2009