25 October 2014


Russian Minister of Defense and a gay Islamist War Lord from Chechnya are palming North America in front of the cameras.

Seriously, how long do we have to wait for someone with balls in the White House???  I am starting to think that we can even get by with Hilary as the President, but two more years of Obama seem like eternity.

24 October 2014

George Galloway (the Spiv) in a tizzy about disclosure of his income

The Guardian's article on the income of British MPs other than their MP salaries covers about 20 of the solons, Galloway occupying a relatively humble third place with meager BP 265,350.

These came primarily from paid weekly appearances for the Iranian state-owned broadcaster Press TV, for which Galloway received £100,650, and a further £96,000 – not including air fares – for fortnightly broadcasts from Beirut for Al Mayadeen, which does not publicly disclose its financial backers.
The Spiv, however, was irked by the article, which in reality didn't mean any harm*. To a degree that he unleashed his spokesman on the press:
A spokesman for Galloway accused the Guardian of “attempts to smear” the MP, and said “his media earnings are for a few hours’ work a week”.

“His programmes enable him to reach a far greater audience than would otherwise be the case for his views, both domestically and internationally,” he continued. “No one from these TV stations determines editorial content.”
The only point I fail to understand in the above is one of reaching a far greater audience. The Spiv has already appeared in a highly successful venue that brought him an audience one can only dream about, remember?

If the size of the audience is the issue here, there was no reason to eschew this gig for some doubtful Middle Eastern venture. Besides, it was, like, totally fitting...

(*) As for the accusation of trying to harm - no, really, it is a clear misunderstanding. First of all, the Guardian employs the highest percentage of the Spiv's admirers anywhere. It is simply that, being relatively low-paid serfs of that media outfit, these folks are naturally envious of the kind of fees our illustrious Spiv commands. And to add that “his media earnings are for a few hours’ work a week” - no, really, George, be more sensitive next time, please!

The Council Has Spoken!

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

23 October 2014

Why we must talk to ISIS: please do tell...

This article by Jonathan Powell, former Chief of Staff for British Prime Minister Tony Blair, is not an exception. During my fairly long by now time of reading newspapers - even when they were printed on real paper - I have seen a lot of op-eds, calling all kinds of people to talk to all kinds of people. Indeed, "to jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war", and when your illustrious countryman had said it, it kind of lends you some wind in your sails, doesn't it?

Of course, seeing as how Mr Powell was one of the people surrounding the Man during the times of the fairly ill-conceived invasion of Iraq, one might want to ask - where exactly was Mr Powell at the time with a similar advice? The idea of negotiating with ISIS didn't come to the author naturally, he arrived to this understanding gradually - as he confesses.

The historical precedents he uses start with Northern Ireland, the long and partly secret negotiations, where he took a significant part. Yes, eventually these negotiations brought a semblance of peace to that long suffering and long occupied territory, where Protestant settlers were busy killing the indigenous Catholics and vice versa. It is a fragile peace, but peace nonetheless, so we can't fault this example. But then Mr Powell mentions Hamas, Taliban and al Qaeda as other potential parties for negotiation.

Hamas, indeed, was involved several times in indirect negotiations with Israel. That much is true. However, every single time the end result was a new round of "arms race" that ended in another conflagration. Bad example.
Taliban: an exceedingly poor reference. So far there have been several overt and covert attempts to negotiate some kind of understanding, if not agreement, with this bunch. We all know where we are today with that murderous outfit.
Al Qaeda now: how exactly does the author propose to negotiate with the myriad of loosely connected cells all over the Islamic world (and probably beyond it) that hardly recognize each other, not to mention some infidel authority they are sworn to destroy?

All in all, these are poor examples to support the main thesis. Which is, to remind you, the need to negotiate with ISIS, so far successfully  proving itself to be the most murderous and the most fanatical bunch of them all. But does the fact that ISIS doesn't show any sign of being amenable to any other kind of persuasion but bullets slow Mr Powell at all? Doesn't seem so. Mr Powell is using the best moral artillery West developed, and there wasn't any possibility to avoid reading the much dreaded word:

The ex-Baathists and ex-Iraqi army offices (sic!) [probably Mr Powell meant "officers", and anyway it is unclear how ex-Iraqi army officers differ from ex-Baathists] that make up a major part of the ISIS force have genuine grievances about the way they were treated by the sectarian Maliki government.
Here you are - I have a real problem repeating that word, but at least I was able to emphasize it. What can I say: many a warrior of a defeated army can point to some gr... I bet the soldiers of Napoleon and Roman legionnaires and German... anyway, all these folks had their gr... after being soundly defeated, but I hardly remember any enlightened thinkers calling for consideration of their gr... verily, our modern enlightenment is boundless!

Going full steam on his way to prove his point, Mr Powell makes a blood-chilling remark:
Negotiations can only happen when the conditions are right, usually when a mutually hurting stalemate is in place and both sides realize they cannot win by military means.
To conceive a stalemate with ISIS means in effect to concede that the daily murder, rape, enslaving and other mayhem by ISIS could be tolerated by the West in the name of some elusive future equilibrium. In short, negotiate this, Mr Powell:

The only way to negotiate something with ISIS and its likes is this:


And re the grievances game played by the author: here comes the best answer:

(Click on the image to enjoy the fine details).

Interestingly, the article we are discussing here is accompanied by a link at the bottom (you know how Internet sites link related stuff). The "related" link goes to an article: I'm a feminist, and I converted to Islam. Bump...

Update: it looks like Jonathan Powell has more original ideas than it was estimated previously.

Police are examining if former Downing Street chief of staff Jonathan Powell potentially perverted the course of justice by advising a republican terror suspect not to return to the UK.
And he done this because:
Had she come back, been arrested feeling she had fallen into a trap by me trapping her into coming back, the peace process would have been dead - it would have been a very bad idea.
Check it out, without prejudice, please.

More re Kim Jong Un: have you noticed that...

I didn't.

Watcher’s Council Nominations : ‘You Usta be My Girl’ Edition

Council Submissions

Honorable Mentions

Non-Council Submissions

22 October 2014

To the stinking hypocrites of AP: thanks for showing your face

Baby killed, seven injured in Jerusalem terror attack is the headline of Jerusalem post article, repeated more or less by other Israeli newspapers ("apparent" was a ToI contribution to the topic). Covers the subject, with or without the politically correct "apparent".

Alan Johnson reports on the AP take of the matter. Here is what he says:

Today, a man drove a vehicle into a group of Israelis in Jerusalem, critically injuring a 3 month old baby, injuring several, then tried to flee the scene An amateur video uploaded to Facebook appears to show the car drive deliberately onto the northbound platform of the light rail station. So how did the Associated Press report this on the wires?
Here is how:

To save you a click on the image, the headline says: Israeli police shoot man in east Jerusalem.

To the said hypocrites: Fuck. You. All.

London School of Economics and Kung-Fu Pandas

Whatever you think and/or say about the deity of Political Correctness, sometimes it (the deity) gets a sidewise blow from a totally unexpected direction. In this case, from a place very close to being a birthplace of that deity, London School of Economics.

London School of Economics wrote to all students who had successfully gained a place on undergraduate courses a confirmation email entitled ‘Dear Kung-Fu, Panda’.
Unfortunately for the university, nearly 70 per cent of their students come from overseas and a third of those are from Asia.

Apologies galore in the article...

21 October 2014

Denmark and its jihadis: softly, softly, catchee monkey

The article Denmark tries a soft-handed approach to returned Islamist fighters is interesting and educational. Who would have thought that a battle-hardened jihadi, who by mere fact of his survival in the bloody fields of the Middle East, most probably has a lot of blood on his hands, could be brought back to civilization that simply? But here it is:

In other countries, Talha — one of hundreds of young jihadists from the West who has fought in Syria and Iraq — might be barred from return or thrown in jail. But in Denmark, a country that has spawned more foreign fighters per capita than almost anywhere else, the port city of Aarhus is taking a novel approach by rolling out a welcome mat.
Why don't others do the same - beats me. But wait, there is more:
In Denmark, not one returned fighter has been locked up. Instead, taking the view that discrimination at home is as criminal as Islamic State recruiting, officials here are providing free psychological counseling while finding returnees jobs and spots in schools and universities.
Nothing, but nothing could mellow a murderer on vacation like a teaching position in a university. Indeed, our universities are hopelessly out of date, at least as far as the modern Islamist military and ideological doctrines are concerned. It is time to show these old school decadent Marxists what it is all about...
Some progressives say Aarhus should become a model for other communities in the United States and Europe that are trying to cope with the question of what to do when the jihad generation comes back to town.
Absolutely. Hard to beat a nice and friendly homecoming parade. And a free machete, Kalashnikov and a Che T-shirt to every kid!

There is more in that article that easily catches the eye, but it's time to explain the "softly, softly, catchee monkey" in the headline of the post. You see, the history of that saying includes a phrase that matches the article we are discussing here only too well:
If it were not for the depressing heat and the urgency of the work, one could sit down and laugh to tears at the absurdity of the thing, but under the circumstances it is a little “wearing.”
Enough. Really enough.

And now about Israeli jihadis

Apparently we too can claim that we have contributed to the ISIS effort (click to embiggen):

20 martyrs-to-be from Israel. Not bad, all things considered. And it is nice to notice that, like most other Jihadis, these ones get to their ISIS jobs via Turkey - the NATO member of good standing. Oh well, it was a side remark. Never mind.

Anyhow, our martyrs come already booby-trapped. Just saying.

20 October 2014

Kim Jong Un converts to Judaism: plans to live till 120

Unlike his illustrious ancestor, Kim Il Sung, who aimed at a much humbler figure of 100 years, the Fatso is more ambitious. "120 or die!" - is the new slogan in the motherland of the Juche idea.

Not relying on religion alone, Kim Jong Un warned his doctors that if the desired goal of 120 years is not reached (in due time), he will personally preside over the execution of the whole medical team, their families and pets.

19 October 2014

More proof that ISIS are Zionist stooges (PG 18 - raw uncensored footage!)

The following recording may be handy for Naomi Wolf in her relentless quest for Troof. But I can't sit on hot material indefinitely, so watch the recording, but keep in mind that it is classified PG 18 with the following notice (upper case in original): WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT - CONTAINS RAW FOOTAGE.

There are no subtitles, but somebody volunteered a brief description in the comments:

He is saying that there is no palestine in the past and now. And that the hamas needs to bleed to death.
That's it. This is all the proof anyone might ever need.

18 October 2014

British Islamist Abu Baraa speaks about the shining future of Caliphate

I wouldn't quote anything, to avoid denying you the pleasure of discovery. Enjoy, but remember - the best parts come at the end of the clip:

Quite a mad bugger, that one, and he is not the only one who believes his rants.

More on Mizanur Rahman aka Abu Baraa.

And a few of his recent tweets:

P.S. Want to bet that he lives on the dole money generously provided by British public?

Inmate overdoses on what?

I must get to the bottom of this mystery.

Via Mandatory.

P.S. Got it here. A meth "manufacturer" died of a drug overdose allegedly caused by methadone-soaked underwear. Well, only two or three tears from me, no more this time.

17 October 2014

Dean Obeidallah on Bill Maher or how to stuff foot in mouth deeper

 A disclaimer: normally I wouldn't waste another minute on a fight between two such renown intellects like Bill Maher and Ben Affleck. The point is that there were other participants and other sensitive subjects involved. As it (partially) follows from the article Bill Maher's Muslim problem by Dean Obeidallah on CNN.

The main flaw of the article is the deliberate obfuscation of the fact that Bill Maher wasn't a main player in the by now famous "meeting of minds". Sam Harris was - at least as far as reciting statistics concerned. While Maher is indeed a hater of all religions, he is ill equipped intellectually to hold up his end of most arguments. Sam Harris, on the other hand, is much better at this game. The fact that Dean Obeidallah didn't mention his name at all is telling. Granted, Harris is, as Maher, an undiscriminating hater of all religions, but this is neither here nor there, as far as the arguments and facts he presented are concerned.

But back to Obeidallah's attack on Maher.
He said that it is "naive" to think that Islam isn't more violent than other religions and mocked President Obama for commenting that the terror group ISIS was not Islamic.
We can split hairs indefinitely on the fine points of theology. ISIS and its supporters consider themselves to be the most Islamic bunch in existence. President Obama, Dean Obeidallah (and even I, if I am allowed to join this team) may think differently, but the horrendous numbers of supporters quoted by Harris and ignored by Obeidallah make the discussion pointless. You can do much better than reading Obeidallah's "analysis" by simply listening to the relevant part of Harris' presentation, but it is educational to check Obeidallah's arguments - they are parroted by too many "defenders of Islam".

To start with, the contention about Islam being more violent than other religions. First of all, every organized religion, Christianity far from being excluded, had its periods of violence, aggression and expansion. People who deny this aren't worth arguing with. Exactly as people who argue that Islamic (or Islamist, if you wish) violence nowadays is a simple matter of an extremist minority, declaring this minority non-Islamic. Clumsy, very clumsy, like in:
Maher then cited a Pew Research poll that he claimed found that 90% of Egyptians supported the death penalty for those who left Islam. I'm not sure where Maher got his numbers, but a 2013 Pew poll actually found only 64% of Egyptians supported this -- still alarmingly high, but not 90%.
Yep, Maher as a scientific source is quite pathetic, but how much less horrible is 64% than 90%? You tell me...

Or, for another example of mumbling defense:
Maher also has left out that only 13 Muslim nations have penalties for apostasy, while 34 do not.
"Only" 13 nations? You don't say!
I'm all for a discussion of the need to reform the laws in certain Muslim countries, especially on issues of rights for women, minority faiths and gays. But painting all Muslims by the most extreme of our faith is wrong.
When most of the Islamic world is plagued by violence, when every day Muslims kill, maim, subjugate and terrorize other Muslims, not to mention people of other religions and creeds, when the mere word "democracy" causes some Muslim religious leaders to foam at the mouth, it is somewhat undermining the meek whitewashing attempts, doesn't it?

And to remind you some pretty basic arithmetic: even if the numbers quoted by Harris are inflated, one single percent of Muslim population makes 15 million people... continue from here.

For reference: the recording of the Affleck/Maher/Harris brouhaha. Check it against Obeidallah's "review".