Friday, November 18, 2005


The truth doesn't suit apologists for Islamofascism either: Since the end of August, the Holy See has had a new apostolic nuncio for Kuwait, Bahrain, Yemen, and Qatar. The new nuncio in these Gulf states is archbishop Mounged El-Hachem, 71, a Maronite from Lebanon... But one passage from his first public interview has provoked surprise and disappointment in the Vatican... In it, he restated the Church's opposition to the war in Iraq, which "can only deepen the gulf between the parties and increase fanaticism." He didn't say a word about the present phase of democratization in that country. But he dedicated many words to analyzing Islamist terrorism and expressing appreciation for its motives. To a question about the link between religion and terrorism, El-Hachem replied: ... "This reminds me of the distressing incident at the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich, when young Palestinians massacred Israeli athletes... At that time I was in the Vatican. It was a sunny Sunday and pope Paul VI appeared at his window and addressed the faithful gathered in St. Peter's Square in these words: `We too reprove and denounce the massacre in Munich, but we ask the following question: why have young Palestinians committed this act? We reply: because the Palestinian people (it was the first time anyone had spoken of the Palestinian `people') have been the victims of the most dangerous of injustices in the history of humanity, an innocent and peaceable people turned out of their land, who have lost their roots and identity amid the indifference of the entire world. What impelled these young men to commit this act was to attract the attention of the world to their cause.'... But if you re-read the words Paul VI really spoke at the Angelus and at the Wednesday general audience before that, where he also commented on the massacre in Munich, you will find nothing of what El-Hachem puts into his mouth.

PETA summarized: "Penn & Teller, in their own inimitable style, have dished the dirt on People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals in a short video. Nothing is off-limits: they joke about the unhealthy appearance of vegans (skeletal and pasty), and are astonished that PeTA kills dogs and cats (apparently they killed two thirds of the 2,100 dogs and cats they "rescued" in 2002, see also petakillsanimals). Not least, they expose one of PeTA's leaders as an insulin dependent diabetic who seeks to prevent others benefiting from future medical advances, by trying to abolish animal research. PeTA would outlaw fishing, circuses, dog shows, horse riding, zoos, pets and guide dogs for the blind: their goal is "total animal liberation" says Ingrid Newkirk, PeTA's leader."

The wisdom to know the difference: "If there's an iron law in the universe, it is that you can not get the changes you want through force. You may get some encouraging immediate results, but in the long run the reaction to the use of force will never satisfy you. Prohibition, after all, did cut alcohol consumption, but that doesn't mean it was a success. When you persuade, people will willingly change; when you use force, people will do as little as possible to avoid harsh treatment, and then direct their energies as far away from you as they can. Even when they comply with the new laws, people do not behave the way those who forced the change intended. The people find loopholes, or are driven to even worse behaviors then the ones that were banned. The Law of Unintended Consequences can also be called the Law of Forced Change. All life reacts badly to force, to threats, to fear."

History of tax revolts: "More than a quarter century ago, Californians rebelled against an overbearing political establishment. Property assessments were climbing, state expenditures were rising, the budget surplus was expanding, and government officials were lying. Voters responded by passing Proposition 13, triggering tax revolts nationwide. The movement has waxed and waned over the years, but the stories rarely cease to inspire. Popular resistance to higher taxes almost always reprises David versus Goliath. Such is the tale spun by Phil Valentine, a Tennessee talk-radio personality who helped stop the bipartisan drive for a state income tax. Tax Revolt offers a delightful read, detailing betrayal and deceit, insider maneuvers and public protests, and big-bucks lobbying and horn-honking rallies. Particularly satisfying is the end: the people win."

Progressives, eugenics and the minimum wage: "American intellectual life in the early 20th century has a dirty secret and its name is Eugenics. Alex Tabarrok points out an excellent article by Thomas C. Leonard on "Protecting Family and Race: The Progressive Case for Regulating Women's Work" (PDF). Leonard makes the point that Progressive support for exclusionary labor legislation for women, including the minimum wage, was based among other things on ensuring "that women could better carry out their eugenic duties as 'mothers of the race'". Though most know that eugenics had some sort of open popularity prior to the Nazis giving it a bad name, few know how thoroughly it was supported by all the "best and brightest". Here's a partial list from Leonard's paper: Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, Sidney Webb, George Bernard Shaw, T. S. Eliot, D. H. Lawrence and economist Irving Fisher. Progressives, in part for eugenic reasons, wanted to make women and other groups unemployable. Their chosen tool: the minimum wage".

For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. On Social Security see Dick McDonald and for purely Australian news see Australian Politics (mirrored here).


Practically all policies advocated by the Left create poverty. Leftists get the government to waste vast slabs of the country's labour-force on bureaucracy and paperwork and so load the burden of providing most useful goods and services onto fewer and fewer people. So fewer useful goods and services are produced to go around. That is no accident. The Left love the poor. The Left need the poor so that they can feel good by patronizing and "helping" them. So they do their best to create as many poor people as possible.

The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)

Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.


No comments: