(via Little Green Footballs)
Saudi cleric Nasser bin Sliman Al-Omar explains why watching the World Cup may cause you to be condemned to eternal torment.
Nasser bin Sliman Al-Omar: With regard to the World Cup... Let me ask you, brother Muhammad... May Allah protect your daughter and sons, but imagine that you are about to undergo a surgical operation, and they tell you the doctor is late because he is watching the game. How would you feel?
Interviewer: Undoubtedly, very bad.
Nasser bin Sliman Al-Omar: OK, imagine that while paying a condolence call, one of the people gets up and turns on the TV to watch the game, and he begins to clap his hands?
Interviewer: No doubt, this is bad.
Nasser bin Sliman Al-Omar: Our brothers are being killed in all corners of the world, yet we sit down to watch the World Cup?
[...]
You know how our sons used to admire one of the great players. You know how our sons used to admire him. He came as a guest to a certain Saudi city. He was hosted by one of the soccer clubs. They imitated him in everything, including his earring. Someone asked a young man: Why are you wearing an earring? He answered: Because that player wears one. He said to him: But he wears it on his left ear, so the young man moved it to his left ear. Do you know what became of this player? He became a drug addict, despite being an international player, and he began to visit the so-called Wailing Wall in Israel. This is the man admired by our sons, Im sad to say.
[...]
During the last World Cup, while the call for prayer was being aired on TV... the TV that was broadcasting the game announced: We will now broadcast the call for prayer. The ball was really close to the goal at that moment, and one guy got up and cursed the muazzin.
[...]
I am saying to the fathers, to the mothers, and to the people who watch these games: On Judgment Day, a page in the book will be opened for you, and it will say that you sat and watched the games. Will this make you happy or miserable? Will this make you happy on Judgment Day, when you face Allah, or will you wish you had never watched these games?
#3
Let me ask you, brother Muhammad... May Allah protect your daughter and sons, but imagine that you are rigging up a bomb, and you are distracted because you are watching the game and you connect the wrong wires and explode in a ball of fire and shrapnel. How would you feel?
#4
Being a huge fan of the beautiful game, I say it's worth it. Phones go off the hook in T -35 minutes.
Posted by: Rafael ||
06/09/2006 11:22 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Wow!
His logic is inescapable. Basically anything fun or enjoyable in life is contradictory to Islam. Sex, booze, music, a good Bratwurst, and now even soccer!
Holy shit, where do I sign up!
#7
This nutcase iman has not seen the Univision bodypaint calandars for the World Cup. With wimmin painted in their teams colors..
Otherwise this report would not be so tame.
#10
Well, you know, if you watch the World Cup then you go to Hell, it must mean that the vast numbers of Americans who don't give a damn about soccer are going to Heaven.
Europe's economic decline is now well documented. But the Continent suffers from a more deadly disease, one the psychologists might call "lack of self-esteem". This comes to mind when certain countries make life unbearable for anti-Islamist freedom fighters such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali -- forcing them to flee. Sometimes, as in the Hirsi Ali case, it is not only a government, but a majority of the population who support these de facto exiles.
Holland is just one of the European countries that seem ashamed to defend their own values when challenged by the Islamists in their midst. Some day ago, several pubs and business centers in the United Kingdom even declared they will not fly the British flag out of fear of the Muslim reaction by fanatics who claim the St. Andrew's cross element of the Union Jack symbolizes "crusaders".
In Italy, the new center-left government led by former European Commission Chief Romano Prodi is known for its soft stance with respect to the immigration and Muslim issues. One of the first decisions taken just one month after taking office, is to soften the immigration policy by increasing the number of those who can enter the country, even illegally, and granting citizenship more easily. This policy has proven to be not only a failure, but a threat to the national security of those nations in Europe, such as the Netherlands, where it has been applied.
Continued on Page 49
#1
Will the Europeans be willing to reject their democratic principles for the sake of the multicultural utopia?
They already have surrendered their future to the velvet glove of a EU authoritarian bureaucracy, trading freedom and challenge for obedience and nannyism. Other than resurrecting Madame Guillotine on the Place de Concorde for their current rulers, it is unlikely they'll be able to stop the fatigued surrender of their ruling elites to the muzzies. Im sure the elites will work some sort of Janissary deal for themselves, the rest of you are screwed. Maybe you can immigrate to Mexico. It would be a nice karmic balance.
#2
O' for the days of Lake Wobegon when LEFTIST > IMPROVEMENT OF SOCIETY, FOR EVERYONE, FREELY AND DEMOCRATICALLY, NOT Universal-Permanent-Totalitarian Governmentism, Regulation and Hyper-Regulation, Bureaucratism, pan-PoliticoSocioCultural Stratification
for the sake of Stratification, etal. "Tyranny and Holocaust is good for everyone except..."like now!?
It seems that more factions are arising in the democratic party than exist in Islam. The animosities and alliances are increasing daily as we approach the mid-term elections. And ironically, the primary season for the next Presidential elections begins just a day after these elections, so they, too, figure into the confusion.
To start with, the chairman of the DNC, Howard Dean, made it his priority to use the national parties' monies to rebuild the decrepit State parties. Several States had almost no paid party organization left, so he had little choice unless the democratic party was to just forfeit those States to the republicans.
But that meant that the national parties' monies cannot be spent on the re-election of congressmen. They will have to raise their own money. This in turn means that they owe the party and its leadership NO loyalty in the elections, or even in congress.
This is already happening, as not only have the Congressional Black Caucus spurned Nanci Pelosi and the other House Leader's request that William Jefferson step down from a less than critical committee seat; but just today, John Murtha announced that if the democratic party wins a majority in the House, he intends to run for House Majority Leader, which means he stands against both Minority Leader Pelosi and the Minority Whip.
These two events show an open revolt in the House of Representatives by democrat congressmen.
Hillary Clinton has already shown party disloyalty by contacting all of the major democratic party contributors and soliciting donations for herself instead of the party. In turn, she is trying to buy the loyalty of some of the poorer congressmen by giving them funds, in exchange for supporting her Presidential ambitions. If she announces, she will still need to do so almost immediately after being elected, with just a few weeks' grace.
John Kerry has limited funds doled out by his wife, and so must go the traditional route of campaigning while fund-raising. He most likely hopes to run as Hillary's running mate, as otherwise her organization would already be trying to destroy him.
Al Gore can lay low for the time being, as after his loss, he made friends with the owners of Google, and obtained a huge amount of stock prior to Google's IPO. He may have made several hundred million dollars, and so has no funding problems should he choose to run against Hillary. He is one of the democrats that bitterly hates her, so this is a strong possibility, if she announces.
Of course, others may enter the primary race, but only with intent to run for a cabinet post, if the main contest is close. Christopher Dodd is one such also-ran, but may drain some of Kerry's New England support.
Interestingly, comparisons are already being made between today and the democratic split at the party convention of 1968. Then, the traditional faction led by Hubert Humphrey surrendered to the radical faction led by George McGovern, resulting in electoral catastrophe.
Today, the radical faction has re-emerged with the anti-war movement, backed by Moveon.org, the Daily Kos, and other such rabble, and they wish to overthrow the part of the democratic leadership with at least pretentions to moderation. They suffer a timing problem, as the next democratic national convention will not be for two more years. However, much manipulation can be done by Howard Dean, who is in their favor.
This means that even though there is little chance of their winning with radical candidates opposed to traditional candidates in the mid-term primaries, they will try to run as many delegates to the national convention as possible, followed by a floor revolt to name a radical candidate for the next Presidential election.
In the final analysis, a lid could be kept on this situation with a determined and disciplined leadership, with tight control over funding, and a willingness to force grudging alliances and party, if not candidate, loyalty.
The democratic party has none of these things. So all must be resolved in a grotesque and bitter melee. And this is even before their first combat with the republicans.
Wouldn't it be the greatest of ironies if they actually lost seats in the mid-term elections?
#1
I dunno, 'Moose. Certainly, the Democrats richly deserve a catastrophe in opposing, and undermining, the WoT. But never underestimate the capacity of the Republicans-- especially this lot of sad sacks we've got now-- to do something mind-bogglingly boneheaded.
But we can always hope.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
06/09/2006 21:03 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I see so many parallels between the Dhimmicraps and the jihadis that it is mind-boggling. Each seems determined to implode - by crapping on the host country, LOL.
#6
What does one expect - even dedicated Lefty Netters/Bloggers are using the terms LEFTIST, LIBERAL and or SOCIALIST synonymously, to include vv DEMOCRAT. COMMUNIST, TOTALITARIAN, ANTI-AMERICAN AMERICAN, OWG-ist, and ASIANIST-EURASIANIST, etc. is still too nouveau avant-garde, too horribly anti-PC and Painful for Lefty use or admittance yet BUT ITS COMING.
What to do with the news that a terrorist master responsible for the murder of untold numbers of American servicemen and women has been killed? Well, for many Democrats, that was a question that actually required thought before being answered.
No instantaneous rejoicing. No thankfulness that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was sent to his maker courtesy of 1,000 pounds of American-made munitions delivered via F-16. No, the first reaction of many Democrats was either worry or disdain. Worry over how to spin a response so that it brings maximum political advantage, and disdain that the U.S. military had a victory on President Bush's watch. The other reaction was incredulity. Some Democrats believe the whole story was fabricated by the military to distract from the "truth" of Bush's failure as a President. Consider the following comments made by actual Democrats:
Am I the only one who thinks this is one big scam on America and the world, to make it look like they "killed a main terrorist" and rid the world of an evil person?"
Continued on Page 49
#1
The Democrats have made getting the troops home the top priority.
Hmm..why? At least you can pull an Al Gore and despirately work to get their absentee votes thrown out. You bring them back they'll only tell their friends and neighbors of the Big Lie[tm] that you and your media buddies have been telling and they'll certainly not vote for you at the local polling station.
Big Lie[tm] is the property of the Reich Ministry of Propaganda. Property awarded to the holders of the Julius Streicher Prize for stereotyping and demonizing fellow citizens [won for the shameless defamation of our military during time of war; 2003, 2004, 2005, and nominated for 2006].
#2
The main "power" behind the left has become mental illness, and exhibits itself in an almost paranoid version of schizophrenia. Just look at the kook comments - they all require Bush to have some huge conspiracy, and that the world is out to cheat the left from its "rightful" position as dictators to the peopel of what is good for them.
They've become Colonel Nicholson at the end of Bridge over the River Kwai - where he has followed the detonation cord to the trigger for the explosives that were emplaced by commados to blow up the bridge he just willingly built for the Japanese war effort (but ignored the consequences of the bridge).
Joyce: Officer, sir. A British officer. We're here to blow up the bridge, sir!
Nicholson: Blow up the bridge?
Joyce: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. British commando orders, sir.
Nicholson (in disbelief): Blow up the bridge!?
Nicholson, like the left, is so attached to his view of reality that he has lost sight of the true evil in the situation.
Nicholson finally realizes he is blocking his own Allied side's operation to blow up the bridge. He gasps: What have I done?
When will the left realize it, that their actions and everything they have done is misdirected and wrong?
#3
And as I recall, Nicholson was shot by his Japanese masters, inadvertently blowing up the bridge but expiring in the event. The same may happen to the donks at the hands of their islamo-tranzi co-dependents. We can hope.
#4
"When will the left realize it, that their actions and everything they have done is misdirected and wrong?"
Never.
Colonel Nicholson's distorted view of reality was born of his desperate situation as a prisoner. The Left's distorted views come from the malevolence and hatred that is within them. As someone remarked here yesterday, "these people have no souls."
Posted by: Dave D. ||
06/09/2006 12:34 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden were appropriately pleased. My half (ok, maybe a little less than half) of the dem party is pleased as punch. I got no truck with friggin Kos, let alone his loony commentators, Kerry is a has been, and the prospect of Pelosi speaking for us makes me think that if end up just SHORT of a majority in the House, that wouldnt be such a bad thing (we can still pass legislation with the RINO's, but dont need to have Pelosi as Speaker)
The blogosphere has been abuzz. But in the days since Rolling Stone magazine published a long piece that accused Republicans of widespread and intentional cheating that affected the outcome of the last presidential election, the silence in America's establishment media has been deafening.
In terms of bad news judgment, this could turn out to be the 2006 equivalent of the infamous "Downing Street memo," the London Times story that was initially greeted by the U.S. media with a collective yawn.
Robert Kennedy Jr.'s Rolling Stone mega-essay is titled "Was the 2004 Election Stolen?" It focuses on widespread voting irregularities, questionable tallies and disenfranchising practices, particularly in Ohio, which President Bush won by more than 100,000 votes.
Continued on Page 49
#1
Get use to it boys and girls. Its going to become even more widespread. When you start from an absolutist position, that there is only one true faith [socialism] and it is the only legitimate form of politics, it follows that the only way the true and faithful are denied the rule of their God is through evil manipulation. That mindset has already been attained. Now that is the basis for legitimizing any action regardless of the illegal or unconstitutional nature of said act. Theyve already been engaged heavily in projection, blaming others for deeds they themselves have been practicing for generations. They cant feel hypocrisy, because as a true believe, they are above sin, since they by faith are entitled to the power. If the river of history is any indication of where this current leads us, its not going to end pretty. Just remember that in the end, they have no use for democracy, only power.
#2
Here's Young Master Kennedy's next investigative assignment. "Widespread and intentional cheating that affected the outcome of the" 1960 Presidential Election.
Go get'em, kid...
#3
Taking the world a a Drunk on anything is stupid.
What about the stolen election in Washington state you TRAZNZI fecal matter? Dems have been stealing elections forever.
#4
The Angry Left has fallen into a fantasy ideology--just like its Islamofascist allies.
Posted by: Mike ||
06/09/2006 9:24 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I saw RFK Jr. (aka Friedo) on a couple of networks and I know exactly why the MSM isnt looking into this: RFK Jr. is an unbalanced NUT. He comes off as whiney, moobatish, and aloof which is an accomplishment. Basically his stance is that If you were as smart as me you would understand this. He claims are long on conspiracy, lacking on any facts, and folds neatly into the pigeon hole that the LLL calls the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. For that reason the MSM is RUNNING from this story lest the expose a Kennedy as a loon. If this story had any truth to it, Uncle Ted (Drunk-Mass) would say so on the floor of the Senate and demand an investigation.
#8
At least AirAmerica (what's left of it) still loves him - 'Ring of Fire: Saturdays 5pm - 7pm EST
The heroin, or Uncle Teddy, must have fried his brain.
Posted by: ed ||
06/09/2006 13:41 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Kennedys harshest public thrashing to date, however, came from one of his closest colleagues, Riverkeeper founder Robert Boyle. Along with seven other Riverkeeper board members, Boyle resigned in 2000 after Kennedy insisted upon hiring a convicted environmental felon as the groups chief scientist. At the time, Boyle told the New York Post that Kennedy is very reckless, and added that [h]es assumed an arrogance above his intellectual stature.
Therefore, a true kennedy.
Posted by: ed ||
06/09/2006 13:46 Comments ||
Top||
#10
This perhaps won't please here, but, hey, if indeed the election WAS stolen, then, I say GOOD JOB, and WELL DONE. The mass-media have already subverted democracy in most western countries, for all I care (FYI, only 6% of french journalos declare themselves as conservative, and the msm are locked, and follow the party line), so that chimpiebush-halliburton-carlyle-lizardcheney outplayed theses cheaters, KUDOS!
Regarding that post today on bilderberg, I think it has some truth, the globalists (rockfeller, ford fundation, cfr, trilateral comm, Eu european commission, Rome club,...) are a real force, and they have a name : "tranzis", because they're socialist, they're in symbiosis with counter culture, big business & mass media (remember Atomic Conspiracy and his "Conquest of cool"?) and don't believe in Nation-State based democracy (see the EU, post-national, post-democratic, soft-totalitarian).
They ARE the ennemy of Western civilization, they are cheating and twisting democracy to suit their goals, I wouldn't cry over seeing them outcheated.
Deputy Secretary General of the United Nations Mark Malloch Brown yesterday delivered remarkably candid remarks before a conference sponsored by our two organizations in which he called for greater U.S. leadership in strengthening the United Nations leadership which is clearly lacking. Mr. Malloch Browns comments revealed an understandable frustration with the current lack of U.S. support for the worlds premier international organization.
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John R. Bolton reacted to the speech by calling it the worst mistake by a senior U.N. official that I have seen. In typical fashion, Bolton responded with a threat: To have the Deputy Secretary General criticize the United States in such a manner can only do harm to the United Nations.
Thoughtful and objective readers will agree that Mr. Malloch Browns remarks do not merit the bomb-throwing invective typical of our nations current diplomat to the United Nations; indeed, John Bolton sadly proves Mr. Malloch Browns point.
Continued on Page 49
#4
The light bulb went off for me, too. I got out an old book, Call It Conspiracy, by Larry Abraham, and it puts the founders and directors of our nation's most powerful institutions, both past and present, as coincidentally also being often members of Skull & Bones and the CFR. Henry Kissinger, Henry Luce, Prince Bernhard, Allen Greenspan, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation, Standard Oil, Chase Manhattan Bank, and other financial dynasties are supposedly all in cahoots to run the world. Supposedly the Rockefellers and Rothchilds arranged rebates on oil, shipped on their railroads, traded with the Communists as far back as the Bolshevik Revolution, and still managed to fuel Hitler's war machine to bank enormous profits. Nelson Rockefeller was supposedly the architect of appeasement and accomodation of the Communists, and have profited from war ever since, supplying both sides, but they are always 'win-win' deals. Abraham contends "Jimmy Carter was David Rockefeller's creation", which somehow makes the conspiracy quite plausible for me. Rockerfeller is also the founder of the Trilateral Commission. If that doesn't explain it all, the Rockefeller's donated land for the UN building, too, as well as compensating and relocating Palestinians when Israel was formed. That many of these same guys are at the Bilderberger gathering and members of these other groups struck me as too much of a coinky-dink as well. They've made a fine mess of things and FOX exposed it, confounding the NYT's and other MSM they control.
And Bolton is frustrating them????? How about John Bolton for President 2008?
#6
The 400 lb gorilla that these Tranzis carefully ignore is that it isn't that we changed or moved away from the UN ideal, the UN moved away from us. The kleptocrats, scam artists, so-called NAM and Group of 77, duplicitous assholes in power in France, the congenitally fucked triangulaters of Russia and China, et al, hijacked the institution.
Podesta's just another Tranzi tool earning his skim.
But he has done us a service by publicly airing the appalling state of the relationship between the US and the UN.
The diplomatic world came to a shuddering halt today when Mark Malloch Brown, Deputy Secretary General of the UN, was undiplomatic: he told the truth. Addressing a US audience, he noted that "the prevailing [US] practice of seeking to use the UN almost by stealth as a diplomatic tool while failing to stand up for it against its domestic critics is simply not sustainable. You will lose the UN one way or another."
Not exactly stirring stuff, but such is the nature of the truth that it caused a massive storm in the land of the brave and the free, led by the US Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, who declared Malloch Brown's speech "a very, very grave mistake by the Deputy Secretary General. ... the worst mistake by a senior UN official that I have seen." And just to prove Malloch Brown was right in saying that the administration does nothing to protect the UN from US critics, Bolton led the march: "fundamentally and very sadly, this was a criticism of the American people, not the American government, by an international civil servant, it's just illegitimate."
Continued on Page 49
#3
And when it is unsuccessful, as over Iraq, it simply ignores the UN - whilst giving it a good verbal bashing - then goes off and does as it pleases in any case.
I suppose the writer didn't hear that the UN and various governments involved in this were being bribed by Saddam?
#4
Agenda peddling masquerading as news. This is the third article in same vein I have read today and none of them mention Japan the second biggest contributor to the UN is also threatening to reduce its contribution. But then that doesn't fit the agenda so is ignored.
#10
What is it we have to lose exactly?
I can't ever remember a U.N. team comming into my town to give vaccine shots or dig wells, or anyting.
I have never benefited from a U.N. program at all.
It seems to me the rest of the world is shooting itself in the foot by pissing us off. After all is said and done, Brussels may be a better place to put the u.n.'s new headquarters, and they can pay to accomodate and protect, and pamper all the "ambassadors" from around the world. All their "clingers on" and spies and bullshit can go on the EU ticket.
#11
I was having such a great day until I read this. Now I gotta take my acid reflux meds. Really we only need to site three words: expensive, corrupt, ineffictive. Explains in total why most of America does not like the UN. This guy is just pissed cause he wants in our pocket in some welfare mode. FOAD it's my money and Bolten is doing the right thing here! I gotta get back to the pics of Zark to cheer me up. Oh ya, did not the UN run from Zark when he bombed them in Bagdad? So I guess I'm wrong, cowards should be the fourth word.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
06/09/2006 13:06 Comments ||
Top||
I'm done with the whole sorry mess. I don't want input from dictators/oligarchs on the solutions to international problem.
I'd be willing to support a "League of Democracy" or other such new international body that has measureable democratic/freedom parameters that states have to achieve for admitance. That kind of input I'd be willing to respect.
The current UN system is useless - throw them out of the US.
#14
Latest comment on this story is great. I am surprised Al Guardian has not deleted it:
VoicesOfTheUN
June 9, 2006 11:56 PM
Dear Middle America,
Recently Mark Malloch Brown, the eloquent speaking number two at the United Nations, said that "Middle America" did not know or understand how the US is constructively engaged with the UN because of UN detractors such as Rush Limbaugh and Fox News, and that the UN's role is "a secret" in Middle America.
And he complains that the US is not supporting even non-controversial issues such as renovating the dilapidated UN Headquarters in New York due to too much unchecked UN-bashing and stereotyping over too many years.
Friends in Middle America, the UN deserves to be bashed and bashed hard. Please allow us, a cross-section of Americans and others who work/ed for the United Nations, to give you a glimpse into how the United Nations is run:
Hirings and promotions routinely violate UN rules and revolve almost entirely around patronage and whom one knows rather than professional qualifications. Poorly performing managers are simply moved into different management slots while others are placed in senior positions only because of his nationality.
The generous salaries for UN employees are free of federal, state and local taxes and come with six weeks vacation, 11 holidays, 10 sick days that are used as vacation, plus 4 weeks of "home leave", rental and housing grants to supplement an already generous salary, and educational subsidies for the children of UN employees. Many also participate in an "alternative work schedule" in which they get every other Friday off.
Several of us have advanced degrees in administration, budgeting, finance, personnel, and other relevant areas of management, and we have been trained to manage large public organizations, and yet we are blocked from advancing by men in the 50s with no management training, education, or experience - only sitting in their chairs because they are friends with someone a higher position. We threaten nearly every
person we meet because they know they are there based only on their connections.
And there is a profound lack of accountability within the UN regarding resource allocation. Simple procurement that would normally take five minutes using modern technology systems takes 2-3 months in the UN. And many United Nations Development Program country offices pay "local
experts" outrageously high sums of money for products of dubious quality. Such contracts would never be made by other international aid agencies such as USAID that have much stronger internal controls and oversight.
We have witnessed several outrageous examples of graft and corruption within the UN system and yet time and again the scandal is covered up because internal UN financial audits are simply comedy. Forms are from the 1950s, and auditors are most interested in inventorying furniture. In fact, a recent article on internal management in the Financial Times cited a UN-commissioned report released in 1994 that was remarkably damning. Yet nothing changed, leading to this crisis in
credibility of the UN.
Despite its dysfunctionality, if the UN were actually making a difference in the lives of others, many would grumble or mutter to themselves but the UN deserves its strongest bashing because of its profound inability to respond to genocide, war, famine, natural disaster emergencies, and other tragedies.
Kofi Annan, current head of the United Nations who ironically lives in a mansion in New York on the shore of the East River that is worth about $10 million, was head of peacekeeping operations in 1994 in Rwanda when 800,000 people died. He said in 2004 that "I believed at that time that I was doing my best" despite that he held back UN troops from intervening to settle the conflict and from providing more logistic and material support to stop the slaughter.
Kofi Annan was unable to stop mismanagement of the Oil-for-Food Program that allowed Saddam Hussein's regime to embezzle millions of dollars through under-priced oil contracts and overcharging in contracts for goods Iraq purchased under the program. According to a Government Accountability Office report, Saddam Hussein embezzled $4.4 billion through pricing irregularities. It is also estimated that Saddam acquired an additional $5.7 billion through illegal oil smuggling. Kofi's son Kojo received payments from the Swiss company Cotecna Inspection SA, which won a lucrative contract under the UN Oil for Food program.
Kofi Annan protected Ruud Lubbers, UN High Commissioner for Refugees, against a report that found him guilty of sexual harassment and misconduct by declaring him innocent by Kofi Annan. This created a global protest against Annan which resulted in Lubbers being forced to resign.
Kofi Annan remains in power while genocide continues in Darfur, while Zimbabwe tailspin into despotism, while up to a third of the population of some African countries will die from AIDS, and while corruption keeps the poorest countries in the starkest poverty.
And Kofi Annan arrogantly ignores the fact that the quality of life of several of us has come close to being destroyed by the many bitter experiences we have experienced over the past decades. Most who work for the UN are so used to its dysfunctionality that they have NO idea how sick the organization is or they are unable to come forward vecause most who work for the UN come from countries where the labor laws and protections are abysmal and where speaking out will land yourself in jail or worse.
And to add insult to injury, the newly created IOIS (the new
"independet" internal oversight panel established to "reform" the UN) has been strong-armed by Malloch Brown and is not independent because its budget comes directly from the UN, thus dissuading anyone from within the UN from coming forward.
Unfortunately, as the walls literally crumble down around them, those who work for the UN and citizens who believe in the founding principles of the UN have no understanding how bad it really is.
Unfortunately, we encourage young people who are seeking a career in international affairs or development to avoid the United Nations at all costs. We wish there would come a day when we would no longer make this recommendation.
Of course the senior leadership of the UN try to hide the profound problems of the UN but shame on them for saying that Americans don't know or understand how the US is engaged with the UN.
If Middle America truly understood what ails the UN, the US, who funds nearly 25% of the entire UN budget, would shut off the money spigot. In sum, the UN should be shuttered, allowing a brand new organization to emerge because the current UN is broken beyond repair.
For more information, please contact Edward Patrick Flaherty who represents UN employees including our views here. flaherty@sfhc.ch
Sincerely,
A concerned group of current and former UN employees
#15
Massive bitch-slap. I doubt it will change any minds among Al Guardian regulars, but an impressive recitation, nonetheless. Were it not for a few spelling and grammatical errors, it would be worthy of forwarding to everyone under the sun - especially the entire US Congress.
I'd wager our dear long lost Diplomad is either a member or advisor.
Iowahawk Guest Commentary
by Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi
Former Senior VP, Al-Qaeda In Iraq
Howzit swingin', fagsicles? Yeah, I know all you bitzoches all seen the pictures by now. Go on and laugh it up chump, like your drivers license photo is all George fuckin' Clooney. Personally I think I'm lookin' straight GQ, seeing as I just got a 500-pound laser guided curb stomp. Shit cuz, y'all should see Kahlid, a.k.a. "Ceiling Spackle." But, hey, whateva. You kuffar haters can finally step off my nuts, 'cause I. am. outtahere. Y'all can just suck it, 'cause Zarkman got his free pass to Allah's celestial Disneyland.
You think I didn't see this martyrdom goatshit coming? Cracka, please. When we were out in the boondocks filming that recruiting infomercial last month, I told that asshole Zawahiri that it was dangerous, that Team Satan would lock in on us with one of their outer space high tech computer gizmos. But nooooooo, he's all, "don't worry, they need an NSA warrant," and then he's like, "we have to attack the mindshare gap with a high GRP, Total Quality Jihad leadership marcom message." Which apparently means I have to stand there under Team Satan's goddamn spy satellites, yelling like the goddamn OxyClean guy, burning my goddamn hand on a goddamn machine gun barrel, while that goddamn director Omar Al-Spielberg asks for another goddamn take. Yeah, that's some world class marketing strategery there, Ayman. Best ad campaign since Pets.com. Have fun training all four of those Syrian droolers that it brought in.
So yeah, I figured I'd be caught in the next round of downsizing, so I started keeping myself prepared. For example, I shaved my junk every morning this week. Okay, I know what you're thinking: what the fizzuck? But trust me, it's in the Koran, and it's not as weird as it sounds. If you're about to be banging a room full of doe-eyed virgins, you're gonna want those nards Brazilian waxed pornstar style. Plus I guess them foxy heaven hos also appreciate a couple of splashes of cologne so they don't have to smell your stanky sack. It's just common martyr courtesy, and that's why around the AQ office we call Brut "the smell of death".
Continued on Page 49
. . . In religious terms, [Wahabbi-style Islam] is a religion of "realized eschatology," that by acting as if the utopian state can be significantly achieved in this present time, then the day will come, fairly soon, when the utopia will be entirely realized, an accomplishment that they view as certain anyway. Hence, the point of al Qaeda's terrorism, and of their allied groups, is to put them on the right side of history, to borrow a Marxist term. They understand that one way or another, the dar al Islam will ultimately triumph over the dar al harb: Islam will reign supreme over infidels. They seek, first, to be true Muslims and second, to help history move toward that triumph.
Their willingness to wage jihad against the infidels, especially giving their lives to do so, is how they cement their place as keepers and defenders of the faith. This faithfulness is not intended to make Allah suddenly, personally strike his enemies dead, but to make Islamist victory inevitable. Why? Because when they order their lives according to Islamic dicta (as they propound it), the flow of human affairs will naturally lead to Islamic triumph. Thats the way Allah has ordered the world.
But this belief is dependent upon a few things, not least of which is that Islam is actually the one true faith in all the world. It depends on their presuppositions that America is weak and weak willed. It depends on the Muslim ummah really wanting to see Islamism established across all the Arab lands, and that the ummah are willing to side with Islamists to make it so.
All these things are highly problematic. However concrete al Qaedas ultimate goals may appear, achieving them rests on a serious sense of self delusion and premises that are far from certain.
The death of Zarqawi does nothing to make Islamism's vision of utopia appear more likely in the eyes of the hundreds of millions of Muslims who are sitting on the fence, waiting to see which side to step off to. If al Qaeda et. al. really are the keepers of the true faith of Islam, as they insist they are, then it's reasonable for other Muslims to ask just when Allah will finally get in the game.
I think that more and more Muslims will decide that Ashraf al-Akhras is right: Allah is in the game, but not on al Qaeda's side.
Posted by: Mike ||
06/09/2006 00:13 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Yes, but for the muslims, allan is on the side of the muslims (Master Of The Obvious Award), and he will eventually reign over all mankind.
That he doesn't side with AQ and its violent mean to achieve that is meaningless, it only proves the *method* is wrong.
Terror is only a *method*, don't get too focused on it, the ennemy is *islam* and its 1400 years of expansion, bare the short period during which the unbelievers colonized the muslim lands (and enabled the 3rd jihad by discovering oil and jumpstarting their then moribund demography through modern medecine) .
The fence sitters won't go for AQ, ok, but they will still believe that the goal of submiting Europe (the REAL prize, the land of the franks, the land of the crusaders, the land of the ex-colonizers, the land where Rome stands, the city prophetized by old mo himself to be the next to fall to islam... remember, Khaddaffy's speech a few weeks ago?) is still going well, since they rightly see us as weakened and ripe for conquest.
And the more we'll seem weak, the more they will believe this is going to happen in their lifetime, or their children's. While we were stronger, it was "insh allan", but now, this is it. A real muslim, a believer, not a fundie, BELIEVE in that ineluctability. The wahabis and others may be millenarists in that sense they think they can bring it through their own actions and the way they please allan (and Donald Sensing is quite right here), but it is not an heretic, fringe belief in itself.
And so, they won't bomb us into submission, AQ-style, they'll colonize us muslim brotherhood-style, that's all.
"The death of our leaders is life for us. It will only increase our persistence in continuing holy war so that the word of God will be supreme."
--Al Qaeda in Iraq yesterday
The life of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi did not represent the word of God. This is false, a simple, dull lie. Whatever claims have been made through history in God's name, there is no imaginable sense in which the nations that emerged from World War II would grant legitimacy to al Qaeda's claims for God's blessing.
But it is a powerful lie. It appears to be the simple lie, we learned this week, that turned 17 Canadian Muslims from normalcy to planning the mass murder of fellow Canadians. It was the lie beneath the bombings of civilians in Madrid, London, Bali and the U.N.'s Baghdad headquarters. It was the lie beneath September 11.
It is doublethink: the contradictory belief, and it is a belief, that the murder of civilian innocents is a moral act, a "holy war." This is the powerful amoral lie that has allowed Zarqawi and al Qaeda to recruit men and women from a world-wide pool of 1.3 billion Muslims to wrap themselves in dynamite and set off bombs in the cafes and markets of Iraq and Israel. Or Ottawa. They then call it martyrdom. It is not martyrdom. It is mass murder.
If nothing else, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi understood that the effect on people of unrelenting mass murder in the global village would be corrosive. As with September 11's second falling tower, Zarqawi knew that he could force everyone in the dazed world community to participate via information electronics in every beheading, in every bombing of Iraqi police stations or open-air markets, and in every homicidal IED (improvised explosive device) detonated beneath American troops.
Zarqawi understood that promising to make constant murder a phenomenon of the world's life, and proving he could deliver on that promise, would corrode the possibility of normal human relationships everywhere--among Iraqis, between Iraqis and coalition forces, and in the U.S. between supporters of the Iraq war and those opponents of the war who abhor terrorism but have simply gone numb before Zarqawi's limitless capacity to kill. Western Europe has been made supine.
Now he has been killed, and this should rightly be called a moral victory.
In normal political terms, calling something a "moral victory" is often considered grasping at straws, putting a good face on a loss. In November 2000, for instance, the Green Party called Ralph Nader's quixotic presidential quest a moral victory that exposed two corrupt parties. Today some will diminish claims of a moral victory in the killing of Zarqawi; for them it is a Pyrrhic victory, not much more than an uptick in George Bush's "failed war." But I think the high stakes here make it a very powerful moral victory and that the better analogy would be to the anti-Soviet dissidents, such as Andrei Sakharov or Natan Sharansky.
Like Stalin, Zarqawi has used barbaric levels of personal violence to drive all of us--resident inside the Iraqi hell or in the watching world--toward a psychological gulag, a place of submission. Faced with news earlier in the week of 17 heads in two fruit crates, we are expected to give up, to throw in the towel against the day when "the word of God will be supreme." Each Soviet dissident was a singular event that stopped the world from internalizing the moral and psychological free fall of Soviet totalitarianism. Killing Zarqawi, who personally beheaded Americans Nicholas Berg and Eugene Armstrong, is a similar abrupt brake.
It stopped Zarqawi himself. His moral abyss is not inevitable. Those among us who insist on belittling yesterday's achievement in Baqubah are simply lost to reflexive opposition to the U.S. side. But for many others, up against the insurgency, the possibility of reversing the recent drop in political support for this necessary effort seems possible again.
Start with the Iraqi police. On the news of Zarqawi's death, they were seen rejoicing in Sadr City, one of Baghdad's poorest districts. No order can be sustained in Iraq's cities unless men have the courage to serve as police. Thus the insurgency makes them a top target.
Iraq's new, aggressive Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said yesterday that Baqubah-area residents offered tips for the air strike. This is a potentially important turn. The respected Iraqi bloggers at Iraq the Model wrote this week from Baghdad, "Severed heads of civilian Iraqis were found twice in fruit boxes in and around Hibhib [near Baqubah]; a terrible crime that shocked Iraqis." So there are limits.
It will take courage for normal Iraqis to blow the whistle on the insurgents among them. Take Haditha, site of the alleged Marine massacre that global publicity has made a household name for moral collapse. But how about this for moral collapse: Haditha is mined with IEDs, the remote bombs that kill U.S. soldiers. A source with contacts among the Marines there called this week to explain how this works: Insurgents offer Haditha residents $100 to plant an IED; if they decline, the insurgents promise to murder them and their families, and they do murder non-collaborators. These are villages where everyone knows everyone, not Paris in 1942. As a result of the insurgents' Satanic kill-or-die policy, my source said, any conceivable bond between U.S. troops there and the local population has been broken.
Getting Zarqawi doesn't solve this. But it helps. It shows average Iraqis that someone--their new government, the U.S., the Jordanian intelligence service and people like themselves--are capable of organizing to resist the insurgency's stone killers.
It is ironic that Hamas's statement yesterday described Zarqawi as "martyred at the hands of the savage crusade." "Crusade" was one of the favorite words used by the "slaughtering sheik." While the West gave up holy wars centuries ago, Zarqawi and al Qaeda have made it explicit that moral claims justified their murders, and many Muslims believe this. We understand that. We should then understand that the defeat of al-Zarqawi is a moral victory, and an important one.
Daniel Henninger is deputy editor of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page.
What beauty is, is averageness. The nose not too long, or too short, the distance between the eyes not to wide or narrow, etc. And symmetry is part of that mathematical averaging. This phenomenon was first noticed by researchers at MIT when they were studying the morphing of photographs, and noticed that the composite picture got better looking the more individual pictures were added into the program. Their conclusion: beauty is our intuitive way of picking the safest conduit to pass down our genes -- going for the middle of the bell-curve, with least chance of outliers mucking things up....
#4
And while you are over at the link snortling, do click on "Hijackers Surprised to Find Selves in Hell." It is classic Onion and still apropos today.
On Wednesday, the Senate fell 18 votes short of the two-thirds majority required to pass a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. The mainstream media joined Sen. Edward Kennedy in calling the entire debate a distraction from the nation's business and a wedge with which to divide Americans.
Since the main business of Congress is to devise ever more ingenious ways (earmarked and non-earmarked) to waste taxpayers' money, any distraction from the main business is welcome. As for dividing Americans, who came up with the idea of radically altering the most ancient of all social institutions in the first place? Until the last few years, every civilization known to man has defined marriage as between people of opposite sex. To charge with "divisiveness'' those who would do nothing more than resist a radical overturning of that norm is a sign of either gross partisanship or serious dimwittedness.
Continued on Page 49
#1
The problem identified is just the symptom. The root undelying cause is a gross disconnect between the government [in this case the federal court system] and the people. Most citizens can read the Constitution. The ability to appeal to authority to rationalize court declarations that are clearly not found in or read in the literal passages of the Constitution does not stand. Nearly a hundred years ago, the people decided to make the Senate directly accountable to the people. It is long pass to do the same for the judiciary. The arguement for an 'independent' judiciary is an arguement for an aristocracy. George III was independent of the colonist. It's time the final branch of government be subject to the direct 'consent' of the govern. It's not like the Senatorial representatives have demonstated class or brains above that of the common citizenry to retain exclusive approval authority.
#3
Until the last few years, every civilization known to man has defined marriage as between people of opposite sex.
'Progressives' think that this old habit must be broken. How else can we progress to create new species by cross breeding with anything that will hold still.
Those for a marriage amendment, just want to instill a little common ground under humanity. It would even be a great idea if we all spoke the same language, but God forbid.
Put 100 married couples on an Island, provide them with food, shelter, etc.
Put another 100 'married' homosexuals on another island, provide them with food, shelter, etc.
Go back in 100 years and pick up the hundreds of people from the first island. Then go to the second Island and pick up the hund......wait....aw hell, nevermind.
#5
Virtue is necessary for a nation to survive. Homosexual marriage is not virtuous. The legal problems it will create will eventually destroy the institution of marriage itself and open a Pandora's box of other problems (legal polygamy and polyamory, legal child abuse, etc.) Legal homosexual marriage will result in school texts that promote and and recruit for the homosexual life style. Homosexual marriage will also result in discrimination against Christians and others who believe the practice of homosexuality is immoral. The way most law scools train lawyers today to understand law and the Constitution, homosexual marriage is inevitable, sooner or latter, unless we amend the Constitution of the US. We may win for a time in many states, but the current world view of most lawyers is like the tide lapping against the side of a building on the beach - it will just keep comming back till it erodes the foundation of the building. In the short run an amendment is needed. In the long run, we need to revamp legal theory and legal education. Fighting homosexual marriage in the states will prove less effective than fighting slavery in the states. And, once there are a large number of homosexual marriages, it will be impossible to muster enough tough minded voters to put the genie back in the bottle - the news media will pull out all the stops to make people sorry for them. It is best to stop homosexaul marriage now. Too bad the Senate seems unwilling to do so. I hope people will be unwilling to vote for Senators who failed to support the amendment.
Posted by: D. R. M. ||
06/09/2006 13:48 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Lefties and Communists are deficit-intensive Conservatives - for the time being, the ALternatists are just PC "useful idiots" for the imposition of ever larger Governmentism-Socialism, Stratification = Centralist Absolutism etc. in the Amer mainstream. Once America is defeated and under OWG, the rights of the Alternatists, etal. will be taken away in the name of proper Socialist accounting and State planning, i.e. prim-and-proper Socialist SECULAR [ATHEIST]MORALITY/ETHICS. Remember that, worse coming to worse, the Left is its own biggest [self] justification for SOcilaism and Totalitarianism, i.e. DON'T TRUST ANYONE FOR ANYTHING, ESPEC AND ABOVE ALL THEMSELVES.
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.
The blogosphere has been abuzz. But in the days since Rolling Stone magazine published a long piece that accused Republicans of widespread and intentional cheating that affected the outcome of the last presidential election, the silence in America's establishment media has been deafening.
