Wednesday, 31 August 2016
‘They’re All Crazy!’ — The Language We Use When Reporting on Terror Attacks
clear

From The Algemeiner 

t has become fashionable to invoke the M’Naghten rules as soon as there is a terrorist attack in Europe. Typically, the perpetrator shouts “Allahu Akhbar” and murders innocent bystanders at some restaurant, bus stop, theater, night club or what have you. Authorities quickly follow up by darkly muttering that the terrorist was actually a person with mental-health issues. Their job is to convince the public how to engage in denial.

Whereas Freud explained 100 years ago how defense mechanisms such as denial, projection and rationalization affected human behavior, today we embrace these concepts as an integral and essential part of political correctness. For instance, politicians have suddenly become theologians and experts in comparative religion by stating that shouting “Allahu Akhbar” has nothing to do with the real Islam. Security officials, backed up by government ministers, on the other hand, suddenly transform into psychologists and psychiatrists, becoming mental-health experts. It’s a new form of multitasking.

The M’Naghten rules were formulated in 1843, after Daniel M’Naghten was acquitted of the charge of murdering Edward Drummond, whom he had mistaken for British Prime Minister Robert Peel. He had  believed that Mr. Peel was conspiring against him. The court found him not guilty by “reason of insanity,” which resulted in a public outcry to the extent that Queen Victoria intervened and recommended stricter criteria for insanity.

Anyone walking along a major boulevard in Berlin or elsewhere would notice a fair amount of homeless people begging or bedding down for the night. Many of them would have mental-health issues, yet people walk past them without the slightest concern, let alone fear. Heaven forbid, however, if one of these beggars were to shout “Allahu Ahkbar.” Yes, these two words would be a game changer. If the beggar actually attacked a passerby, he or she would be labeled a criminal. Likewise, a person who stabs or mugs someone in a park or at a bus stop is considered a criminal. But when he shouts the magic words while doing such things, his is a mental-health case. He, like all people yelling the word couplet, is routinely referred to as someone who “became radicalized,” as though he contracted some disease. Hence, diminished responsibility.

From the terrorist’s — or, in PC language, the “patient’s” — point of view, the danger is that, by being called mentally ill, he is being robbed by society of his thunder. After all, ascending to Paradise as a psychiatric patient rather than a martyr would certainly spoil the party. Welcoming virgins would also feel cheated and, worse still, could find themselves in an abusive relationship. . . Since security forces and terrorists are involved in a cat-and-mouse game of one-upmanship, authorities may be put on the defensive if terror groups start calling themselves the Al Neurosa Front, the Psychosis Caliphate or the Front for the Liberation of Acquired Organic Brain Disorder.

There is one country, however — which has had its fair share of attacks — in which terrorists are not automatically diagnosed as having mental-health issues. This country is Israel. And interestingly, European — and increasingly American — theologians and mental-health experts are either silent in relation to terrorism in the Jewish state, or attribute it to — you guessed it — the “occupation.”

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — nothing more nor less.”  Indeed.

clear
Posted on 08/31/2016 3:30 PM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
clear
Wednesday, 31 August 2016
Vicars told churches should have 'bouncers' due to terror fears
clear

From the Telegraph

Churches should have a ‘bouncer’ on the door throughout services to improve security, new counter terrorism advice suggests, as an expert has warned small parish churches are more at risk of attack that larger places of worship.

The draft 12-page guidance drawn up by an adviser to the Home Office says churches should ensure their doors can be securely bolted and recommends worshippers are briefed on what to do if they spot someone suspicious. It says churches should have “someone on the door of your church welcoming people into the building during service who can close the front door in an emergency. Make sure that someone is stood by the door before, during and after the service, whilst the congregation is present.”

The advice says: “The job of the person on the door is to delay any offenders (including those who are not terrorists) so that the police can arrive and deal with them.”

Nick Tolson, director of National Churchwatch, said: “When the French church attack happened, there was a recognition that the risk has increased. The risk is still very low, however, we need to think about what we need to do.”  He said any attack was likely to target a small parish church, as seen in the French attack. He said: “It won’t be Westminister Abbey or St Paul’s, it will be a little church in Bolton or Birmingham. It’s the small churches, just like the one in France. You can walk into any church on a Sunday morning and it probably won’t be a gun, it will be a knife.”

But he said clergy should continue to wear dog collars. He said: “We advise them to have their collars on and open their churches because there’s zero evidence that wearing collars is any risk.”

The Church of England said it had not told vicars to stop wearing dog collars. A spokesman said much of the new security guidance was covered by its own advice, but it was up to individual churches to decide what was appropriate.

clear
Posted on 08/31/2016 3:13 PM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
clear
Wednesday, 31 August 2016
Jean-Louis Harouel On France’s “Marche Vers Dhimmitude”
clear

by Hugh Fitzgerald

While nearly everyone has expressed an opinion about the burkini ban that was put in place by the mayors of several dozen French municipalities, and then overturned by a decision of the Conseil d’Etat, the views of Jean-Louis Harouel, a French legal historian and polymath, are of unusual significance.

Harouel, a professor emeritus of the History of Law at the University of Paris, criticizes the members of the Conseil d’Etat for their decision, which he says reflects their failure to take into account the difficult period that France is now going through. In the present circumstances, writes Harouel, the “jurisprudential liberalism”’ that might have been acceptable in relatively peaceful times can no longer be justified, given what France is enduring.

I have freely translated his words:

Furthermore, the Conseil d’Etat failed to take into account the fact that France is now engaged in a clash of civilizations, that just in the past year has cost it hundreds of deaths on its own territory, and which made it necessary to maintain the State of Emergency. “Islamism” is now making war on France, and there is no real boundary-line between Islam and Islamism.

The Conseil d’Etat failed to take into account the shock felt by the French people on seeing burkinis deliberately appearing on the beaches so soon after terrible massacres had been committed in France by Muslims acting in the name of their god. So soon after the carnage on the promenade in Nice and the slitting of the throat of a priest while he was fulfilling his priestly duties, such an increase in the flaunting of Muslim identity is truly indecent.

The Conseil d’Etat failed to take into account the fact that at present a silent conquest of Western Europe is underway. This conquest finds its source in the Qur’an where one can read that Allah has promised to give to the Muslims as the spoils of war the lands of the Infidels. That’s how sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradawi, one of the leaders of the UOIE (Union of Muslim Organizations in Europe), the French branch of which is the UOIF (Union of Muslim Organizations in France) put it: “With your democratic laws, we will colonize you. With our Koranic laws, we will dominate you.”

The Conseil d’Etat refused to see that the conquest of our beaches by these burkinis is only one stage in the taking over of France by the forces of political Islam. The Conseil d’Etat refused to see that those wearers of the burkini – like all those who wear variations on the Muslim veil — are the foot-soldiers, whether deeply convinced or merely docile, of a civilizational jihadism which is now trying to conquer our country by stealth.

To speak simply, the “rule of law” too often means condemning the peoples of Europe to helplessness when confronted by the mass immigration that is submerging them, and the aggressive Islam that is in the process of conquering their countries. To be able to react, it will be necessary to give the “rule of law” a bit of a shove, as it is currently being imposed on Europeans in this positively suicidal fashion by the secular religion of human rights.

In this confrontation with Islam, to conceive of the principle of “laicite” as being neutral in regard to different faiths will not work. For Islam is only secondarily a religion in the sense given to that word in Europe. In our country, Islam is now an aggressive civilization that is at war with our own and claims to replace it. Now, facing another civilization bent on our conquest, we cannot be neutral: we have to defend ourselves and counter-attack.

The main point is this: a Muslim living in Europe should not expect to be able to live as he would in a Muslim country. Muslims who have settled on European soil have constantly to be reminded that they are not in Dar al-Islam but, rather, in the land of the Infidels where, even their own sacred texts tell them, they should keep a low profile. If the Muslims living in Europe come to feel that they are living in Dar al-Islam, that will mean the end of Europe.

Professor Harouel is neither “far-right” nor “xenophobic.” He is a scholar accustomed to measuring his words. But in taking to task the Conseil d’Etat for its failure to understand the gravity of the menace, and in limning the limitless ambitions of Islam, what he says is absolutely terrifying.

First published in Jihad Watch.

clear
Posted on 08/31/2016 2:19 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Wednesday, 31 August 2016
When In Rome Do As The Romans Do
clear

by Michael Curtis

In his war-time directive when Britain was facing the threat of invasion by Nazi Germany, Winston Churchill told his country, “we shall fight on the beaches…we shall never surrender.” France today is divided over the invasion of the sunny beaches of the French Riviera by the burkini, the full body swimsuit, being worn by Muslim women. The crucial question on this controversial issue is whether France will fight or surrender?

The situation cannot be fully understood without awareness of the context. It is occurring in an atmosphere of anxiety, fear and tension after France has been reeling after two instances of Islamist terrorist activity. One was the massacre on July 14, 2016 of 86 people carried out by a Muslim driving a truck on the boulevard in Nice, and the other was the murder on July 26, 2016 of a 84 year old priest, whose throat was slit in his church near Rouen by a follower of ISIS.

The present controversy arises from the fact that thirty French cities, starting with Cannes, banned the wearing of the burkini on the beach. Some small fines were imposed on several women, penalties that are now being contested by human rights advocates.

One of the reasons given by the mayor of Cannes, David Lisnard, and other mayors for the ban is that the wearing of the burkini would risk disruptions to public order, or would result in problems of hygiene.

Understandably, Lisnard asserted he wanted to make sure his city was safe in the context of the state of emergency that French President Francois Hollande had imposed on November 13, 2015 after a terrorist attack had left 130 dead. He explained that beachwear ostentatiously showing religious affiliation was not acceptable while France was and could be again be subjected to Islamist terror attacks. France, he said, expected respect for its customs and secularism, qualities that were violated by wearing the burkini in a public space.

The issue of the ban came to court. On August 26, 2016 the Conseil d’etat, France’s highest court, ruled that the burkini ban imposed by the mayor of Villeneuve-Loubet was suspended. It argued that the emotion and concerns arising from the terrorist attacks, notably the one perpetrated in Nice on July 14, did not suffice to justify the ban.

The French human rights groups, that had challenged the ban, declared they would continue to challenge other similar bans in the 30 cities. On the other hand, some of those cities said they will continue to enforce the bans despite the court’s judgment. Marc Etienne Lansade, mayor of one of them, Cogolin, was plainspoken, saying , “If you don’t want to live the way we do, don’t come.”

The dispute continues. On August 30, 2016 another court in Nice ruled that the burkini ban imposed by Cannes violated basic fundamental freedoms and was illegal. In addition, some public criticism of the bans arose with the publication of photos that showed French police watching as a Muslim woman removed her top on the Nice beach.

There is a basic legal problem. Did the mayors overstep their powers by deciding a particular form of dress could not be worn on the beach? Then there are the more controversial political problems of the compliance with national law, the adherence to the French ethos of secularism, the suitability of the burkini in the French system, the fear of Islamisation of French society, and whether the bans are feeding a racist political agenda.

Criticism of the ban has come from expected quarters. A strong, indeed heatedly undiplomatic, statement came from the spokesperson for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Rupert Colville, who delivered with extraordinary speed and in imperious fashion the message that the UN wanted French officials to remove the bans. For him, the bans are stupid, stimulate friction, and are doubly unacceptable. They are a grave and illegal breach of fundamental freedoms and a stupid reaction to recent extremist attacks in France. They also fuel religious intolerance and the stigmatization of Muslims in France, especially women. Colville’s leader, Zeid Ra’ad al-Huissein, the Jordanian UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, issued a similar statement.

Four responses are pertinent to this righteous indignation on the human rights issue. One is the fact that the UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, does not come with clean hands. Its concern for human rights hitherto appears limited to one country and to one group. It has a Special Rapporteur who reports several times a year on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian “territories occupied since 1967.” The Rapporteur always concludes that the actions of Israeli authorities, sometimes using excessive force, are a “cause for concern.” No other country in the world appears to be of equal, or indeed any, concern in the reports.

Secondly, an incident that received little publicity indicates the hypocrisy inherent in Colville’s remarks. It is the case of a 21 year-old Muslim woman in Reims, in northern France, who was sunbathing in a park in a bikini. She was attacked and beaten by five young Muslim women for exposing so much flesh in a public place. Apparently, a glimpse of stocking and more was seen as shocking by the intolerant women. No comment seems to have come from the UNHRC.

Third is the fact that French and all Western women abide by local Islamic practice. In visiting a Muslim country they cover their faces or bodies according to the customs of that country. The disparity between Western willingness to respect local Islamic behavior and the refusal of Muslims, men and women, to respect Western customs and laws seems invisible to the Human Rights officials.

Fourth, Muslim women, when liberated from Islamic religious oppression, behave differently. This was shown in August 2016 in the photos of Syrian women taking off their unwanted religious form of dress when liberated from ISIS control. Moreover, anyone looking at photos of Egyptian women in the period before the advent of extreme Muslim groups and when the country was ruled by Presidents Gamal Abdel Nasser and Anwar Sadat can observe that women wore Western style of dress rather than religious garments.

On one issue the Conseil d’etat was right. Muslim women who wear the burkini do not directly threaten public order. That swimsuit cannot be blamed for the violent or hostile actions of other Muslims as the French Minister for Education, Moroccan born Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, who opposes the ban, argues. But this issue is not the core of the problem.

There are two main justifications for a ban. The first is that the burkini dress code is not liberating or providing freedom of expression for Muslim women. On the contrary, it undermines the autonomy of women and girls by denying them the ability to make independent decisions about how to dress, and is a humiliating and degrading form of control over women and discrimination and inequity by making them second class citizens and subordinate to Muslim men.

The second justification, a vital one, is the issue of supporting adherence to the national law and ethos of France. Public opinion polls show the population of France is divided on the burkini issue; about two thirds support a ban. The French political class is also, but far less, divided as the statements of political rivals indicate.

What is interesting is that support for the ban comes from both the left, especially socialist Prime Minister Manuel Valls, and from the right, especially the conservative Nicolas Sarkozy who is seeking nomination for the presidential election of 2017 and who calls for a law banning burkinis not simply locally but throughout the whole of French territory.   

In the French society based on laicite, there is a need for clear rules to be made respecting French secularism, the basis of French ethos. The wearing of the burkini does not reflect that ethos since it is appropriate to a different culture, and to a 7th century ideology that seeks to impose itself in the public space.

The bans are not feeding a racist political agenda. They provide a double signal. One is that the national law, and adherence to the customs of a secular society must prevail over Islamic laws and practices that discriminate against women. The other is that while members of a minority group can dress and behave in private as they like, they have no right to impose that behavior in a public space.

clear
Posted on 08/31/2016 2:09 PM by Michael Curtis
clear
Wednesday, 31 August 2016
The African Slave Trade: The Islamic Connection
clear

by Emmet Scott (September 2016)

In The Impact of Islam (2014) I showed that whilst slavery as an institution had been abolished in Christian Europe by the tenth century, it was revived in later centuries first and foremost by contact with the Islamic world.  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/31/2016 8:14 AM by NER
clear
Wednesday, 31 August 2016
Why Trump Can Still Win
clear

For all his flaws, he's the only hope against the long, failed Bush-Clinton incumbency.

by Conrad Black (September 2016)

The dust has settled since the conventions and Mrs. Clinton appears to have settled into a lead of three to seven points. This reflects the usual convention surge and a final flare-up of Trumpian foot-in-mouth disorder. It is far from a safe margin ten weeks from a presidential election, and even farther from the elephantine gap the more energetic anti-Trumpians were predicting.  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/31/2016 7:38 AM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
The Calico Cat
clear

by David P. Gontar (September 2016)

 

                                                             the calico cat

                                               came back

                                                   to the place

                                                     where they ripped the hedges up  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 2:26 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
Crispies
clear

by Sanjeev Sethi (September 2016)

(1)

 

Conference of crows:

life burns

buried in their beaks?  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 2:21 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
I Made a Feeble Show by Miklós Radnóti
clear

translated from the Hungarian & edited

by Thomas Ország-Land (September 2016)

Miklós Radnóti (1909-1944), probably the greatest among the world’s Holocaust poets. He was virtually unknown when he was murdered as a Jew by the Hungarian Army at the close of WW2. His best poems recovered from a mass grave were found on his body.  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 2:14 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
Surrender
clear

by Dilip Mohapatra (September 2016)

When I was in class four

I got my first ever summon

from poetry  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 2:09 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
What Is This Feeling?
clear

by Bibhu Padhi (September 2016)

What is this feeling taking charge

of me, in the middle of the day  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 2:03 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
Three Songs From a Play
clear

by Evelyn Hooven (September 2016)

(The play, Seafarer, was suggested by the Anglo-Saxon poems “The Seafarer” and “The Wanderer.” This work is not a translation; it is, rather, an attempt to imitate—although in modern English—the sound and mood and tone of Anglo-Saxon poetry.)  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 1:56 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
Oh, Those Madcap Millennials!
clear

A Cautionary Tale About Tale-Telling

by James Como (September 2016)

Since Patrick’s current girlfriend was merely a surrogate for the last, he numbered them. Both were writers: One a poet, Two a TV script writer. They were voluptuous. He was machomore>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 1:50 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
The Suprasternal Notch
clear

by James LePore (September 2016)


Woman on Train
, © James LePore

The suprasternal notch (fossa jugularis sternalis), also known as the jugular notch, is a large, visible dip found at the superior border of the manubrium of the sternum, between the clavicular notches.  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 1:43 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
Julian Langness' Fraternity of Combat
clear

by Dexter Van Zile (September 2016)

Julian Langness likes the outdoors, J.R.R. Tolkien and is proud of his Norwegian roots. He worries about the future of Western civilization, Europe especially, and encourages young men who read his website to get control of their finances, spend less time on social media and to stop looking at pornography. He exhorts his fellows to wake up early, get in shape, learn self-defense, adopt an attitude of self-reliance and to become writers and poets.  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 1:32 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
Capitalism’s Forgotten Soldiers
clear

by Saurabh Jha (September 2016)

 
 
 
by J.D. Vance
Harper (June 28, 2016)
272 pages

 

 

 

One is never too old or too young to write a memoir. J.D. Vance’s memoir about growing up in a working class white American family is aptly timed for this year’s presidential elections, and explains the support for Donald J. Trump in a constituency which feels disempowered and frustrated about the future.  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 1:24 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
Lin-Manuel, Meet William Carlos
clear

by J.A. Marzán (September 2016)


William Carlos Williams

This year, in which Lin-Manuel Miranda won the Pulitzer Prize and his musical Hamilton 11 Tonys, is also the eve of the centennial of Al Que Quiere (1917), the first important poetry book by William Carlos Williams, who in 1963 was posthumously awarded the Pulitzer for Pictures from Breughal and Other Poems (1962).  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 1:13 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
Goodbye To Barcelona
clear

by Samuel Hux (September 2016)

I never actually met Robert Graves. He lived in Deyá and I in Puerto de Andraitx, but I was too shy to just look him up.  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 1:07 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
The Construction of Chastity in Shakespeare’s Pericles, Prince of Tyre
clear

by David P. Gontar (September 2016)

ABSTRACT

In her reading of Pericles, Prince of Tyre, Marjorie Garber traces an entertaining trajectory from incest to romance, maturity, and sexual alterity in which the troubling consanguineous detour is closed with finality.  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 1:02 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
Preconditions for Slaughter in America
clear

by Richard Kostelanetz (September 2016)

“Guns kill people” is a common lie, unless you can fantasize that a gun all by itself gets off a shelf and fires away. Think, please think.  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 12:56 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
The Rio Olympic Games and Brazilian Participation in World War II
clear

The Smoking Snakes

by Norman Berdichevsky (September 2016)

The run-up to the Olympic Games in Rio was accompanied by numerous reports in the world press that were largely negative and highlighted Brazil’s unpreparedness, disorganization and problems of health, crime, sanitation, hygiene and a lack of enthusiasm on the part of many Brazilians, especially the poor slum dwellers in Rio’s favelas.  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 12:47 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
The Protocols of Soros
clear

by Richard Butrick (September 2016)

George Soros began his philanthropic activities when he established the Open Society Foundation in 1984. The foundation funds a range of global initiatives “to advance justice, education, public health, business development and independent media.”  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 12:00 PM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
A Mirabilary Of The Passing Parade: Homo Gnosticus (Part II)
clear

Us vs Them

by Cynicus Americanus (September 2016)

A Mirabilary

Signs And Wonders of The Devolution Of Man And The Decline Of Western Civilization In The Time Of Obama In The Age Of the Gnostics In A Republic of Dunces, A Federation of Twits, An Accomodation Of DumbAsses.  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 11:53 AM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
EU Moves Toward Authoritarianism
clear

by Lorna Salzman (September 2016)

On May 31st of this year the EU Commission issued a press release, the first part of which follows and which contains a major contradiction in that it takes a token position in favor of free discourse, but nonetheless expresses an intent to censor the media and the internet.  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 11:46 AM by NER
clear
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
Jihad Attack on a Little French Church
clear

by Nidra Poller (September 2016)

The following is a blow by blow account of the murder of Father Jacques Hamel as I reported from France at the time:  more>>>

clear
Posted on 08/30/2016 11:40 AM by NER
clear
clear
Showing 1-26 of 176 [Next 25]

Subscribe