Is it REAL????
This is insane, sick... shades of the "Spartan" movie, though there is no "happy" ending there. Again, is this sick sh*t true?
This is the fate of many Saudi women &, guess what? quite a few kidnapped western girls as well while our own governments look studiously away in the direction only of oil! Translated private interview from Saudi Arabia forwarded to me & many others in a desperate attempt to get the word out Doctor Muzaffar: I have a medical practice in Jizan, Saudi Arabia which I practice female circumcision. I am a Egyptian and still spend much time there, but spend much time at my clinic in the Kingdom. My husband travels with me. Female circumcision is well established in Egypt and is now spreading in the Kingdom from the Tihama region of the Arabian peninsula. The locals have practiced in for many years and now the Saudi religious police have encouraged its spread in the Kingdom.
RZ: Why did you pick there to set up your practice if female Circumcision is easily available.
Doctor Muzaffar: I was recruited in my homeland, Egypt, by the religious police as circumcising the young may be done by midwives, there was few trained female Doctors in the kingdom that had experience in circumcising grown women.
RZ: Religious police?
Doctor Muzaffar: Yes , this is the new more tolerant religious police, where in the past Prostitution or Adultery was punishable by stoning , now sometimes they simply have the accused circumcised and , or infibulated. They bring them to my clinic and they are my guest for a day or two. I also Train nurses for the religious police to preform female circumcision. after a training period they are moved to female hospitals in other Kingdom cities. Clitoridectomy is not not a hard thing to learn for the average nurse. The religious police feel that female circumcision has many positive benefits. It calms women, ends lesbian activities, discourages adultery and prostitution. It allows women to concentrate on being good wives and mothers.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
02/12/2007 10:51 Comments ||
Top||
#3
OK I've calmed down somewhat, First order of business, kill all the "Religious police", to the last one.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
02/12/2007 10:57 Comments ||
Top||
#4
And this is against that "civilization", its values, its laws that we are going to lose? Because we are taught to hate ourselves and to long for oblivion (they have children, we don't anymore... who loves death more than life, ultimately?)...?
Because we (or our Enlightened Elites) prostitute ourselves, kneeling in front of the petrodollar god? Shirak has or had a 50 millions euros secret bank account in Japan, I have no doubt most of it came from backshich from arms deals with gulf countries.
#7
The artilce reads like the screen play for a sci-fi horror film.
Posted by: Mark Z ||
02/12/2007 11:44 Comments ||
Top||
#8
A female Egyptian doctor is highly unlikely to refer to women as 'birds' - it's a term used only by British males.
Really, I'd prefer this to be an hoax, though I have no doubt it might exist, if only in less "severe" form. The bird might be literal here, an image (IE a "bird" caught by the hunter), not a national slang term, but you might be right too.
#9
I call hoax. This sounds like some sort of sex fantasy. No doubt some of this is based on a core of truth (circumcision, etc.), but the elaborations are bizarre. There are a lot of oddities also, like I don't think any important Saudi is called a "Pasha".
There is no doubt a lot of abuse of foreign workers and foreign wives/etc. in Saudi, but in decades of these stories I have seen nothing so rococco as this.
#10
If the concubines are surrounded by 15-foot walls, why do they need special collars that administer electric shocks when they get out of bounds? It sounds like clumsy propaganda by someone who (rightly) doesn't like the Saudis.
#14
The oldest active Google ref I saw is from Oct 25, 2005: white girls circumcision in Saudi Arabia. However, in comment #5, Hume references an even earlier instance of this article at ummah.net. It has been removed (assuming it was there). However there is some crazy female clitorectomy shit from "Zaira", such as: I am a 30 year old British born nurse. I met and married an Egyptian doctor several years ago, lived in Egypt for several years and converted to Islam and underwent female circumcision. I have no regrets. ... This information is widely known in countries that practice female circumcision, but it is deliberately supressed by the West - whether you want to call it cultural imperialism, political correctness or just plain old bigotry against those of different beliefs or religion is up to you. Thirdly, the reasons for female circumcision are also deliberately misrepresented by the West. Female circumcision IS permitted under Islam and since the West has banned it, this is an attack on our religion. In the past female circumcision was considered optional, but many (both ordinary people and religious scholars) now think that it should be mandatory because of the West's anti-Islamic predjudice. The West also deliberately supresses the medical information relating to the benefits of female circumcision. Particularly in the case of Egypt where due to Western pressure its practice was banned for many years - but then permitted again some years ago - substantial comparative data has been gathered. [While female circumcision was banned it nevertheless continued to be practiced, although admittedly under less than perfect conditions - and this was one of the reasons why the Egyptian government lifted the ban]. Within a few years of the ban being lifted, female circumcison rates shot up from 90% in the countryside and 50% in the cities to 97% throughout the country.
Posted by: ed ||
02/12/2007 14:24 Comments ||
Top||
#15
BTW, Its NOT Female Circumcision. Its intentional mutilation of female genitalia.
#16
Muslim hard boyz don't have a history of being able to sexually satisfy their women. Female genital mutilation gives them a built in excuse to explain why.
Posted by: Mark Z ||
02/12/2007 15:52 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Hello all you idiot people choosing DENIAL.
Uneducated.
Mysogynist.
Head-in-Sand Retrobrains.
Truth Suppresors.
Helpers of the Moslem Satan.
You know who you are.
The merely ignorant I will excuse, unless you stop being ignorant by choice or design.
Witless promoters of Female Genital Mutiliation.
You all make me sick.
I thoroughly researched Female Circumcision or Female Genital Mutiltation (FGM) when I was getting my master's degree a couple of years ago. This practice is widespread the documented.
Of course, this is only a start based on internet listings. There is plenty of info in professional journals and books. It's linked to the white (and other) slave trade:
The point is this: the royal Saudis are sick men, entirely wrapped up in and warped by sexual perversion. White women are prized as slaves. They come from Russia, Scandinavia, Europe, and America. Their whereabouts are untraceable once they enter the magic Kingdom. The issue of FGM of these captive women would be a simple extension of the Saudis design to maintain a private collection of sex objects, who deserve to be slaves, since "they dress as prostitutes" and go about without maile escorts. It is not farfetched at all that this occurs.
Secondly, the fact that the rich Saudis are employing Eygptian doctors makes perfect sense because the Eygptian docs are more familiar with the practice. The state of the art references are completely believable because the rich Saudis can afford it.
Also, it is not uncommon for Egyptian women to bring their daughters to medical clinics now for the operation, since there has been a lot of information about health complications with FGM. Even though is it technically illegal for women or girls to undergo FGM in Egypt, it happens all the time and goes unpunished.
The dog collar thing is just more the of the same mindset in action.
The sex slave thing is also tied to the child/aduult pornography industry.
Finally, that they refuse to give pain killer to offenders undergoing FGM as punishment, is part and parcel of their thinking.
Just wish there was a link to the interview site, for verification, but from everything I know, it is not only beliveable, but entirely probable.
The lack of true understanding of the enemy (sociopolitical/cultural/religious) is the most dangerous problem in this war.
#18
I spent a few minutes reading about Ampbreias, the woman who posted this on her website. Unless the vast amount of information and pictures about herself are an elaborate fabrication, I'd lean towards the credibility of this account, which she says is a priate interview that was e-mailed to her and many others.
I am also an eclectic-agnostic ex-Muslimah and crusader against Islamism. Im not against someone believing in that stuff religion, or lack thereof, should be a personal choice Ive just seen the damage Islam can do when played out to it logical extreme and am just determined to undermine its ability to do harm thereby. My first book, Lost in Foreign Passions, written under my former married name [Debra Kamza], is a memoir of my time as a Muslim and the year I was stuck in Iran under the oppressive presence of the Islamic Regime when it was still so new that Iranians themselves could remember what it was like to have relative freedom only a few years previously.
Seems that after she escaped Iran and abandoned Islam, she served for a time in the US Army as well. Her personal interests still seem to reflect the sort of flakiness that would be expected of a naive young Western girl who gets swept up by something exotic that turns into a nightmare.
Funny, J.D., I too found myself wondering if Natalie Holloway is now a slave in a Saudi harem.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'll be spending rest of the evening suppressing my vomit reflex, whilst thanking the good Lord I am both intact and well-armed.
#19
The majority of circumcisions are simply snipping it off. This is most effective in controlling female behavior. 90% of the pleasure nerves are in the very tip. By just snipping off the tip will have the desired effect on female behavior.
If this is for real, the solution is to cut the heads off the animals responsible for this. No, not at the neck. The other head. Then crush their balls between two rocks. Then impale them.
I think Vlad Tepes is my new hero.
Now excuse me. I'm gonna go puke.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
02/12/2007 20:05 Comments ||
Top||
#20
I do not, for an instant doubt the veracity of these accounts. In fact, I would think it is only the tip of the iceberg, further, I think if we knew the true extent of our enemies perversions we'd slaughter the lot of them. Now. Every last man, woman and child. Just to be certain there could be no more Islam.
Islam is an evil that must be either exterminated, or quarantined. Since I harbor no illusions about the prospects of quarantining them, they must be destroyed. Unfortunately, I think our culture is doomed to perish because of the Leftist Cancer that has hollowed out our souls. Pity. It means that humanity is unlikely to ever make it to the Stars, and beyond. Trapped on this rock, because we're too cowardly to declare Liberalism a fatal mental disease and act accordingly. Too cowardly to deal with an obvious evil. Islam Delenda Est!
#21
There is an interesting debate going on in the Local section regarding prostitution. I couldn't help thinking that in the Islamic world, it is the same mindset made culturally and politically mainstream--women as objects to such a degree that their very sexuality is COMPLETELY controlled for purposes of male pleasure fantasy experience.
The highest number of online porn customers are from the Middle Eastern countries, too. Weird connection. In fact, the "shaved" presentation of female anatomy that characterizes online porn comes directly from the preferences of those MidEastern customers. It is connected to the removal of female sexuality and a fantasy return to pre-pubescence and sex with the same. Bascially, Arabs are dictating the sexual "preferences" of the West in that arena for those who view that stuff.
#1
I do not think any responsible analyst now believes that a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian issue has much bearing on stability in the Middle East.
Unfortunately, the World is not run by responsible analysts.
The Mission Can't Be Accomplished -- It's Time for a New Strategy
Lt. Gen. William E. Odom, U.S Army (Ret.)
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Odom launches his attack by going on at length about Bush's blunder in not embracing the "stability" fetish of the Realist school of foreign policy thought, then calls on Congress to "exercise its power of the purse to end the war and open the way for a strategy that might actually bear fruit." Having expended his propellant, he then delivers the payload:
The first and most critical step is to recognize that fighting on now simply prolongs our losses and blocks the way to a new strategy. Getting out of Iraq is the pre-condition for creating new strategic options. Withdrawal will take away the conditions that allow our enemies in the region to enjoy our pain. It will awaken those European states reluctant to collaborate with us in Iraq and the region.
Second, we must recognize that the United States alone cannot stabilize the Middle East.
Third, we must acknowledge that most of our policies are actually destabilizing the region. Spreading democracy, using sticks to try to prevent nuclear proliferation, threatening "regime change," using the hysterical rhetoric of the "global war on terrorism" -- all undermine the stability we so desperately need in the Middle East.
Fourth, we must redefine our purpose. It must be a stable region, not primarily a democratic Iraq. We must redirect our military operations so they enhance rather than undermine stability. We can write off the war as a "tactical draw" and make "regional stability" our measure of "victory." That single step would dramatically realign the opposing forces in the region, where most states want stability. Even many in the angry mobs of young Arabs shouting profanities against the United States want predictable order, albeit on better social and economic terms than they now have.
Realigning our diplomacy and military capabilities to achieve order will hugely reduce the numbers of our enemies and gain us new and important allies. This cannot happen, however, until our forces are moving out of Iraq. Why should Iran negotiate to relieve our pain as long as we are increasing its influence in Iraq and beyond? Withdrawal will awaken most leaders in the region to their own need for U.S.-led diplomacy to stabilize their neighborhood.
HT: Pappy
Posted by: Dave D. ||
02/12/2007 07:01 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The first and most critical step is to recognize that fighting on now simply prolongs our losses and blocks the way to a new strategy. Getting out of Iraq is the pre-condition for creating new strategic options. Withdrawal will take away the conditions that allow our enemies in the region to enjoy our pain. It will awaken those European states reluctant to collaborate with us in Iraq and the region.
Second, we must recognize that the United States alone cannot stabilize the Middle East.
If we can't, who else is there? Answer - there is no one else.
Restructure the whole argument along the lines of the old west being developed in the 19th Century. You think we should have pulled out of the Sioux country [the Dakota Territory] after taking loses at Fort Phil Kearney? or for that matter later at Rosebud or Little Big Horn? That maybe Washington should have given up allowing settlers into the area? Hell, we were having just as much problems dealing with the natives in the New Mexico Territory too. Should have pulled out there too. It does end there. You sit in Texas and the Apache come in from the territory to the west. You try to put pressure on them in the territory and the just cross the Mexican border and continue their raiding from across the Rio Grande. It will never end [at least from the perspective of 1870]. There is no central strategy. Constantly suffering casualties, a continuing drain on the nation's treasury, and certainly unpopular with the eastern intellectual city folk. There is no consistence policy. How would you ever succeed?
Guys, note for you. This is a part of the unending process that every great nation goes through. When it gives up and permit the 'enemy' the choice of when and where they will do their dirty work is when the curtain begins to fall. If it ain't worth fighting for, it ain't worth having.
#2
We can write off the war as a "tactical draw" and make "regional stability" our measure of "victory."
Choke, spit, cough! He said what??
Exactly who's side are you on there LTG(ret)Odom?? The men and women fighing for our nation did NOT join so your fat retired ass could pontificate about the virtues of a tie in the war on terror! This is not "hysterical rhetoric" you dumbass. We are destin for more WTC events with guys like you spouting your "acceptable draw" in this war. GFY!
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
02/12/2007 10:31 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The article shows, once again that just because Bush's wrong (the only freedom Arabs want is the freedom to kill their enemies i.e., anybody not immediate family, with impunity) doesn't mean his detractors are right.
#5
"The article shows, once again that just because Bush's wrong (the only freedom Arabs want is the freedom to kill their enemies i.e., anybody not immediate family, with impunity) doesn't mean his detractors are right."
In my opinion, Bush made a major blunder in positing that our efforts in Iraq are certain to succeed, that sweeping aside Middle East dictators and establishing democratic self-governance in their place WILL be the key to dealing with Islamic terrorism in the long term. In nearly every speech on the topic, he has spoken with an almost religious faith-- even a blind faith-- on the power of freedom to overcome the hatred and evil that visited us on 9/11. He speaks of the advancement of freedom as being "the calling of our generation".
But there's a big problem with that faith of his: not everybody shared it even in the beginning when things seemed to be going well, and fewer still share it now. I suspect the average Joe on the street looks at everything going on in Iraq and the rest of the Arab/Islamic world and mutters, "Yeah, right. Just look at those people-- there's no way in Hell you're ever gonna turn them into anything other than what they are: savages." So when he hears Bush go on and on with his high-minded "freedom" talk, he suspects Bush is just clueless.
Worse still, by taking a public stance of rock-solid certainty that democracy and freedom WILL cure what ails the Muslim world, Bush set the stage for exactly what we've ended up with: an interminable, irresolvable national political argument over whether or not Bush is "right", with his political allies (such as they are, anyway) claiming that he is, and his political enemies shouting to the rooftops that no, he is wrong (along with being wrong about everything else, everywhere, all the time, and in every way possible, with no exceptions).
I think that it would have been a lot better if, rather than continuing to express that unshakable faith of his that freedom and democracy WILL cause Arabs to cease their fascination with murdering us kufr and turn them into responsible world citizens, he had simply positioned our Iraq effort (and Afghanistan as well) as an option we needed to try, in part because, among the options available to us, it is the only one in which neither we nor the Islamic world ends up having to take a big one up the ass.
He should have told the American public, in effect, "Look, we've got to try this. Maybe it'll work, maybe it won't; but we won't know unless we try. We're certainly not going to surrender to the enemy, not on my watch. We've tried appeasement, we know that won't work. Ignoring the attacks, or withdrawing from the world, isn't going to work either. We've tried the "law enforcement" approach to terrorism, that's what got us to 9/11 in the first place. As much as many of you abhor the Patriot Act and being felt up by surly airline security personnel every time you try to board a plane, that's NOTHING like the police state it would take to stop terrorism by heightened domestic surveillance alone; not gonna do that. And we're not about to declare totalische wehr on the entire Islamic world, whether to conquer and subjugate them, or to punish them, or to intimidate them, or to exterminate them. This attempt at transforming the Middle East through the power of democratic self-rule may work or it may not, there are no guarantees; but we need to try it because the other options are all far worse."
Had he done that, the argument today would be about "yes, it's working" versus "no, it isn't" rather than about "Bush is right!" versus "Bush is wrong!" and that would have been a lot healthier for this country.
However, at this point that's all academic: come January 20, 2009 the Bush Doctrine-- all of it, both the democracy part and the preemptive war part-- will be dead whether Bush is succeeded by another Republican or by a Democrat.
God help us. I see dead people-- LOTS of them.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
02/12/2007 18:31 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Things will be a lot worse, Dave D., before they be any better.
Iran has caught two Al Qaeda terrorists who were making their way from Pakistan, through Afghanistan and Iran, to Iraq, where Al Qaeda is fighting a bloody sectarian war against the Shia. The two were caught on a very familiar route used by Al Qaeda men to go to the Caucasus and Iraq to make things tough for the United States. Of late, however, Iran has been catching the Al Qaeda terrorists and turning them over to the US allies even though not long ago it had sheltered Osama bin Ladens son and the leader of Al Qaedas Iraq jihad, Abu Musab Al Zarqawi.
Ironically, Washington is making ready to accuse Iran of collaborating with Al Qaeda. In fact some observers think that President Bush might be about to order an air attack on Iran. According to them, Vice President Dick Cheney and some conservative think-tanks are in favour of punishing Iran from the US military build-up in the Gulf, while the Defence and State Departments are opposed to any such action. While Irans president, Mahmud Ahmadinejad, and the American president George W Bush send verbal lightening bolts at each other, the two countries are also watching their interests coalesce in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In Pakistan, however, ruling politicians are telling the Karzai government and North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) forces in Afghanistan to consult with the old warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar to get rid of the Taliban curse. Iran has changed tack on Al Qaeda because it has been punished for its past policy of helping its terrorists pass through for Kurdistan in Iraq. The Iranians must have regretted especially their act of letting Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, then Al Qaeda chief in Herat in Afghanistan, use Iranian territory for his adventures. Zarqawi turned the Islamic jihad into a Sunni jihad, which now has to be fought against the Shia and Iran. In 2006 he destroyed the Askari shrine in Samarra containing the remains of two Shia imams and one structure dedicated to Imam Mahdi. Zarqawi was killed by the Americans the same year near Baghdad, as an unintended gesture to Iran.
Zarqawi sat at the Islam Qila crossroads giving access to Turkey through Iran, on the one hand, and to Chechnya through Turkmenistan, on the other. He was closely watched by the Iranians although there was agreement between Iran and Al Qaeda on the right of passage for the mujahideen. Zarqawi knew that the Iranians were financing the Shia militias against the Taliban. Osama bin Laden was impressed with Zarqawis efforts at training jihadists in explosives and chemicals (there was even a rumour that Al Qaedas nuclear material was also stored in Herat) and therefore did not hesitate to give him money for his plan to carry out terrorists attacks in Israel in 2000.
Zarqawi landed first in Kurdistan and promptly divided the leadership there. He also took advantage of the Saudi funds injected into Kurdistan for Salafism although that was anathema to Osama bin Laden. Far from attacking Israel he thought of leading the Sunnis of Iraq against the Shia and Iran. He pushed the Kurdish extremist leader Mullah Krekar nurtured by Pakistan as a teacher at its Islamic University in Islamabad to run away and seek asylum in Norway. Zarqawi them moved to the Anbar province and began supporting the sectarian writers funded by Saudi Arabia and posting intensely ant-Shia harangues on his websites.
Osama and Al Zawahiri at first disapproved of Zarqawis new policy but were defeated by the funds Zarqawi was able to attract from Europe for his programme. (The expat funding from Europe was manifestly anti-American but subliminally ant-Shia.) In December 2006 Osama bin Laden finally gave in and agreed to change Al Qaedas policy. Al Qaeda is now a sectarian outfit and jihad is turned against Iran. It is because of this change that Iran has acted against Al Qaeda men passing through its territory. For the information of Senator Mushahid Hussain in Pakistan, Iran may no longer look kindly at Hekmatyar who once hid there when his total lack of direction in policy had exhausted his options in Afghanistan.
Pakistan is shooting itself in the foot backing the Taliban. In Washington, policy-makers must wake up to the fact that the Taliban and Al Qaeda are Americas major enemy in the region and not Iran. Pakistans own interest too lies with Iran, which will be its only source of energy in the coming years. America is already in the same bed with Iran on its backing to the Northern Alliance and its non-Pushtun components. Ironically it may be the Northern Alliance that might be willing to recognise the Durand Line, not Hekmatyar or the Pushtuns of Afghanistan. *
Posted by: Fred ||
02/12/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Good read.
Who is the bigger danger Pakistan with Saudi Funding or Iran and Hezbollah/Syria????
In The UK we see the Pakistan threat as more urgent!!!!
#1
Besides, your mayor stated Christianity and Islam are compatible. You will never see or hear Muslims go around defaming Christianity or Judaism. Don't your dare bash Islam!
Either Mahmoud has been living in a well somewhere or his fingers fell off after typing that line.
#2
The article, really more of a letter to the editor, purports to have been written by a retired black air force tech sergeant living in Ohio. The man obviously has no first hand knowledge of either Jack Ellis or Macon and was just reacting to attacks on a fellow black muslim. Unfortunately for him, Ellis is a consumate con artist, a man who makes Kingfish (of Amos and Andy fame) look restrained. Ellis has always answered charges of graft, corruption, and incompetence with a smile and the comment that when he left office he was going to leave Georgia for life on a yacht in the Caribbean. As the end of his term as mayor approaches, his conversion appears to be the opening phase of just another scam. That said, the sort of knee-jerk support a scoundrel like Ellis can evoke by being a "muslim" in people that don't know him, should lead to serious thoughts about the potential for a fifth column in this country. Ellis is a clown, a black Benny Hill. What happens when "serious" muslims with an anti-US agenda come asking for support?
Western Europe is crazier than any civilization before it in history, even paying its own enemies to colonize it and thinking about thoughts about cultural diversity as it is being wiped out. France has loved revolts and mayhem since 1789.
Many Western intellectuals and academics were delusional about the reality of the communist threat. Reagan, who dared to challenge blackmail from one of the most brutal regimes in human history, was reviled and ridiculed by the leftist intelligentsia, and is still hated even a generation after the Cold War ended. There is a massive fifth column of left-wingers during the Cold War who sapped our strength and appeased our enemies. These very same groups continue their work uninterrupted, and switched from promoting Soviet Communism to promoting Jihad.
You know you live in a Western country when the media is cheering for your enemies, when your schools and universities teach your children that your civilization is evil and when your politicians think its a sign of extremism if you want to protect your nations borders.
Perhaps we will win this struggle for liberty only when Western left-wingers decide that love their children more than they hate Western civilization.
I think victory will be possible when the influence of these burnt-out Marxists finally dies out with their generation, which is barely interested in having children. A related development today demonstrates the spinelessness and death-wish of Europe. One of the Baader-Meinhof terrorists serving 9 life sentences for murder has been set for early release after serving only 24 years.
#4
For all the talk about liberty, the folks around at the end of the American War of Independence sent tens of thousands of Tories [crown loyalist] packing. There was an understanding that if you didn't buy into the program, you were a threat whose presence was not welcome. The war made starkly clear who could be part of the program. You think it hurt the new nation in the long run? After the collapse of the former Soviet Union, Marxists should have been treated like former Nazi SS prison guards.
#5
Rome did the same thing before its fall. Outsource defense, imported thousands of more illegal immigrants slaves to do the work Romans wouldn't do. Cost of socialist programsgames and bread were breaking the Roman bank. Roman politicians were more worried about making themselves rich than doing any real lawmaking. The population was more interested in entertaining themselves rather than problems of empire. Rome paid off enemies rather than crush them.
Things came to a head when the goths were at the gates.
"But, but we were NICE to them! Why do they hate us?"
#6
And these people are not allowed to bear arms.
YET.
I guess Fjordman figures they'll grow old and die off rather than take back their country. That would mean yet another continent for us to clean up....again.
#8
Multiculturalism and mass immigration Its a beauty contest for bored, Western intellectuals who use immigrants as a mirror to reflect their own inflated egos, a sport where they can nurse their vanity in the mistaken belief that denigrating your own cultural heritage is a sign of goodness and lack of prejudice.
Its all about making them feel good about themselves right now, without regard for future consequences of their actions.
This guy really says it like it is
Posted by: bk ||
02/12/2007 17:29 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Why is it SO impossible for Westerners to understand that the Muzzie immigrants have NO RESPECT for Western culture, values, lifestyles, religion, and are tantamount to an invading FORCE OF DESTRUCTION? It just seems so elementary.
I'd like some feedback.
If suddenly:
women were forced to be genitally mutilated (practical equivalent of castration),
were forced to wear billowing, hard to get around in, hot, ugly clothes at all times in public,
couldn't go anywhere without a male escort, or be raped if alone,
were not allowed to vote,
were not allowed to see movies, operas, plays, concerts,
were not allowed to associate freely with peers of the opposite sex,
were not allowed to eat or drink what they chose to,
would these Western morons get it THEN? What is it going to take?
Someone has to make the rules. If those "someones" are outnumbered, then the other guys, the supplanters, will be the someones calling the shots.
#10
"Why is it SO impossible for Westerners to understand..."
Because then they'd have to abandon their bland, feel-good Sesame Street sensibilities and acknowledge that there is real evil in the world. And then they'd have to confront it. And if they confronted it, head-on with the full force it would take to vanquish that evil, they would no longer be able to think of themselves as "nice".
That's my theory, anyway...
Posted by: Dave D. ||
02/12/2007 18:41 Comments ||
Top||
#11
You know you are in a Western country when one of the major networks (ABC) runs a travelogue on your enemies during its morning feel good program.
ABC's Good Morning America ran the travelogue on Syria last week and is covering Iran starting today. The coverage could not be more fawning, uncritical or amateurish. They are working feverishly to better humanize our enemies so that popular opinion goes against any possible attack. Hey, the Iranians seem like nice people, we should be able to do business with them.
Of course the average Iranian is great on a personal level. What in the hell does that have to do with ANYTHING when their government is killing our soldiers and Marines and actively thwarting our efforts in Iraq?
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
