November 16, 2004

REAL EVIL

James Morrow on progressive concerns:

November 2 was not just the day that George W. Bush, bete noire of the chattering classes, handily won another four years in the White House. It was also the day that Dutch film-maker Theo van Gogh was slaughtered on an Amsterdam footpath – for no other reason than that he made a film shining a light on the treatment of women in Islam.

Yet a quick survey of headlines in the 12 days following both events reveals that for many so-called "progressives" the US's free exercise of democracy was far more disturbing than the fact that, in a country known for its extreme tolerance, a film-maker could be knifed to death for publicly criticising an organised religion.

Progressives may be unmoved, but the Dutch are taking action:

At this point, the Dutch seem more inclined to move from Live and Let Live to its opposite, and are calling for laws that make the Patriot Act look like Kumbayah. Strict laws against government surveillance over religious establishments, a centuries-old inheritance from the United Provinces' battle against Spanish occupation, appear set to go by the boards. On Friday, the Dutch parliament requested a new law that would forbid mosques to employ imams who had been educated elsewhere. One member of parliament was quoted in a wire report as saying: "It's better to have 10 possibly innocent people temporarily in jail than one with a bomb on the street."

Australian politicians are forever organising "fact-finding" tours to various fun locations. I wonder if any are planning to visit Holland.

Posted by Tim Blair at November 16, 2004 01:31 PM
Comments

The Euros have demographically suicidal birthrates and will not be able to keep up their hyper-nanny states without bringing in more immigrants - muslim immigrants- in the coming decades. However the resistance of their native elite as well as the immigrants themselves to encourage some kind of cultural assimilation is too entrenched. This is a sign of things to come.

Hell.
People want to talk about a red state - blue state cultural clash? Just imagine what "Old" Europe will be like in 25 years. I recall that this murderer was supposedly raised in Holland. Imagaine aging welfare states dependent on millions like this murderer.

Posted by: Herkimer at November 16, 2004 at 01:54 PM

That's Europe for you: Things get hard, democracy goes out the window.

I sympathize with them, but Scandinavia and the Low Countries are starting to look a little too "1938" for me. This European Union thing may end very badly.

Posted by: Aaron at November 16, 2004 at 01:59 PM

As a general rule, you should never take seriously any argument based on "the latest evidence from Holland / Scandinavia."

Posted by: Harry Hutton at November 16, 2004 at 02:14 PM


I've always taken the European ostrich reflex to be simply an indication that they believe, deep down, that this 60 year experiment with liberal democracy with universal sufferage to be simply a happy interregnum between totalitarian brutality.

The reason they don't seem to take sides is that they would rather let the boat sink just after they're dead or too old to care, rather risk rocking it and getting what's left of themselves wet.

Posted by: Andrew at November 16, 2004 at 02:29 PM

The Lancet "Study" is a fraud cooked up by anti-Bush nonsense and leaked before the US election. It has little to no basis in fact. The causalties in the Iraq conflict probably number about 4000. This has more basis in fact than this study. Robert Manne is psychotically deranged.

Posted by: klein at November 16, 2004 at 02:32 PM

One member of parliament was quoted in a wire report as saying: "It's better to have 10 possibly innocent people temporarily in jail than one with a bomb on the street."

WTF?!?

Posted by: rosignol at November 16, 2004 at 02:34 PM

This is long overdue in Europe and signals the beginning of the end of Islamic presence in Europe. Every European country with large Muslim immigrant populations needs to start permanent, large scale repatriation programs immediately, and it will happen.

The end of Islam in Europe is going to happen, whther you like it or not.

Posted by: klein at November 16, 2004 at 02:37 PM

Thats probably too optimistic, Klein. I suspect it will take a lot more bloodshed before Europeans realise the full extent of their "Multicultural" and "Human Rights" follies.

As for repatriations - this assumes that there will be other countries willing to accept those being expelled. More likely it will be native europeans doing the emigrating. Where to? Across the Atlantic, of course. Perhaps this is another reason why European politicians seem so hell-bent on bashing America rather than focusing on their real enemies - they see America as a threat to their sources of tax revenue.

Posted by: HippyHunter at November 16, 2004 at 02:47 PM

I'm sure Trish Draper wouldn't mind taking her boyfriend to Holland for a dirty weekend.

Posted by: Mike at November 16, 2004 at 02:48 PM

"Australian politicians are forever organising "fact-finding" tours to various fun locations. I wonder if any are planning to visit Holland. " Actually, the Emily's List crowd made them cancel their plans; they were afraid the pols would make jokes about the dikes...

Posted by: richard mcenroe at November 16, 2004 at 03:00 PM

"Thats probably too optimistic, Klein. I suspect it will take a lot more bloodshed before Europeans realise the full extent of their "Multicultural" and "Human Rights" follies."

Pardon me Holland, was that one suicide bomber in Parliament House today or two you will be having?

How realistic is that proposition?
My conjecture is that if it does happen, repatriation of militant or all unintegrated muslims will be highly likely.
I wonder how much of a protest the progressives would muster?

Posted by: gubbaboy at November 16, 2004 at 03:11 PM

"My conjecture is that if it does happen, repatriation of militant or all unintegrated muslims will be highly likely."

Well if Spain is any indication as to how the rest of Europe will react to mass-murdering terrorist attacks, Europe's future is looking pretty grim...or should I say 'Eurabia'??

Posted by: HippyHunter at November 16, 2004 at 03:20 PM

Europe should not feel too relaxed about any terrorist acts. They might feel safe by being progressive and anti-American, however Madrid does set a precendent of how Europeans can be influenced ... successfully.

So, how did that Victorian pastor go with the Vilification charges against him? The guy who gave his own interpretion of the Koran to his church people.

I'm all for multi-cultralism. Just not cultural relativism, vilification laws, and certainly not the idea minority groups can not be deamed to be racist themselves.

Posted by: madison at November 16, 2004 at 04:03 PM

Holland can export all its Muslims to the Islam paradise of France.

Posted by: perfectsense at November 16, 2004 at 04:18 PM

I think that the criticism of Islam by a non Islamic or secular country or organisation or person would be seen as offensive to a minority group and suppressed by law.

You are not free to express something that may offend someone else.

Until Islam becomes a majority or mainstream force this will continue to be the status quo.

Posted by: rog at November 16, 2004 at 04:18 PM

Look what Spain's appeasement of terrorists bought them - plots to blow up the High Court!! Luckily for Spain it was foiled, and even luckier for its Socialist government - they would have had a lot of trouble blaming this one on Iraq or the Americans.

Posted by: HippyHunter at November 16, 2004 at 04:18 PM

The problem with multi-culturism is that it is usually interpreted to mean one culture's tolerance of other cultures intolerance.

Until that definition goes out the window, multi-culturism is a wasted effort.

Posted by: The Real JeffS at November 16, 2004 at 04:19 PM

Its fascinating that supposedly the United States is prejudiced against muslims, but more Dutch mosques have been attacked post-Van Gogh murder than have been in all of the United States post 9/11.

The supposedly more enlightened Europe is a veneer at best.

Posted by: Robin Roberts at November 16, 2004 at 04:20 PM

Rog,

When Islam is a majoirty force its followers will use their numbers to impose Sharia on everyone else. This will mean goodbye to multiculturalism, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, etc.

Posted by: HippyHunter at November 16, 2004 at 04:23 PM

Rog,

Your criticism of others' criticism of Islam offends me. Should your freedom to express such criticism be suppressed? If so, by whom and following what process?

Posted by: ab at November 16, 2004 at 04:32 PM

"I'd rather let a thousand guilty men go free than chase after them."

Posted by: Nash Kato at November 16, 2004 at 04:37 PM

Rog and ab,

Hasn't anyone told you? You're not allowed to criticise anyone unless they fall into at least one of the following categories:

1. White
2. Male
3. Christian
4. Israeli, and of course -
5. American

Posted by: HippyHunter at November 16, 2004 at 04:38 PM

I lived in Holland for a year and these are my observations: It offends me that Muslims make women cover their hair. It offends me that Muslims worship a child molester. It offends me to hear the Mualim's call to prayer. It offends me to see their butts when they pray. If offends me that Muslims fast during Ramadan. Arab cooking offends me. It offends me that Muslims have multiple wives. It offends me that Muslims have mis-spent their oil wealth. It offends me that Muslims don't learn Dutch or other native languages. Why do Muslims refuse to be sensitive to my cultural needs? When will I be compensated for these insults by Muslims?

Posted by: perfectsense at November 16, 2004 at 04:45 PM

"When will I be compensated for these insults by Muslims?"
I wanna be compensated too.
I'm highly offendable.

Posted by: gubbaboy at November 16, 2004 at 05:06 PM

Countrys that let muslims in are total idiots. Mark my words it is only going to lead to big trouble sooner or later.

Posted by: Le clerc at November 16, 2004 at 06:09 PM

I wonder if the Iranians would tolerate thousands of Christians flooding into their country, refusing to assimilate, demanding special treatment and killing those who oppose them.

Posted by: Benjamin at November 16, 2004 at 06:44 PM

Rog. You are not free to express something that may offend someone else.

What happens to freedom of speech? I think freedom does a lot more for tolerance than supression of speech. Surely, western societies have learnt the importance of freedom, and how it fosters other principles like tolerance, equality, etc.

Posted by: madison at November 16, 2004 at 06:50 PM

The Iranian government doesn't tolerate the peaceful Christians (or Ba'hai, or Jews) that are already there.

Posted by: Alan K. Henderson at November 16, 2004 at 07:19 PM
That's Europe for you: Things get hard, democracy goes out the window.

No, Aaron, you've got it backwards. This is democracy at long last breaking in through the window while the occupants are being mugged by reality. This is one of those exceptionally rare occasions where Europe is setting a positive example, and one which we would be very wise to follow.

Posted by: Clem Snide at November 16, 2004 at 07:48 PM

And with truly exquisite timing, it's being reported in the German press today that two leading politicians of the Greens party (the only Greens member of parliament who ever won his own district, and the federal minister for the environment) have spoken out in favour of getting rid of one of our Christian holidays and instead introducing a state-recognized Islamic holiday. You know, "to improve the societal recognition of the more than 3 million people of Islamic faith in Germany", to paraphrase the statement by one of the pols. Mindboggling, absolutely mindboggling.

Posted by: PW at November 16, 2004 at 08:26 PM

Holland and the rest of Western Europe is in serious trouble. Legal action directed at the problem of unassimilated Muslims will be temporary and useless, and Muslims know it.

History, demographic trends, and structural weaknesses in these cultures are putting out the lights on native culture at this minute. Multiply the division and internal consistencies of the American Democratic Party by some huge number, and you have a model for the problems facing Europe.

Americans need to consider that Canada is a local version of Holland; how long will it be before some Theo Van Gogh finds himself on a cold sidewalk with a note nailed to his forehead? I guess that assumes that Canada could produce a Theo Van Gogh. Unlikely.

Posted by: Crazy Chester at November 16, 2004 at 10:35 PM

Correction:

Internal INCONSISTENCIES of the American Democratic Party...

Posted by: Crazy Chester at November 16, 2004 at 10:37 PM

I've long wondered if social democracy's soft-on-crime policy is an honest mistake, or if their intent from the beginning was to foment chaos as an excuse to consolidate power.

I still wonder.

Posted by: Brian at November 16, 2004 at 10:40 PM

This is going to be...interesting. Also instructive. Remember the, the Europeans have a well-earned reputation in professional slaughter.

Posted by: Mikey at November 16, 2004 at 11:14 PM

"how long will it be before some Theo Van Gogh finds himself on a cold sidewalk with a note nailed to his forehead?"

As long as the note is in both French and English...

Posted by: robw25 at November 16, 2004 at 11:52 PM

It's definitely the latter, Brian. Perfidy, not naiveity, explains the Left's mindset on crime. They actually want to create an chaotic, balkanised society of criminals and welfare-dependents as an end in itself. They perfectly understand that democracy will not survive multiculturalism, mass unemployment, and welfare dependence, but these trends will certainly empower (and enrich) leftist lawyers and bureaucrats.

Posted by: Steve Edwards at November 17, 2004 at 12:10 AM

Madison, et al — Rog's attitude, sadly, is very common on American campuses today. I remember one young woman on a newscast saying, with absolute innocence, "Well, yeah, you should have freedom of speech, but if someone objects to something you say, you should stop saying it." This is the ultimate result of campus speech codes and bullying ideologue "professors"... not only are these "progessive" young people willing to censor others' speech, they're willing and even eager to accept censorship of their own.

Posted by: richard mcenroe at November 17, 2004 at 12:53 AM

The way I see it, Europe will need rescuing for the third time within the next 25-40 years. And I for one, seeing my grandfather fought in WWI, my father in WWII, my ex in Vietnam, my son-in-law now, don't want my grandsons to fight WWIV (I count WWIII the cold one).

But I don't see any other way. We've been fighting this one for over 1,400 years. It's just a new phase.

Elizabeth
Imperial Keeper

Posted by: Elizabeth at November 17, 2004 at 12:55 AM

Lets see now....

a religion that doesn't tolerate other religions, believes crimes against non believers is OK, herd their women around like cattle, has the death penalty for rape (not for the rapist but the victim)...

versus

a country too stupid to assimilate immigrants, euthanasia is considered death by natural causes, legalized drugs c/w safe injection houses and needle exchange programs, wide open flesh trade, child pornography accepted, homosexual marriage recognized ...

As they say, I don't have a dog in that fight.

Posted by: Arty at November 17, 2004 at 01:47 AM

Elizabeth — The only reason Europe hasn't had a major war already is because the US and USSR stood on their head for forty-plus years. They're overdue. As it is, they managed to get the Balkans cesspool stirred up again, and Germany and Poland are bickering over WWII reparations...

Posted by: richard mcenroe at November 17, 2004 at 02:11 AM

Europe is in serious trouble today. Sagging birthrates among the native population, sagging economies, trouble with vast numbers of unassimilated immigrants: these are perfect conditions for the rise of fascism and another Hitler. Just let one charismatic demagogue begin to preach a doctrine that includes a "final solution", and it WILL be Europe 1938 all over again. Only this time, it will be against a population who are not as peace-loving as the Jews of 1938 were. It will be against a bellicose, angry, religion-besotted mob who have the support of the well-armed and well-financed nations of the Middle East. We'll be lucky if Europe isn't a smokey, ruined plain of death by the middle of the century. And I don't see how we'll be able to keep ourselves out of it, out of simple self-defense.

Posted by: Rebecca at November 17, 2004 at 03:52 AM

Interesting point about a Candadian Theo Van Gogh with a note nailed to his forehead. Under current law it would have to be in English and Canadian French, although I think mixed Arabic patois would be acceptable in Canada. The country is currently assimilating itself to new arrivals, rather than the other way round.

Rebecca's point is right on, particularly when one considers the nuclear capabilities of many European countries, and whether or not militant Islamists could find their way to them.

Turkish participation in the EU might moderate these forces, however. Who knows? It doesn't look good. Europe will probably in the end take Chris Matthew's view, that radical Islamists on European streets are like Fallujah's "insurgents". According to Matthews, "They aren't bad guys. They just disagree with us." (It's time to shuffle this fat moron off to the stage.)

Posted by: Rhod at November 17, 2004 at 04:22 AM

Morrow pegs the double standard 'progressives' apply to religion. A crucifix in urine is 'art' worthy of public subsidy, and anyone who complains is an intolerant crank. But asking why Islam is bloody around its borders is somehow offensive and bigoted.

Question for Rog: What if "someone else" decides to be 'offended' by anything he or she disagrees with, or anything Rog happens to say? Are you prepared to keep quiet to avoid offense?

And please explain how Islam is "a minority group and suppressed by law" -- anywhere in the West, that is.

Posted by: Cosmo at November 17, 2004 at 05:32 AM

Hmmm.

Actually the most interesting thing a friend said to me was "Why doesn't Europe actively import people from South America?". Or Central America for that matter. Or even Asia.

Europe does desperately need an influx of immigrants to maintain itself. But the argument that Europe MUST be eventually dominated by muslims isn't actually true. And it's a theory that I used to subscribe to.

As long as European nations allow a passive immigration, rather than actively courting specific peoples, then they will eventually fall under Islamic control with all the potential pitfalls.

But by selectively importing specific people into a nation, such as Holland, a highly varied mix can be achieved. This will go very very far in limiting the influence of Islam and allow for a greater integration into European cultures as the new immigrants are those that are very much inclined to assimilate directly.

In effect this would be a case of a nation actively creating a "mini-me" of America rather than just letting it happen. With all the benefits and downsides involved.

Frankly I see this as the only real solution and one that would work very well.

Posted by: ed at November 17, 2004 at 06:26 AM

Rog said:

"You are not free to express something that may offend someone else.'

As HippyHunter noted, that's not true. Demonizing Christians, Jews, the US, Israel, Western Civilization and White people is something that's ENCOURAGED among members of the Left. You can't be a Leftie in good standing if you have anything positive to say about those groups.

Criticism, however mild and however truthful, of Muslims, non-Western countries/cultures, and non-Whites is NOT tolerated however. In some places you could lose your job if you dared to say anything perceived as criticism of these groups.

madison:

"What happens to freedom of speech?"

It's an illusion that freedom of speech, at least in the US, exists for everyone. Freedom of speech protects only those who want to speak against APPROVED targets. Approved targets include: Christians, Jews, US, and Israel.

We see how freedom of speech/expression can be invoked to force tax payers to pay for a urine enclosed crucifix, or a dung covered Madonna. The targets were the CORRECT targets. The artist was covered by Free Speech laws.

If someone were to try and portray Muslims, or some other protected group, in a less than flattering light that would NOT be covered by today's interpretation of Free Speech.

It does get confusing. I admit that I believed Free Speech, in the US, protected everyone. Silly me. I have learned that Free Speech can ONLY be invoked successfully if the target is one of the non-protected groups (Christians, Jews, etc.).

Posted by: Chris Josephson at November 17, 2004 at 06:56 AM

This ideal that Europe is “waking up” to the Islamist threat is pure nonsense. Oh they may write Op-Eds deploring this and that atrocity but nothing serious will come of it. People who have no strong convictions, no positive sense of their own culture will be unable to muster the courage to fight. Europeans who have been taught by the left for over 60 years to despise their own culture and history and to belittle their society’s accomplishments may be not only unwilling, but also unable, to defend their societies. The original purpose of this strategy was to weaken the will and resolve of anti-leftist forces. The radical left knows only too well what Islamo-fascism stands for and what kind of society that it wishes to construct. But the number one goal of the radical left is to attack and destroy all vestiges of liberal democracy and individual sovereignty. The leader of ideal of liberal democracy is the United States hence the implacable hatred and hostility of radical left to any and everything American. (The essence of leftism IS anti-Americanism.) The goal of the radical left is also the primary goal of the Islamo-fascists. In fact, there was an excellent article that was published several years ago that discusses how radical Islam has adopted some, if not most, of the basis tenets of the radical left. Therefore, in the present circumstances, the two ideologies are natural allies. (Who else defends the Islamists so passionately? Look at who buries the news of Muslim gang rapes of young non-Muslim girls in Norway? In Sweden, people are afraid to discuss the fact that the city of Malmo has become a no-man’s land for fear of the left’s displeasure. Who else seeks to prevent or undermine any attempt to study and discuss radical Islam as an enemy in our media and universities?) This bizarre alliance between two seemly diametrically opposed ideologies has precedents in history: the alliance between the Communists and the Nazis in the Weimar Republic and the “alliance” between the Khomeini-ists and the Iranian Tudeh (communist) party in Iran that existed before and, for a short time, after the overthrow of the Shah. (When the communists no longer served any further purpose, the Khomeinists killed them by the thousands.)
As with the Nazis, the radical left respects and admires—actually is in awe of-- the superior will to violence of the Islamo-fascists. They seek to utilize this superior will to their own ends: let the Islamists attack, undermine and destroy Western society. If the Islamists are successful, then out of the chaos that would follow the destruction of Western society a revolutionary situation would be created in which the radical left will then present themselves as the only viable alternative to Islamo-fascism. (Then and only then will you see the radical left turn on their Islamist cousins.) The irony for the left is that instead of paving the way for Marxism, their assault on their own societies paved the way for ultra-reactionary Islamism.


Posted by: Mark Razak at November 17, 2004 at 07:10 AM

>Europe does desperately need an influx of immigrants to maintain itself.

No we bloody don't, at least as far as Britain is concerned. We've had quite enough of that already, thank you. This is another myth from the same people who bring you the Guardian etc. As for the rest of europe, they have a choice: get sh*gging and work longer or give your grandchildren's inheritance to the third world.

If you wants some facts, check out httpp://www.migrationwatchuk.org. This is no amateur organisation. It's put the wind up the govt. spin merchants and all the other Briton bashers.

Meanwhile, here's something to balance the BS:

The Myth
"Britain (or usually Europe) has a declining population and work force".

The Facts
The British population is officially projected to increase by 5.6 million by 2031 (85% of this is due to immigration). The population of working age will also increase, partly because women will be working longer, With a fertility rate of 1.73, Britain is in a completely different situation from Italy and Spain whose fertility rate is about 1.2.
It is therefore misleading to treat Europe as a single entity for
this purpose.

The Myth
"Britain needs migrant workers to help pay for our pensions"
The Facts
False. Immigrants themselves grow older. To maintain the present population of working age to pensioners would require over 1 million immigrants a year up to 2050. That would double the population to 120 million and leave us with the same problem.

The Myth
"Migrants contribute a net £2.5 billion to the exchequer".
The Facts
False. The relevant Home Office paper was heavily qualified, describing the results as conditioned on the period in which they are calculated and the country's position in the business cycle. In fact the year chosen was one in which the public sector accounts were in surplus so everyone was contributing 5% more than they took out; to correct for this deduct £1.3bn. Furthermore, Corporation Tax from shareholders resident abroad was wrongly attributed to migrants; deduct a further £0.8bn. The study also overlooked the key point that, since the early 1990s, migrants have added to our population so it ignored the cost of new facilities required and the costs of special education etc.

Posted by: JamesUK at November 17, 2004 at 07:18 AM

You're quite right, Richard. Actually, the last 60 years has been an abberation in European history; an enforced peace by the two large superpowers. Now that Russia has collapsed, the intercene warfare has started again.

Heaven help us all.

Elizabeth
Imperial Keeper

Posted by: Elizabeth at November 17, 2004 at 07:20 AM

Thats right Chris J, you are not allowed to offend a minority group. "Majority' groups are excluded.

However minority groups are allowed to offend 'majority' groups, its their enshrined-in-law right!

Mark Razak; why is it that human right groups dont condemn actions such as the slaughter of Mary Hassan yet protest at the felling of trees?

Posted by: rog at November 17, 2004 at 07:27 AM

OF all the Westerners executed in Iraq, Margaret Hassan was the most deserving. Yet she gets by far the most sympathy. Ironic isn't it?

Posted by: Felicity at November 17, 2004 at 07:50 AM

Why did Margaret Hassan deserve to be murdered, Felicity?

Posted by: The Real JeffS at November 17, 2004 at 08:19 AM

Will Felicity answer this question, Jeff? This sounds to me like one of those little enigmatic posts by idiots who haven't the courage to discuss the subject in detail. What about it Felicity?

Posted by: Crazy Chester at November 17, 2004 at 09:02 AM

OF all the Westerners executed in Iraq, Margaret Hassan was the most deserving.

The explanation behind this statement is going to have to be pretty good.

Posted by: GoodFace at November 17, 2004 at 09:04 AM

Ahhh Felicity, that's the type of deep thought I enjoyed on your cancelled TV show.

Posted by: Brett at November 17, 2004 at 09:12 AM

I think Felicity is looking for sympathy for 'her' most deserving condition.

Posted by: rog at November 17, 2004 at 09:16 AM

Rog:

Drug-induced dementia?

Posted by: Crazy Chester at November 17, 2004 at 09:20 AM

[Management note: this person is a well-known yet strangely not beloved Canadian person who seems to get his jollies from being banned from website after website. He's a bit tense, probably because his country is about to be invaded by a new crop of our losers and cast-offs, who will soon be clogging the streets of Toronto with their Priuses (which will be constantly breaking down in the subzero winter weather of the Great WHite North), the coffee shops of Montreal with their wide, granola-fed asses, and the cell-phone lines of Vancouver with bitching about the weather, the service, and the food. So let's give a polite golf clap to Brave Sir Robert for his desperate threnody to times that will soon be no more than memories, eh?]

I have to say I've never seen more bullshit than I did when I read your site. Weren't barbarians like you hanged at Nuremberg? Shouldn't your kind of people have learned the lessons of WWII?
I can't believe there are people who still think that some nations, and some cultures are better than others.

Shouldn't your kind of people have learned that war is NEVER any solution?

What you have said about the UN is despicable. The UN is the only platform that gives voice to anyone but your beloved multinational corporations. The first thing Hitler did after coming to power was to withdraw Germany from the League of Nations. But you, of course, haven't learned the lesson of that?

Bush rejected Kyoto, ICC, bucked the UN on Iraq, refuses to adopt the metric system and won't abide by international law. Bush is the biggest thugh on the planet. Bush just carried out the grandest armed robbery in history and enslaved 24 million innocent non-white Iraqi people.

You have a trypically fascist love of guns. Millions of Americans own guns and thousands are killed every year. Only the gun industry benefits. What you have said opposing global gun control is so stupid that I fell out of my chair reading.

It's all about FREEDOM. Freedom from Colt, Smith & Wesson, Remington, Glock and other merchant of death corporations who don't give a fuck how many people are killed by their products as long as people are left to buy them.

Like you, all these death corporations donate heavily to Republicans. Have you been to an inner city? Tell a mother whose son was shot in a gang fight about your precious second amendment so-called rights.

You've also dissed my personal hero Robert Fisk. Fisk is the most objective journalist I've ever read. He is the only one who dares speak the truth about the racist Israeli state and fascist, illegitimate Bush regime.

In short, you appeal to a populace of rednecks like yourselves, brainwashed by FoxNews, Rush, Hannity, the KKK, talk radio Newsmax and gun companies.


Posted by: Robert McClelland at November 17, 2004 at 10:21 AM

Robert McClelland - you are a caricature, right?

Posted by: HippyHunter at November 17, 2004 at 10:38 AM

Crazy Chester _ See Robert McClelland's post following yours. While you still can, anyway.

Posted by: richard mcenroe at November 17, 2004 at 10:40 AM

Robert seems to have forgotten to make the switch to decaf again.

Posted by: SteveH at November 17, 2004 at 10:41 AM

Talking about travel.

How about all those poor celebrities who are trapped by poverty in Bushitler country?

Now you can help!

http://www.helpthemleave.com/

Posted by: Rob Read at November 17, 2004 at 10:42 AM

We'll be banning Bobby momentarily. But I'll leave his charming comments up as an demonstration of a total loser.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at November 17, 2004 at 10:44 AM

Shouldn't your kind of people have learned the lessons of WWII?

Shouldn't your kind of people have learned that war is NEVER any solution?

So what exactly are the lessons of WW2? Apart from being a solution to Nazi and Japanese agression?

Posted by: GoodFace at November 17, 2004 at 10:44 AM

Robert McClelland has in his hands a piece of paper from Mr Bin Laden!

Peace for our Time!

War is not the Answer, Feed up the crocodile!

Posted by: Rob Read at November 17, 2004 at 10:45 AM

Robert McClelland, I hope you're joking. I've never laughed so hard in my life.

Posted by: Benjamin at November 17, 2004 at 10:45 AM

RM, I realize you're a troll and I'm wasting my time, but I have a hard problem letting such UN comments go...

The UN is the only platform that gives voice to anyone but your beloved multinational corporations.

What voice did it give Rwandans? What voice did/does it give to Tibetans? What voice did it give to the Kuwaitis in 1989? What voice is it giving to the Sudanese people suffering from genocide? What voice does it give to any oppressed people, besides its beloved Palestinians? No, it invites tyrants to the table, puts them on the Security Council and in the Human Rights Commission. It apologizes for them, and selects which oppressed people it will politicize and which it will ignore. It funnels money to tyrants for weapons purchases, while telling the world it's being used to buy food and necessities for the oppressed.

Whatever the UN was meant to be or once was, it clearly is no longer.

Kick them out of NYC and start over.

Posted by: Brett at November 17, 2004 at 10:47 AM

God, McClelland, you have more disproved and false leftie talking points in your post that I've seen in the last couple of months.

I'm toying with the idea that this is another spoof of the leftoids, like Aarrgghh. Your talking points are 100% classic leftoid, with a couple of spelling errors. Still, you do have good punctuation and grammar, and distinct paragraphs.

However, your e-mail looks fake, with a ".ca" or Canada extension. It's a toss up.

So I'm going to throw this on the table. What say ye, good people? Thumbs up, or thumbs down?

Posted by: The Real JeffS at November 17, 2004 at 10:50 AM

Did Arghhhhhhhhhhh forget to change his name?

I suspect not, Argghhh has no spelin mystakes and doesn't randomly bold text

Posted by: Rob Read at November 17, 2004 at 10:51 AM

George 'W' Bush, you stand before this EU/UNSSR tribunal accused of the Heinous crime of "refusing to adopt the metric system"

How do you plead?

Posted by: Rob Read at November 17, 2004 at 10:58 AM

Hmmmm......looks like thumbs down!

Posted by: The Real JeffS at November 17, 2004 at 10:58 AM

George 'W' Bush, you stand before this EU/UNSSR tribunal accused of the Heinous crime of "refusing to adopt the metric system"

That was the best line in there, hands down. Think of the lives it would have saved.

Posted by: Brett at November 17, 2004 at 11:04 AM

Where be Timmy?

Posted by: superboot at November 17, 2004 at 11:05 AM

Brave Sir Robert used to infest the comments at blogs like Daimnation and Little Green Footballs and he's been banned from just about all of them. His shtick never alters: "you rubes", "Americans are Nazis", "George Bush = Hitlarrrrggghh!" and so on. The usual tedious crap.

Anyway, I've banned his IP, so don't bother arguing with him.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at November 17, 2004 at 11:05 AM

Shit, we'll never learn the lessons of WW2 now.

Posted by: GoodFace at November 17, 2004 at 11:08 AM

That can't be the real Boobert McClueless. He forgot to call us all "Reich Whinge Rubes!" ;-)

Posted by: Mary in LA at November 17, 2004 at 11:39 AM

I've long wondered if maybe "Robert McClelland" is a buggy computer program that broke out of its parameter space and now infests the internet as part of an uninterruptable feedback loop.

More seriously though, does anyone know if Robbie also posts on lefty blogs, or does he only visit places with a better than 80% chance of his being banned? Most trolls I know (both on the left and right side of the blogosphere) have at least some "home" blogs on their own side of the divide where they carry on conversations that aren't pure trollbait. I somehow have trouble imagining what a serious conversation with Robbie Mc would look like, so if it exists, I'd love to see it.

Posted by: PW at November 17, 2004 at 11:53 AM

I've traveled in Scandanavia quite a lot but am not convinced the average citizen has bought into the multi-cultural line. They've been watching their once low crime rates increase dramatically, which corresponds (apparently) to increased immigration. As one friend told me "they (no group in particular) come here for a better life, but want to behave as they did in their old home".
Sounds familiar to me.
I have often wondered if the extreme tolerance Europe professes to practice is an over-reaction to what occurred prior to WWII. Either way, there is a clearly one branch of Islamic thought that is no more tolerant of other cultures than the Nazis were of the Jews. Europe needs to recognize the threat for what it is, or they will repeat the mistakes their best intentions have tried to correct.

Posted by: southpaw at November 17, 2004 at 11:54 AM

Hi All!

I didn't mean to imply that Margaret Hassan deserved to be murdered. Heavens no, not for a micro second. Just that, along the deservability spectrum, she was at the furthest end point of the Westerner's executed so far.

Posted by: Felicity at November 17, 2004 at 11:58 AM

You make no sense, Felicity. I'll just mark you down as something to ignore, and move on.

Posted by: The Real JeffS at November 17, 2004 at 12:03 PM

Felicity,
They could remove your head and intellectual processes wouldn't be crimped in the least.

Posted by: superboot at November 17, 2004 at 12:16 PM

"I somehow have trouble imagining what a serious conversation with Robbie Mc would look like, so if it exists, I'd love to see it."

Robbie most likely has serious conversations with that guy in the mirror every morning.

Posted by: The Real JeffS at November 17, 2004 at 12:22 PM

Bob McEnroe ought to recognize McClelland from Roger Simon's bog, before he, Mc, was banned in an acrimonious exchange of lunacies from Mc, and controlled loathing from Simon and everyone else on the blog.

I don't know if Mc has a Home Blog. I'm not sure he has a home, instead maybe a chipboard carton where he dines on squirrel and wanders about claiming to anyone in earshot that he once was a Big Time Blogger.

Mc is the perfect citizen for a country fixated on "soft power", and Lloyd Axworthy (or whatever) should be proud to have Mc in his chipboard carton. Mc will fight goodness wherever he finds it, cuddling with real tyrannies and fulminating about imaginary ones.

He could actually be the reanimated corpse of Robert Welch or Robert Moseley. Who knows? He has a kind of Unabomber charm too.

Posted by: Crazy Chester at November 17, 2004 at 12:30 PM

Well, since McClelland didn't complain about people who shoot Ruger and Uberti, I guess I'm off the hook...

Say, do you wonder if the mullahs in Tehran and Riyadh are worrying about "the Dutch street?"

Posted by: richard mcenroe at November 17, 2004 at 12:59 PM

I meant Richard McEnroe, not Bob. Sorry Richard.

Posted by: Crazy Chester at November 17, 2004 at 01:10 PM

Good thing Bob McClelland didn't lump Berreta in with those other manufacturers! One day I would like to have 92FS, when they change the laws here in Oz. (It will ahppen you know! If they can go soft on mull like they are here in WA, guns aren't far down the track!)

I do have to say that I agree with him on the US and metrics. Get with the program people!

I go and by Lance Armstrong's books on training and then spend so much time converting miles, pounds and calories into kilometers, kilograms and kilojoules that I don't have enough time to get out on the bike and emulate the guy. Sheesh!

Posted by: Razor at November 17, 2004 at 01:48 PM

PW, Robert McClelland posts on Daily Kos.

He's also posted the same screed as above at Silent Running. Looks like he's no longer bothering to interact, just spamming as many blogs as he can.

Time for an entry in MT-Blacklist, methinks.

Posted by: Evil Pundit at November 17, 2004 at 01:50 PM

Razor — My bike gets forty rods to the hogshead, and that's the way I likes it!

Posted by: richard mcenroe at November 17, 2004 at 02:05 PM

PW, Robert McClelland posts on Daily Kos.

How oddly apposite; I should have known he'd be drawn to that cesspool. Thanks for the heads-up, Evil.

But that pretty much dashes my hopes to find McClelland caught in the act of an actual conversation. There's not really much of that to be had amidst the ravings of the Kos groupies, after all. Not to mention that dissent is even more quickly crushed there than over here. (I fully support their right to ban anyone they damn well please, mind you.)

Posted by: PW at November 17, 2004 at 02:15 PM

Razor, I pull chains and shoot a compass myself. And there's nothing wrong with buying grain by the hundredweight.

Posted by: The Real JeffS at November 17, 2004 at 02:35 PM

"I don't know if Mc has a Home Blog. I'm not sure he has a home, instead maybe a chipboard carton where he dines on squirrel and wanders about claiming to anyone in earshot that he once was a Big Time Blogger."

i've been lurking all sides of the 'sphere for 2 years and these are posts by RC on his own blog. read them all, they just get worse.

[Thanks. I go to all that trouble to make sure the cretin's url doesn't show so he won't get the hits at his lousy blog he so craves and you help him. URLS REMOVED. If anyone is so curious about this McClelland creature they can look him up on the other websites that have been mentioned. I don't want this site in his referral logs. The Management.]

Posted by: friendlydude2k at November 17, 2004 at 03:20 PM

In the weekend Oz it quotes The Guardian as blaming Holland's belated attempts at assimilation, the harshest immigration policies in the E.U., pledges to deport long term illegals and compulsory Dutch language classes!!!!!!!!!!! "The Dutch should heed the warning of their prime minister and avoid being swept away in a maelstrom of violence." The human rights tribunal WILL be pleased.Hi Jim U.K. -we Aussies still don't think of U.K. being part of Europe -yet .......

Posted by: crash at November 17, 2004 at 04:01 PM

I've seen some of Robert McClelland's postings on other sites.

It's such an odd world these days that I wonder if he REALLY believes all he writes, or he is out to prove, by example, how empty are many of the arguments espoused by some Lefties.

He does such a great job of showing, by example, how crazy some of the Left's talking points can be that I can't discount the idea that may be his goal.

This:

"You've also dissed my personal hero Robert Fisk. Fisk is the most objective journalist I've ever read. He is the only one who dares speak the truth about the racist Israeli state and fascist, illegitimate Bush regime."

just doesn't ring true. It seems like tongue-in-cheek. "Personal hero"?! That's so over the top I'm wondering how much Sir Robert loathes Fisk.

Or, could be the guy is just nutz and wants attention.

Posted by: Chris Josephson at November 17, 2004 at 04:05 PM

Clever ABC local radio--yesterday they voluntarily interviewed a Texan police officer about his "charity" www.adoptasniper about special body armour for coalition special troops.Only so that they could patronise and quiver with shock-horror when it was politely and helpfully explained. Today it was the American lady whose grilled cheese sandwich "resembled a Madonna image".Patronising sneering giggles all round. Still these interviews did not enrage listeners as much as the session on BEHEADING. It was explained to us by a self styled pop culture guru (professor) from Curtin Uni that beheading is not in fact barbaric and less worrying than burning people alive or hang,drawing and quartering them etc etc.This particular afternoon show presenter is being dropped reluctantly.Mediawatch was informed but evidently David didn't feel like 'going" them as he terms it.

Posted by: crash at November 17, 2004 at 04:32 PM

Wasn't there a delegation from the NSW Parliament who went on a fact-finding tour of Dutch brothels, complete with expense accounts, many years ago.

Posted by: Peter at November 17, 2004 at 06:04 PM

There was Peter and I believe that there was a successful outcome.

Posted by: rog at November 17, 2004 at 06:35 PM

Crash said -we Aussies still don't think of U.K. being part of Europe

Quite so. Europe is what we call 'the Continent' -- all those foreign Continentals and their funny ways. If they come here they're 'New Australians'.

Henry Root (the esteemed wet fish merchant and Voice of the People, Chelsea) in his seminal work Henry Root's World of Knowledge ("11,000 Facts") says of The French (who are genuine Continentals)--

"The French have always been able to take self-interest in their stride. Little notion of Anglo-Saxon probity. L'affaire of the Bokassa diamonds could never have happened here. In a humorous column always refer to them as Frogs...'It's chacun pour soi as far the Frogs are concerned'."

I invite readers who wouldn't be without their World of Knowledge to share with us Mr Root's entry under 'The Guardian'. A classic

Posted by: Walter Plinge at November 17, 2004 at 07:40 PM

A Robert McC extracted comment - illegitimate Bush regime


This is so... "2000"!

Posted by: madison at November 17, 2004 at 10:46 PM

Getting Canadian sunshine pumped up your ass 24/7 by the CBC has taken a toll on your mind, hasn't it McClelland? Why don't you fuck off to the Ivory Coast and make yourself useful. They need a Canadian to show them how to surrender to the French.

Posted by: Arty at November 18, 2004 at 02:44 AM

"Only the gun industry benefits."

Robert obviously hasn't been on the giving end of a good murder lately. He seems to be getting close though so there is still hope for him.

"she was at the furthest end point of the Westerner's executed so far."

I need to check out that scale again to see which end is the furthest end point as it relates to Western executions. One good thing is that I'm doubting it will be in metrics.

"I do have to say that I agree with him on the US and metrics. Get with the program people!"

Don't worry we're only one or two generations away from it becoming a reality. My kids know it and the US Government has already made the change...its just for my generation and the one above me to die and you'll have it. We're trying to hurry but they keep inventing new cures for things....those damn conservative drug companies I expect are the culprit.

So, when are you guys going to start driving on the "right" side of the road? and what is it that makes aluminum and schedule so hard for you people to pronounce? Get with the program people!


Posted by: tej at November 18, 2004 at 06:12 AM