A few weeks ago History News Network published an article by Timothy R. Furnish entitled “Resurrecting Christendom: A Blueprint”. It’s a thought-provoking essay that floats the idea of a worldwide alliance of Christian nations for the purpose of containing Islam.

Dr. Furnish calls it the “Gondor Strategy”, and says it “would entail setting a ‘Watchful Peace’ upon the bloody borders of Islam, as in Tolkien the most powerful human kingdom did against Sauron’s land of Mordor.”

He supplies some specifics about what the Gondor Strategy would involve:

This strategy would be implemented by a Global Christian Alliance, formed by representatives from the aforementioned countries with the largest Christian populations, minus the problematic ones: Nigeria (as many Muslims as Christians, thus on the fault line between the civilizations); China (officially Marxist); Congo (too politically weak and unstable); and Kenya (see “Congo”). At first perhaps only one or two official delegates from each nation would be sent to the formative meetings in the de facto, working “capital” of the GCA. Rome is undoubtedly the best location, since the only other truly viable candidate, Jerusalem, might be deemed too hot a political potato (although meeting there would demonstrate the GCA’s dedication to the preservation of Israel). Eventually, as the mechanics of the alliance are ironed out, some sort of proportional representation might well be incorporated, with the U.S. getting the most delegates, followed by Brazil, Mexico, Russia, etc. This would acknowledge the reality of the power differential between the nation-states involved—for this is not a revamped World Council of Churches, but a political and military alliance grounded in a shared Christian culture.

Note, too, that [Jim] Pinkerton’s four main Christian blocs—Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox and African—would all be represented (as, for that matter, would the Mormons, largely subsumed under the Protestant American category). The foundational membership for the GCA would, under this plan, include a majority of Roman Catholic nations, several Protestant ones (including the largest and most powerful, the U.S.) and two Orthodox ones (Russia, Ethiopia), with African Christianity represented by South Africa as well as Ethiopia. Also, borrowing boldly from [Robert] Conquest, very early on the GCA would create both permanent Foreign Policy and Military Committees, each of which would have as its purview, unlike NATO, the entire planet14—or at least the non-Muslim parts of it. Perhaps most importantly “these two committees would also provide a unified approach to political warfare—concentrating information and expertise and insisting on the major role of this side of the struggle.” Indeed, the GCA, like Conquest’s posited Anglosphere, “might eventually…raise or sponsor its own forces on a limited scale.”15 Unlike Conquest’s Anglosphere, however, the GCA would not have as its stated ultimate aim the total political unification of its constituent members—although it would not rule that out—but rather the goal would be to preserve, protect and defend Christian civilization against those who would destroy or subvert it, primarily Muslim enemies. Other civilizational blocs, as they continue to unite politically—the Indian/Hindu one most obviously, but also the Buddhist one—could be accorded “observer status” at GCA meetings for discussing joint counter-Islamic strategies.

I recommend a visit to HNN to read the whole thing.

It’s a tempting and compelling vision. As a Christian, I want it to happen. But how feasible is it?

The problem with assembling a Christian alliance to stem the Great Jihad is that Christianity is on the wane throughout the West, but especially in Europe. The center of gravity for Christianity in the 21st century has moved from a trans-Atlantic axis to one that runs from the heart of Africa to the heart of Asia. As I reported last week, it is thought that up to a million Iranians have converted to Christianity in the last five years, and people in China are becoming Christians at an astonishing rate. Current estimates place the number of Chinese Christians at between fifty and sixty million — a number roughly equivalent to the population of the entire United Kingdom.

And, unlike most nominal Christians in Europe, these are practicing Christians. If you live under a brutal totalitarian regime — especially one, like Iran, that punishes apostasy with death — you don’t become a Christian unless you’re serious about your faith.

In contrast, if you’re a European, and you blow off church most Sundays, you’re far from alone. According to today’s Daily Telegraph, observant Muslims will soon outnumber observant Christians in Britain:
– – – – – – – – –

The increasing influence of Islam on British culture is disclosed in research today that shows the number of Muslims worshipping at mosques in England and Wales will outstrip the numbers of Roman Catholics going to church in little more than a decade.

Projections to be published next month estimate that, if trends continue, the number of Catholic worshippers at Sunday Mass will fall to 679,000 by 2020.

By that time, statisticians predict, the number of Muslims praying in mosques on Fridays will have increased to 683,000.

The Christian Research figures also suggest that, over the same period, the number of Muslims at mosques will overtake Church of England members at Sunday services.

[…]

The projections show that, if the Churches do not reverse their historical decline, there will be more active Muslims than Christians in Sunday services across Britain before the middle of the century.

Any functional Christian alliance designed to contain Islam would have to be anchored in the most advanced and powerful countries of the West. But, as the above news story illustrates, it’s a lost cause to urge the citizens of Western Europe to mobilize against the Islamic juggernaut on the basis of their Christian faith.

The United States is somewhat better off, thanks to the Baptists and the Pentecostalists. Christianity is still vigorous here, and will be for many years to come. But a global Christian alliance could not sustain itself solely through the muscular power of the USA.

Europe is necessary to the cause.

Based on the (admittedly anecdotal) evidence of Gates of Vienna commenters and email correspondents, about half of the impetus for the Counterjihad comes from atheists and agnostics. Throw in the Jews, the Sikhs, the Buddhists, and the Hindus, and Christians are in the minority among those who would roll back the Islamization of our societies.

That’s why I repeatedly advocate for a broad coalition. Christians may be the single largest component of the resistance, but this is not a Christian movement. It’s a movement of all people who oppose the backwardness and brutality of Islam as it is currently expressed in our world. It’s an alliance of people interested in maintaining and advancing what we all call “civilization”.

That’s what we have to work with. Two or three generations from now, when militant Islam has been extinguished, all the other faiths — Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Orthodox Atheism, and even devout secular Hedonism — will flourish.

I won’t be around to see the day, but some of you who read this will be. Stick around and keep your eyes on the prize.

Hat tip for the Telegraph article: TB.

For a long time the Department of Tourism in our state has been handing out bumper stickers that proclaim “VIRGINIA IS FOR LOVERS.” And no, I haven’t a clue as to why the pen pushers thought that was a catchy tourist slogan. However, it has led to some hilarious editorial comments on the stickers themselves. My favorite so far is “VIRGINIA IS FOR gun LOVERS”, mainly because I know it annoys the gun control folks.

Now we find that Israel is really the place for true love, via this story from ANSAmed:

A Palestinian gay man, residing in the refugee camp in Jenin (one of the most volatile areas of the West Bank), has been allowed by the Israeli military authorities to move to Tel Aviv to be able to remain close to his Israeli partner.

The special permit, which it seems has no precedent, was issued by General Yosef Mishlav, coordinator of the activities of the Israeli government in the Palestinian Authority “for humanitarian reasons”.

The man, 33, together with his partner, 40, said they had been submitting applications for a permit to reside in Israel for years but they never received it. In general, for the Palestinians residing in the West Bank it is very difficult to be granted an authorisation to enter Israeli land.

For this reason, the request was addressed directly to General Yosef Mishlav: the high-level officer decided to approve it in consideration “of the death threats that the Palestinian received in Jenin because of his homosexual relationship with an Israeli citizen”.

That’s not the issue exactly. Any Palestinian would be in as much jeopardy if he were in a homosexual relationship with a Muslim man. Double trouble.

Hat tip: insubria

[Love is eternal but the post ends here]

From Seth Freedman’s blog in The Guardian:

Hundreds of Muslims who have fled Darfur are rebuilding their lives in Israel.

“Even though we’re Muslim, the Islamic world has done nothing to protect us”, said Yassin, a refugee whose tortured flight from Darfur finally brought him to Israel three years ago. He was one of the first Darfurians to make it into Israel across the border from Egypt, and has dedicated his life to helping hundreds of his fellow countrymen who have made the same perilous journey.

Yassin, a genial 30-year-old former architect, is now director of Bnei Darfur [Sons of Darfur], an organisation which assists Sudanese refugees to integrate into Israeli society, and which last week was finally granted non-profit status by the Israeli government. Sitting in his office in downtown Tel Aviv, Yassin painted a harrowing picture of the way in which Darfurian refugees are mistreated by the uncaring and unsympathetic authorities in Egypt, which is the first port of call of many fleeing the violence in Sudan.

– – – – – – – – –

Darfuri children are scared to set foot outside in Egypt for fear of attack, Yassin said, citing the slaying of dozens of refugees after a protest outside the UNHCR headquarters in 2005. “It’s not that Egypt doesn’t look after refugees in general,” he said, “after all, they treat the Somalians very well. However, when it comes to us, they are different. It’s racism [that motivates the Egyptian mistreatment].”

It doesn’t help that the Darfurians are accusing fellow Muslims of genocide, said Yassin, noting that the Muslim states who support the Sudanese government in turn claim that the refugees are collaborating with enemy states in the West. “All of the Arab countries support the government of Sudan – our problem is with the Arab League,” Yassin stated with a shake of his head at his people’s plight. Having watched most of his family slaughtered in a militia attack on his village, he fled the region hoping to find shelter in Egypt, but was soon forced to move on.

After the cold and often violent reception the refugees received at the hands of the Egyptians, Yassin decided that things couldn’t be worse on the Israeli side of the border – despite the anti-Israeli indoctrination he’d been spoon-fed when growing up in Sudan. “The government controlled all of the media back home,” he said. “The television stations, the radio, the newspapers… and all of them were very hostile towards Israel. They described it as an enemy state full of killers, and the cause of all of the world’s problems.”

He smiled at the irony of Israel turning out to be the first country where he and his fellow refugees could finally find sanctuary – although it was hardly plain sailing at first. “When the army picked me up, I spent five days on their base in a tiny room with five Egyptian men. The conditions were awful, and one of the judges was very cruel, threatening to deport me back to Egypt. She told me that I was I wasn’t welcome in Israel because I was from an ‘enemy country’ – but in the end I was transferred to a larger prison in the south.”

He spent 14 months in jail, where he banded together with other Darfurian refugees and founded an informal support group to assist one another, teaching English, Arabic and Hebrew to those who required educating. After a few months, the Israeli press started picking up the story of the refugee crisis, and soon several NGOs and welfare organisations began campaigning for their release. The UN got involved, and eventually many of the refugees were let out of jail and sent to work on local kibbutzim.

However, once free they faced large-scale exploitation by employers who took advantage of their lack of proper permits and rights, forcing them to work for a pittance and in dreadful conditions. Again, intervention from the UN and local NGOs caused a change of heart on the part of the government, who granted 600 of the 750 refugees with ‘A5’ temporary residency status, with the remainder receiving protection as asylum seekers.

And the rest is recent history. Yassin and his friends formed Bnei Darfur, and have been stunningly successful in their mission to create a self-sufficient community “that isn’t a drain on Israeli society”. Every one of the refugees has a job, a house, and access to medical care – “the only ones without jobs are the ones who’ve just arrived, and we soon take care of them”, he said. The children have been found places at Israeli schools, where they learn Hebrew and befriend their locally-born peers, and the future appears bright for those who have managed to make it into Israel.

Many Israelis took up the Darfurians’ cause on the basis that Jews have been denied refuge by indifferent countries throughout history, and that Israeli Jews should remember their own troubled past when dealing with the victims of today. However, whilst the way in which Israel (eventually) received the refugees is to be admired, there is of course the accusation of double standards to be dealt with regarding Palestinian refugees being denied the chance to relocate to the Promised Land.

But the unresolved issue of the Palestinian right of return is not something Yassin wished to be drawn on. As far as he’s concerned, Israel has provided for his people in a way that no Arab country would – and for that he’s eternally grateful. And in terms of Israel’s image in the eyes of the refugees as well as the outside world, accepting the unwanted Darfurians was both an astute and an admirable move to make.

Be sure to click on the blog link to read some of the comments. What people have to add to this story is enlightening. This one is a good example:

“Israel over its short history has managed to become home for refugees from Vietnam (Boatpeople), from Ukraine after the Chernoble disaster, and of course for millions of Jewish refugees from Arab and other Asian countries and from Eastern and central Europe.

Most of the people attempting to make their way to Israel these days from Africa are actually not Sudanese from Darfur but rather Africans from other countries, seeking mostly better economic conditions, many of whom are indeed Muslims.

It is fascinating yet very sad to observe that neither Muslim nor Arab countries wish to accommodate such migrants/refugees.”

It may be very sad to see this, but it’s certainly predictable. Muslim and Arab countries are in the emigration business. It’s a one-way street.

Found on: Big News

Islamization in the Czech Republic is not the same urgent problem that it is in most of Western Europe. The Czechs came late to the Multicultural Party, having spent the first forty years of it under the boot of their Soviet comrades. All those years of experience with a centrally imposed totalitarian utopia have made them wary of outlandish ideologies.

The number of Muslim immigrants in Czechia is relatively small. The latest figures I have are from 2004, and show somewhat over twenty thousand Muslims in a population of approximately ten million — under one quarter of one percent. No doubt the number of Muslims has increased over the last four years, but accurate figures are hard to come by.

Still, it’s obvious that the blade of the scimitar is not yet at the Czechs’ throat. But that doesn’t stop the politically correct appeasers from engaging in preemptive surrender.

Here’s the latest story. A nationalist party, after hearing about Geert Wilders’ problems with Network Solutions, is offering to host his movie on their servers in the Czech Republic.

And how has the Czech government responded?

By staunchly supporting the right of their citizens to express themselves freely, right?

By asserting that forty years of Soviet domination has made their nation acutely sensitive to the importance of free speech, perhaps?

Wrong. The ruling party in Czechia has done itself proud as full dhimmi member of Eurabia.

First, an article from Al-Arabiya:

A Czech nationalist party has offered to host a film by Dutch politician Geert Wilders critical of Islam on its website, prompting denunciations Monday from mainstream politicians.

The National Party, which has no seats in parliament, said it was ready to host the 15-minute film “in reaction to the cowardice of Dutch and European Union politicians who themselves spread panic and are unable to support the chairman of the Freedom Party Geert Wilders in his fight against Islam.”

To do so would be a response to “Islamic terrorists whose blackmail and attacks damage our countries,” the far-right party added in a statement seen on its website.

Czech Interior Minister Ivan Langer attacked the offer as “stupid”.

[…]

Dutch officials have unsuccessfully urged Wilders not to air the film, fearing a repeat of violent protests that erupted in many countries when European newspapers printed cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed.

Wilders has said he will release it “before April 1” on the Internet if no conventional broadcaster will show it.

Several Muslim countries — including Pakistan, Indonesia, Egypt, Iran and Afghanistan — have already protested against his plans.

A Dutch newspaper that has seen some of the opening images said it depicts the cover of the Koran, and then “a decapitation in Iraq, a stoning in Iran and an execution in Saudi Arabia”.

And look at this NYT-style bit of editorializing on the part of AFP (which is the original source of the article):
– – – – – – – – –

The National Party is known for its xenophobic views and calls for a resurgence of conservative national values. It frequently makes headlines with sparsely-attended demonstrations against immigrants and minorities.

I’m also known for my xenophobic views, and have also called for a resurgence of conservative national values. And I know what happens to anyone who asserts the right of a nation to control immigration and maintain its traditional culture: we’re all racists, bigots, white supremacists, xenophobes, Islamophobes, neo-Nazis, fascists, and any other derogatory epithet that can be mined from the bottomless lexicons of leftist insults.

As it happens, the National Party (Národní strana) has a reputation for anti-Semitism and being non-supportive towards Israel. I’m no expert on Czech matters, so I’ll let our commenters weigh in on the justice of this characterization.

But my point is that, to the MSM in Czechia or anywhere else, we’re all the same. All cats are black in the darkness of the legacy media, and all conservatives are extremist, marginal, bigoted, and racist. That’s just the way it is.

Regardless of the political opinions of the National Party, and despite the hurt feelings of Muslims about a movie they haven’t seen, the Czech government should have stood behind the free speech rights of a group of its citizens who offered asylum to Geert Wilders’ persecuted movie.

But they didn’t. They did the EU Dhimmi Two-Step, the dance with which we’ve become all too familiar in the last few years. According to CeskéNoviny.cz:

The offer of the Czech nationalist National Party (NS) to place on its foreign server the controversial anti-Islamic film of Dutch ultra-right MP Geert Wilders is an absurd idea of some ignorant persons, Czech Interior Minister Ivan Langer said today.

Jeronym Tejc, head of the opposition Social Democrat (CSSD) security commission, and former interior minister for CSSD Frantisek Bublan also condemned the NS’s offer as irresponsible.

The film release on the web would pose a security risk to the Czech Republic’s citizens, the politicians said.

“I believe that silly ideas of some idiots will not draw attention. The best way…is to ignore it, because they need exactly a media show and promotion,” Langer (senior ruling Civic Democrats, ODS) said.

He added he is convinced that Wilders’s film would not be on the web in the end.

Langer stressed the NS has no support in Czech society and the Czech Republic distances itself from the nationalists’ activities.

“I think that this step by the nationalists will only unnecessarily escalate tension,” Tejc told CTK.

“It increases the risk of possible terrorist threats in the Czech Republic in the future,” Tejc warned, adding that the nationalists want to promote themselves at the expense of citizens’ safety.

Note that because some deranged psychopaths might commit violence, the people who host the movies are the criminals, and not the poor misunderstood Muslims who do the maiming, killing, burning, and looting:

If the film were really released on the website, the police should investigate whether this act was a crime or not, Tejc added.

It is potentially risky as it can stir up indignation, probably not among the Muslim community in the Czech Republic but abroad, Bublan said.

He recalled that the Dutch authorities did not allow to broadcast Wilders’ film called Fitna, an Arabic word used to describe discord, in fears that the film might stir up protests in the local strong Muslim community.

If the film stirred up racial hatred, its release could be prosecuted as a crime, Bublan said, adding he does not know the film.

Nobody knows the film, but everybody seems certain that screening it would be a crime. Threats of murder, burning cars or buildings, violent street actions — those are trivial distractions, not worth the attention of the authorities.

But making movies like this — now that’s a crime. Lock ’em up and throw away the key!

Hat tips: Viktor Svoboda and TB.

Magdi Allam is a prominent Egyptian-Italian journalist who converted to Christianity and was baptized by the pope in a ceremony during an Easter mass in the Vatican.

Since he was born into Islam, Mr. Allam’s conversion makes him an official apostate, and thus subject to a sentence of death. His is a dramatic act of great symbolic import, much more effective than a thousand anti-jihad books or a million turban bomb cartoons.

By this Easter ritual Pope Benedict XVI has done a great service to the cause. It makes it easier to overlook some of his public statements about the Motoons — not to mention the stated positions of his subordinates in the Vatican hierarchy.

The significance of the occasion was not lost on the Islamic world. Here’s the latest from Reuters:

The Easter baptism of an Italian Muslim by Pope Benedict was a provocative act that raises questions about the Vatican’s approach to Islam, a leading participant in Christian-Muslim dialogue said on Monday.

Aref Ali Nayed, a key figure in a group of over 200 Muslim scholars launching discussion forums with Christian groups, said the Vatican had turned the baptism of Egyptian-born journalist Magdi Allam into “a triumphalist tool for scoring points.”

“A triumphalist tool for scoring points”? What do you call the beheading of infidels? How triumphal are the pronouncements that emerge from Tehran, or Cairo, or Riyadh?

He said the Vatican should distance itself from a searing attack on Islam that Allam published on Sunday in the Milan daily Corriere della Sera, where he is deputy director.

Why should it do that? What Catholic knows the truth about Islam better than an ex-Muslim?

Commentators in Algeria and Morocco echoed Nayed’s view, saying Allam’s conversion was a personal affair but his attacks on Islam and his headline-grabbing baptism by the pope strained relations between Muslims and the Catholic Church.

“The whole spectacle… provokes genuine questions about the motives, intentions and plans of some of the pope’s advisers on Islam,” Nayed, who is director of the Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre in Amman, said in a statement.

Translation: “We had the Church nicely softened up, almost ready for full dhimmitude. It’s time to whip the Vatican back into line.”
– – – – – – – – –

“Nevertheless, we will not let this unfortunate episode distract us from our work on pursuing ‘A Common Word’ for the sake of humanity and world peace. Our basis for dialogue is not a tit-for-tat logic of reciprocity.”

Nayed was one of 138 Muslim scholars who last October issued an unprecedented appeal entitled “A Common Word” that urged a serious dialogue between Christians and Muslims on the basis of the shared values of love of God and neighbor. Dozens more scholars have since signed the appeal.

Protestant churches have mostly reacted in a positive way, but the Roman Catholic Church — which accounts for more than half of the world’s two billion Christians — has been hesitant and agreed to dialogue only after some delay.

Ah, yes: “A Common Word”. This is the latest ecumenical effort initiated by Islamic front groups and aimed at Christianity. It contains all the peace-love-’n’-justice boilerplate that’s guaranteed to hook the soft-brained leaders of the mainstream Protestant churches. The Vatican is obviously made of sterner stuff, and not only held out longer, but prepared a below-the-waterline shot against Islam in the meantime.

Read through the text and scriptural citations at the Common Word site. You’ll notice the standard set of “good” Koran quotations can be found there — “no compulsion in religion”, etc.

But for those who are familiar with strict Islamic doctrine, and also with the standard taqiyya used to slip it under our radar, there is this:

Clearly, the blessed words: we shall ascribe no partner unto Him relate to the Unity of God. Clearly also, worshipping none but God, relates to being totally devoted to God and hence to the First and Greatest Commandment.

[…]

As Muslims, we say to Christians that we are not against them and that Islam is not against them — so long as they do not wage war against Muslims on account of their religion…

The first section quoted is the one that ultimately requires a Christian to reject the doctrine of the Trinity. It is routinely used in Islamic theology to demonstrate that Christianity is in fact a polytheistic heresy. There will be no “common word” between the religions until the Trinity is repudiated.

The second section conceals the fact that to a Muslim any criticism or mockery consists of “waging war against Muslims on account of their religion”. The Motoon crisis and the uproar over Fitna illustrate this issue perfectly. If you mock the Prophet, then Islam is against you, and may wage war on you. In fact, the Koran obligates Muslims to fight until you are either killed or submit to the rule of the Ummah.

The Reuters article continues:

Mohamed Yatim, commentator for the Moroccan daily Attajdid, called the high-profile baptism “a new provocation for the Islamic world and part of a trend that has intensified in recent years with the caricatures of the Prophet.”

[…]

In Algeria, deputy editor Mahmoud Belhimer of the popular El Khabar newspaper said Allam’s conversion “could have been normal if he had not made anti-Islamic comments.”

“Normal” means that he must never, ever offer any criticism of the religion he left behind.

The Saudi daily al-Watan reported the baptism on its front page and described Allam as someone who “worked tirelessly to attack Islam” and was close to pro-Israel groups.

This is the cardinal sin for this new infidel: support for Israel. Baptism is one thing, but allying with the Zionist apes and pigs? How could he?

And there are the usual Christian dhimmis just aching to submit:

Rev. Christophe Roucou, the French Catholic Church’s top official for relations with Islam, also questioned the publicity surrounding Allam’s conversion. “I don’t understand why he wasn’t baptized in his hometown by his local bishop,” he said.

Magdi Allam, needless to say, is afraid for his life. Today’s Corriere della Sera (his own newspaper) has this to say:

An outspoken muslim author and critic of Islamic fundamentalism who converted to Christianity at the hands of Pope Benedict said on Sunday he realised he was in greater danger but he has no regrets.

“I realise what I am going up against but I will confront my fate with my head high, with my back straight and the interior strength of one who is certain about his faith” said Magdi Allam.

In a surprise move on Saturday night, the pope baptized the 55-year-old, Egyptian-born Allam at an Easter eve service in St Peter’s Basilica that was broadcast around the world. The conversion of Allam to Christianity — he took the name “Christian” for his baptism — was kept secret until the Vatican disclosed it in a statement less than an hour before it began.

Writing in Sunday’s edition of the leading Corriere della Sera, the newspaper of which he is a deputy director, Allam said: “… the root of evil is innate in an Islam that is physiologically violent and historically conflictual”. Allam, who is a strong supporter of Israel and who an Israeli newspaper once called a “Muslim Zionist,” has lived under police protection following threats against him, particularly after he criticised Iran’s position on Israel.

His conversion, which he called “the happiest day of my life,” came just two days after al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden accused the pope of being part of a “new crusade” against Islam. The Vatican appeared to be at pains to head off criticism from the Islamic world about the conversion. “Conversion is a private matter, a personal thing and we hope that the baptism will not be interpreted negatively by Islam,” Cardinal Giovanni Re told an Italian newspaper. Still, Allam’s highly public baptism by the pope shocked Italy’s Muslim community, with some leaders openly questioning why the Vatican chose to shine such a big spotlight it.

“What amazes me is the high profile the Vatican has given this conversion,” Yaha Sergio Yahe Pallavicini, vice-president of the Italian Islamic Religious Community, told Reuters. “Why could he have not done this in his local parish?”

Once again, the arrogance and audacity of Muslims knows no bounds. What right has Mr. Pallavicini or any other Muslim to question where and how Christians welcome converts to their faith? What Christian second-guesses the process by which people convert to Islam?

As usual, Islam is special, and gets to write its own rules for what everyone else does, Muslims or otherwise.

Allam, the author of numerous books, said he realised that his conversion would likely procure him “another death sentence for apostasy,” or the abandoning of one’s faith. But he said he was willing to risk it because he had “finally seen the light, thanks to divine grace”. Allam defended the pope in 2006 when the pontiff made a speech in Regensburg, Germany, that many Muslims perceived as depicting Islam as a violent faith. He said he made his decision after years of deep soul searching and asserted that the Catholic Church has been “too prudent about conversions of Muslims”.

Islam’s responses over the next few months to various tender topics — the Motoons, Fitna, and Mr. Allam’s conversion — will tell us something about how violent a faith it is.

If the people who take to the streets to burn and kill are not “true Muslims”, then how many true Muslims are there?

If you subtract the violent heresiarchs, then how many out of the 1.4 billion are left?

Just asking.

Hat tips: TB and insubria.

Full hijab has proved useful to members of Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, who have occasionally eluded capture by going undercover in a burkha and slipping the dragnet.

Lately crimes committed by perpetrators wearing a burkha as a disguise are becoming more commonplace. We’ve had a few such incidents here in the States, and there are even more in Europe.

The latest one in Britain occurred in Birmingham last week. According to AlArabiya.net:

British police are searching for a 6ft 6in armed robber who robbed a jewelry store disguised as a Muslim woman wearing a burkha and pushing an empty pram, British press reported Saturday.

The man acted as a decoy in order to be buzzed into the highly secured “Friends Jewellers” in Cape Hill near Birmingham. Once he was in he was quickly followed by four men wearing hoods with their faces covered who began to hammer down a second security door.

The Sun newspaper reported that “the burkha-shrouded giant” and his accomplices got away with almost US $400, 000 (£200,000) worth of gems.

The thieves reportedly sprayed the terrified shop owner and his brother and two security guards with pepper spray before fleeing the scene.

The gang, believed to be British-Asian’s, are being hunted by the police.

“British-Asians” is the customary official code phrase for Pakistani immigrants or their descendants in Britain; no reader would ever imagine Japanese or Thais when picturing the possible culprits.

There were more details the Sunday Mercury, quoting the owner of the store:

“It’s very fortunate nobody was hurt because they threw a claw hammer at my head, which missed, and sprayed me in the face with pepper spray and used lump hammers.

“They are very organised and they blocked off the road to aid the escape, they knew what they were doing.”

How unusual is this? Is it an isolated incident?

The Sun quoted local councilor Keith Davies as saying: “It’s the first time I’ve heard of anything like this. It’s worrying.”

But the Birmingham Mail does not agree:
– – – – – – – – –

Now it has emerged that a would-be robber dressed in an all-covering black burkha was involved in a separate robbery.

Police said he approached the lone driver of a Securicor van, outside the busy Fox and Goose Shopping Centre in Washwood Heath Road at 1.15pm on Friday, March 14, and threatened him with a 14in firearm wrapped in a black plastic bag.

The terrified driver managed to get inside his van and shut the sliding door, trapping the suspected weapon in the van door for a few seconds.

There was a brief struggle before the robber eventually released the weapon and the driver managed to escape.

The offender ran into a dark coloured Ford Focus, which was parked outside the post office in the Fox and Goose Shopping Centre car park which was driven off down Bromford Lane.

And the owner of the jewelry store seems to take it as a given that there have been even more crimes of this type:

Raj Kumar, 40, who runs Friends Jewellers, said: “They obviously use the burkha and pram disguise to catch you off-guard. I had been halfexpecting something like this because all the shop owners talk to each other and there have been three others in Birmingham recently, with the same Audi used in two of them.”

In all the recent cases in Western countries where women wearing burkhas were denied admittance — to businesses, buses, courtrooms, etc. — the issue has been framed in terms of human rights, as a matter of religious freedom.

Once Muslim activists get the battle framed in such terms, they are more than likely to win: women have a right to be free, and that freedom includes the privilege of wearing a head-to-toe garment which completely obscures the identity of the wearer.

She’s got her “rights”; that’s obvious. Therefore the burkha wins. Case closed.

However, like so many counterjihad issues that tie Western jurisprudence in knots, the matter is easier to dispose of if it is reframed as a security issue.

The wearing of burkhas in public manifestly increases the incidence of crime and allows the criminals to escape punishment more readily.

Public safety trumps the right of any individual to go about in public totally disguised.

People have a right to conduct their business unmolested by masked marauders. The burkha is out. Case closed.

Hat tip: TB.

Back in the mid-1970s, when I was but a wee sprout of a computer programmer, I worked for a company in the aerospace business in the heart of Washington D.C. For the sake of this post I’ll call it Worldwide Engineering Systems (not its real name).

The top managers and officers at WES were all retired USAF veterans. They came out of the service and — like so many others in the K Street canyon — went through the revolving door to form one of the quasi-private barnacles that fasten upon the ample pilings of the federal government.

After oil prices skyrocketed in the mid-seventies, WES and similar companies found a lucrative market in Iran and the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf. The sheikhs had a lot of money, and were keen to spend it on upgrading their military equipment, particularly their aircraft and related systems. WES fell into a specialized niche: they built and equipped air traffic control systems, trained the end-users, and signed maintenance contracts to keep the hardware in working order.

The flyboys who had been stationed in Saudi or Iran left the service to work at WES and returned to their former stomping grounds overseas. They parlayed their local contacts and their connections with the aerospace industry into hefty contracts for the company. At the air bases in the desert, WES laid the tarmac, erected buildings, installed the radar, and set up other equipment, all in order that the wastrel sons of Arab princes could play at being pilots and fly the most recent USAF surplus fighter jets.

But WES didn’t rely solely on air traffic control for its livelihood; it tackled anything that related to military aircraft. Midway through my tenure with the company, it snagged a fat contract with the Shah of Iran to supply spare parts for his air force.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Worldwide Engineering Systems consistently went out on a limb to do business in the Persian Gulf. Its clients were rich, but they weren’t the genteel First World customers that one did business with in Europe or North America. After a system was delivered to the local sheikhs, it was touch and go whether the company got paid. The fact that the Arabs were wealthy didn’t always mean that they had ample liquid reserves — their capital might well be tied up in long term debentures, or Parisian real estate, or Rolls Royces and call girls in London.
– – – – – – – – –
Getting paid for a completed contract was always a dicey business. The preferred method for getting a WES client to pay up was to offer a new deal, one that was so enticing that the client could be induced to write a check for the previous project before accepting the new delivery.

That was the impetus behind the Iranian spare parts project. The Shah held on a little too tightly to his procurement purse strings, and the marketing guys at WES figured the best way to loosen his grip was to make him an offer for spare parts that he couldn’t refuse.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

At the time I was programming for the company in FORTRAN on an old IBM-370 mainframe. Most of my work was accounting and payroll, but every now and then some other project would come across my desk.

The spare parts project started out as a huge stack of photocopied parts lists, with each item listed separately: part number, description, number of items needed, cost, price, and — most importantly — the expected life of the part.

The lifetime of the parts was significant, because the company was designing a three-year parts inventory for the Shah — that is, the spare parts would supply the covered systems for three years of continuous use. The statistically projected failure time for a part told us how many of that part would have to be included.

The data entry operator punched up all the information on cards (yes, it was that long ago), the cards were read, and the data were stored on a disk drive attached to the 370 system. It was my job, as a lowly programmer, to write the code that would crunch the numbers and give the sales rep the total amount for the entire system.

The problem was this: the marketing boys had given the Shah a particular dollar amount for the whole deal, and business necessity required the system to stay within that limit.

The first pass through the data came out way over budget, so instructions came down from on high to (shh! don’t tell anybody!) change the parameter for the run to specify a two-year lifetime for the parts, instead of three years.

But even that did not bring costs down far enough. The night before the sales rep was to fly out to Tehran, he went through the whole printout and marked which parts could be knocked down to a year and a half, or even a year. The card punch guy and I worked late, made the final run, and the rep went off to see the Shah in the morning with a suitcase full of green bar and whatever cover story management had cooked up about what they were actually selling him.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Unfortunately, the spare parts deal didn’t save WES. The Shah never did pay his earlier bill, so the company eventually filed for Chapter 11 and went into receivership. I was dissatisfied in my job and quit literally two weeks before everyone but the accountants was laid off, so I missed out on all my unemployment benefits.

This was a couple of years before the Shah was overthrown, so it wasn’t the Islamic revolution that did in WES. It was the reluctance of Iran — and Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, too — to pay their bills.

When the Gulf War came around in 1991 and Saddam ordered all those air force planes flown to Iran to keep them safe, I thought about the Shah’s spare parts.

After all, there had been an embargo on military parts for the mullahs in place since 1979. Since the parts on those planes disappeared faster than would have been expected (“Those cursed Americans! Why did these altimeters fail so soon?”), the Iranians must have been hungry for spare parts.

I could picture the technicians out there on the runways in the desert airfields, poking around in the bellies of the Iraqi planes looking for useful equipment.

Yes, all of those planes were MiGs and other Soviet aircraft, but still… There must have been something there that they could use.

Anyway, it makes a nice story.

So… Whenever you read about the Russians selling jets to Iran, ask yourself:

How may years worth of spare parts did they claim to be supplying?

And how many did the mullahs actually get?

Here’s a report from our expatriate Dutch correspondent, H. Numan, on the current controversy in the Netherlands over Geert Wilders’ movie.

Notice that in the photo of the demo the slick expensively-produced protest sign carried by the demonstrator has the word “western” spelled wrong. Heh.

Update: A Dutch reader sent us an email this morning with two corrections.

I read H.Numan’s really excellent post “Fitna: The Left Paints Itself into a Corner”, but noticed two minor flaws. Not that important, but maybe handy to know.

Firstly, concerning the sign: The sign reads “Wilder’s Westen”, which in Dutch means: “The West according to Wilders”.

The mistake about the sign is mine. But it’s very confusing — I didn’t know that the Dutch language ever used an apostrophe like that, especially after a word ending in “s” — I thought that peculiarity was unique to English. Also, the lower part of the sign is in English, so it seemed unlikely that the top was in Dutch.

But I bow to an informed correction.

Secondly, concerning the kort geding, It is not the NMO, but the “Nederlandse Islamitische Federatie” (NIF) [Dutch Islamic Federation] that is filing the lawsuit.

Fitna
by H. Numan

It’s almost time for Wilders to show his movie, and the Left have sharpened their blunt clubs. We can’t see Fitna — yet — as several activists complained to Network Solutions, where Wilders possibly planned to host his movie. I say “possibly”, because I don’t think Wilders intends to use Network Solutions. First of all because they already caved in, and secondly, because I don’t think Network Solutions can handle so much expected traffic to a site they host.

Yesterday, the IS (International Socialists) hosted a demonstration on the Dam in Amsterdam. Nederland bekend kleur (translated: “The Netherlands admits color”). This demo was supposed to show solidarity with ethnic minorities, but in actuality it was a ‘let’s bash Wilders in public’ demo.

It was a complete fizzle. At least 5,000 demonstrators were expected. Less than a thousand showed up. The national media weren’t even present.

IS went full blast: they invited everybody remotely important, and 50 VIP’s were silly enough to be present. Many of them are known left-wing politicians or wannabes: Ed van Thijn (PvdA), Mrs. Groenteman (left-wing wannabe), but also Hans Dijkstal, a man who should have known much better. Dijkstal is a VVD politician, not exactly somebody you’d expect to be present in Trotskyite demonstration. However, Dijkstal represents the ultra left wing of the VVD, so his presence together with former party leader Ed Nijpels is not that unusual. Also because both Dijkstal and Nijpels are now retired politicians. Anything to get into the limelight!

Rather unusual: no sitting parliamentarian attended this demonstration. Not even Groen Links or the Socialist Party. The reason: the parliament found unanimously that this demonstration was a direct personal and slanderous attack on the person of Mr. Wilders, a fellow parliamentarian. Which made Dijkstal and Nijpels look like the outcasts they actually are.
– – – – – – – – –
Notable artists attended this demonstration fizzle, but some will not be happy that they did. The singer Frank Boeyen for example. Many of his fans didn’t appreciate it. It might be he gained a few during the demonstration, but he surely lost many more because of his presence. And even more because he, in the past, supported free speech… His audience clearly doesn’t appreciate turncoats.

As might be expected, the Fitna movie has been the talk of the day for many months. Other activists try to make it more difficult to find the movie, once it comes out, by spiffing the domain: they bought fitnathemovie.nl, org, doc, any domain name will do as long as it might divert traffic from this accursed movie.

Are Mohammedans really democratic? Well, in a democratic nation we do not practice censorship. Which means nobody can forbid Wilders to produce his movie. Only if and when he does he can be held responsible. A Muslim organization, the NMO (Dutch Muslim Broadcasting Organization) filed a kort geding, (a special fast track civil law suite) to force censorship before publication. Which, of course, is utterly impossible, given the current law in The Netherlands, and shows how desperate left-wing activists must be.

I’m not sure how many people, organizations and lawyers already filed lawsuits against Wilders. Gerard Spong, one of the best known (by criminals, that is) lawyers of The Netherlands did so too, with a team of law students, no less. So far, no luck. Not one lawsuit has been handled in court. All those intended lawsuits got much media attention. The fact that not one of them has been in court doesn’t. At least fifty lawsuits have been filed. None of them handled…

We saw several pillars of the politically correct establishment make complete fools of themselves: Doekle Terpstra and Harry de Winter. The last one is pretty well off, he can afford to dump €10,000 in a ditch. Both performed so well as national village idiots that for the foreseeable decades they won’t be offered anything else.

And let’s not forget our elected betters: the government and the civil administration. The prime minister cannot be held responsible for leaking as he didn’t do it. But the first rumors about the Fitna movie came from his ministry. From that moment on he showed he lacks something substantial: balls. He begged for forgiveness (for what? Nobody has even seen the movie!) and told the world not all Dutch are like that.

The Dutch embassy in Beirut shares his medical problem. They stopped hoisting the Dutch flag over the embassy compound ‘so as not to infuriate sensitive feelings’. That one didn’t ride well in parliament. The whole house was furious, and instructed the minister of foreign affairs, if necessary, to go personally to Beirut to hoist the flag! And that the complete staff of the embassy should be replaced immediately. The argument from the ambassador was waived aside, and rightly so. Not hoisting the flag doesn’t mean the embassy is invisible. We won’t hear much more about it, but rest assured that some careers will be terminated over this.

And the Dutch population in general? It seems most people support Wilders. If not actively, certainly passively. Demonstrations against Wilders fizzle out. This ‘Holland admits color’ isn’t the first one. In the past, the Left never found it difficult to drum up thousands of supporters for whatever reason. In fact, several left-wing activists boasted about it. But that is, fortunately, in the past.

Today the world is different, and we can be thankful for the Internet. Now you can see you aren’t the only one thinking something. You immediately see it in the replies on news articles of the mainstream media. In fact, when newspapers like De Telegraaf do not allow readers to post their opinion, it is suspicious.

In the past, it was very difficult to find like-minded souls: the left wing controlled the media completely. Then came the Internet and with it something that nobody thought possible: instead of the conservatives painting themselves constantly in a corner, it’s the turn of the Left.

Which they are doing pretty well.

Here’s a racist white supremacist neo-fascist Nazi-sympathizing Easter treat for all you homies:

The video is not new, but I didn’t hear about it until last night.

The word is that this kid is from Charlottesville. The first good thing to come out of that town. Yes, yes — I know about Dave Matthews…

Hat tip: Apollon Zamp.

[post ends here]

Happy Easter, everybody.

I just got on the computer, and I haven’t had time to read the comments on last night’s post — y’all are probably way ahead of me on this.

But when you pull up the UK site for Fitna, a “Ha ha! We fooled you!” page has been put up to replace what was there until last night.

I stripped out the scripts, ads, styling, image, etc. from the HTML and just left the text and the table used to build the page. Below the jump is what you get from using the straight HTML:
– – – – – – – – –

“Fitna”

Eerste rij:

Tweede rij:

Derde rij:

Einde tabel:

To Fitna or not to Fitna

FITNA The Movie	NO FITNA The Movie
[image]	It should be fairly obvious by now that there is no “Fitna” movie. No movie to insult Islam or Muslims or anyone else for that matter. The month of April is upon us, we all know the month of April starts with the 1st April and that day is famous for (practical) jokes. Holland might not be considered as a country with a great sense of humour but ever once in awhile even in Holland they crack a joke. So, bottom line; if you are here to find the Famous Fitna movie I guess you have been had !!! On the other hand, if you are worried about how much unrest the rumour of a 15 minute movie about Islam can create, maybe it is time to identify and deal with the issues at hand. When points of view are miles apart, the truth can usually be found near the middle. ps Surely this site will soon be hacked and diverted to some muslim site, some people just don’t have a sense of humour. Happy Easter !!!

Interestingly enough, this is a Dutch production. I’m guessing that “Eerste rij”, “Tweede rij”, and “Derde rij” mean “First row”, “Second row”, and “Third row”.

More than this I will not speculate. Time to get ready for church; I’ll be back later.

The main website for Geert Wilders’ (as yet unreleased) movie Fitna has been taken down by Network Solutions, its hosting service. If you visit http://www.fitnathemovie.com now, this is what you will see:

This site has been suspended while Network Solutions is investigating whether the site’s content is in violation of the Network Solutions Acceptable Use Policy. Network Solutions has received a number of complaints regarding this site that are under investigation. For more information about Network Solutions Acceptable Use Policy visit the following URL: http://www.networksolutions.com/legal/aup.jsp

Hosted by Network Solutions.

However, one of the satellite Fitna sites, the UK version, still has the same image up as a placeholder, and continues to list tomorrow (March 23rd, Easter Sunday) as the movie’s release date. Evidently this site is not hosted by the same service.

I don’t have links to any other satellite sites. If readers know of any, please leave the URLs in the comments.

[Nothing follows]

From Europe News today comes word that a large mosque is not going to be built near Århus after all. Here’s the story:

Danish mosque plans abandoned

Århus: The proposed construction of a great mosque west of Denmarks second largest city Århus has been abandoned. The reason for dropping the project is lack of interest among the local Muslim population.

In spite of significant help from native Danes, the organisation behind the project managed to collect only a bit over €100,000, vastly short of the estimated € 10 million construction cost, reports Metin Eidin, chairman of the fundraising committee.

This, in turn, has caused the city council spokesman Peter Thyssen to drop plans to incorporate the mosque project into the city planning, citing the improbability that the required funds will ever materialize.

It is noteworthy that neither Saudi Arabia nor Turkey has contributed economically to the project. It is widely known that Saudi funding usually is tied to the radical Wahhabi strain of Islam, but the Turkish state, which has funded construction of many ‘Conqueror mosques’ in Europe, has not been involved here.

– – – – – – – – –

Brabrand Boligforening, who administers the housing project in the area and owns the desired construction place, has long resisted the idea of constructing a real mosque, citing concerns about religious fanaticism poisoning integration and the risk of creating a Muslim ‘parallel society’ in the area. The danger of radicalization, as seen on Channel 4: Undercover Mosque, has contributed to reluctance against the project.

One of the small existing mosques on nearby Grimhøjvej had parts of its public funding revoked, as the funding was to be given to education, not worship, and the mosque, known for its fundamentalist attitudes, was found to be in violation of this condition.

Commentators have largely praised the abandoning, stating that stronger integration, education and teaching the use of democratic tools to empower immigrants are more relevant than increasing religiousness in the area, which already suffers high crime rates and rampant unemployment.

Don’t you wish that the world’s news services could settle on a spelling for Qaddafi’s name and stick to it?

I refer, of course, to Muammar Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi, the venerable dictator of Libya. His last name seems to be spelled differently every time it appears in the news. A Google search turns up the following variants at least a hundred times apiece: Gaddhafi, Gadhafi, Ghadafi, Ghaddafi, Ghaddhafi, Kaddafi, Kaddhafi, Kadhafi, Khaddafi, Khaddhafi, Khadhafi, Qaddafi, Qaddhafi, Qadhafi, Qhadafi, and Qhaddafi.

“Qhadhafi” can also be found forty-two times, and I found one instance of “Qhaddhafi” in a Google books selection. There are probably more variants than these, but I got tired of inventing new ones and then searching for them.

To make matters worse, Khaddhafi’s first name can also be spelled “Moammar”, “Moamer”, “Mommar”, and probably dozens of other ways. With the two names in combination, searching for news stories about him becomes an exercise in advanced digital forensics.

The reason I bring all this up is that Mr. Ghadhafi has a son named Seif (also spelled “Saif” and goodness only knows how many other ways), who in recent years has become somewhat of an international celebrity and bon-vivant. This week the name (or names) of Qhadafi fils has come up in connection with the Austrian hostage crisis.

The latest word is that Austria is still refusing to pay ransom for Wolfgang Ebner and Andrea Kloiber, who were abducted on February 22nd while on vacation in Tunisia and are now believed to be held near Timbuktu in Mali. Their Al Qaeda captors — trying to guarantee themselves a hefty jackpot — extended the deadline by a week to Easter Day, in order to allow the Austrian government to reconsider its intransigence.

But so far the Austrians are holding firm. According to Magharebia:

Austria has refused to pay any ransom for the release of two Austrian tourists kidnapped from Tunisia in mid-February, press reports quoted Austrian negotiator Anton Prohaska as saying on Wednesday (March 19th). Algeria-based al-Qaeda Organisation in the Islamic Maghreb, which claimed responsibility for the abduction, has demanded a five million-euro ransom and the release of ten of its members jailed in Tunisia and Algeria. Austrian tourists Andrea Kloiber, 43, and Wolfgang Ebner, 51, are reportedly being held at an al-Qaeda base run by Mokhtar Belmokhtar about 150 km from Kidal in Northern Mali.

The deadline for releasing the Austrians has been extended to Sunday (March 23rd).

And now Seif al-Gaddhafi gets into the act. According to a AFP:
– – – – – – – – –

Kadhafi son optimistic on release of Austrian hostages

Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi’s son is in contact with the kidnappers of two Austrians abducted last month in Tunisia, and is optimistic they could soon be freed, the Austria Press Agency reported.

“Seif (Al-Islam) is negotiating with the kidnappers and is in his own words confident the whole thing will soon be concluded,” Austrian far-right politician Joerg Haider told APA.

Haider said earlier this week he had enrolled his long-time friend Seif Al-Islam to help negotiate the hostages’ release.

Austrian Chancellor Alfred Gusenbauer has also reportedly called Kadhafi himself to help in the affair.

The daily Oesterreich reported Saturday that the Libyan leader discussed the hostage crisis with the president of Mali, where the Austrians are believed to be held, during a common visit to Uganda.

By the way: notice that Joerg Haider, who is described as a “far-right politician”, is very chummy with Muslims.

Vlaams Belang, Dansk Folkeparti, and Partij Voor de Vrijheid are also described as “extreme right-wing” parties, and yet are staunchly opposed to Islam.

This only goes to show that the term “right-wing” has outlived its usefulness as a descriptor of European party politics.

But back to our main story — it seems that the kidnappers may postpone their deadline yet again:

Oesterreich also quoted sources in Mali as saying the kidnappers could again postpone a Sunday midnight deadline for negotiations.

The abductors originally gave the Austrian government a March 16 deadline to secure the release of a number of Islamists imprisoned in Algeria and Tunisia in exchange for the Austrians’ freedom.

But the deadline was extended at the last minute until March 23, amid reports that talks were switching focus to a possible ransom.

I always considered the call for a release of prisoners to be a feint. It was obviously a loss-leader designed to raise the minimum bid for the final payoff.

Expect the deadline to be postponed repeatedly until Al Qaeda gets the required jackpot while allowing the Austrian government to pay up in a face-saving manner. Perhaps Vienna will agree to fund an “Islamic cultural center” in Ouargla. Or maybe they’ll endow a “scholarship fund” for indigent students at a madrassa in Taoudenni — to be announced coincidentally just a day before the miraculous release of the hostages into the custody of Saif Qadhafi.

And, of course, there’s always debt relief. The Bulgarians managed to pay off Kadhafi Senior so that their nurses would be released, but in a manner that permitted a pretense that there was no deal. Expect something similar to happen with the Austrian tourists.

No matter how you spell it, though, ransom is ransom.

For a change of pace, here’s a guest-post from Henrik at Europe News. A slightly different version of this essay was posted at his site on Wednesday.

Switch off that PlayStation!
by Henrik R. Clausen
March 19 2008

If you happen to own one of these technological wonders that will allow you to play soccer on a screen, karate without bruises, shoot stacks of enemies without a scratch, and race through town at 180 km/h, one of the best things you can do for society may be to switch it off.

Why, you may wonder? What’s wrong with entertainment, or is it a matter of preserving energy so the next generation will still have some oil left to burn? Or is Wii that much better?

None of the above. It’s a marvel that we can go racing without risking mangled cars, can practice shooting in a virtual world, and can work in teams to recover immense treasures from forgotten dungeons. All without leaving the comfort of one’s home. And surely, looting dungeons of the ancients is much less criminal than looting houses downtown, not to mention the stakes when it comes to shooting.

But this deluge of entertainment — and the Internet at large provides much, much more — is causing a distraction into details and virtual options that distracts a lot of intelligent, well-educated, and well-intentioned people from something vital:

Getting influence has never been easier

And by this, I mean real, political influence that will change our societies for years to come. While it is tempting to enjoy the very beneficial physical circumstances we have in these times, democracy is too important to be left in the hands of the professionals.

Really. Professionals are great, and they’re paid to document exactly the opinion we want them to. But too much professionalism dismantles the quintessence of good democracy, participation by citizens. Take the European Union. It has a huge budget, great buildings sporting thousands and thousands of professional, well-educated, diligent and loyal workers. Yet, this staff does not a democracy make.

Or take our national political systems. Membership of political parties has plummeted, and (at least in Denmark) the parties are on quite strong economic support from the state. A few decades ago, this would have been ridiculous, as party membership of any kind was a natural thing, and the pooled resources went a long way towards what was needed to run a party. Today party membership and attending meetings is a minority interest.

Which, in turn, is a reason gaining influence is easier than ever. There’s less competition, more space to just walk in and get things done. It’s free-for-all, and it’s damn sure that people complaining about lack of political influence have never seriously tried to take any.

Still, some things are needed to join the party. As in every decent party, everyone has to contribute something. It may be knowledge, entertainment, skills, clothing, or coffee, but some contribution is needed. A list of relevant items:

1.		Listening
2.		Reading skills
3.		Knowledge
4.		Philosophy
5.		Curiosity
6.		Diligence
7.		Rhetorical skills
8.		Writing skills
9.		Discipline
10.		Supportive friendliness
11.		Stamina
12.		Joy of swimming

A bumper bundle, ain’t it? Sure would be tempting to go back and switch on that PlayStation anyway, where you just got Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma to deal with, and the computer will even keep track of those for you, in case you forget.

But then .. how many of the politicians you know score high in all of these? Even just ‘fair’? The competition isn’t too scary, actually. And not all of these skills need to be top-notch, and since they’re trainable, they can improve over time. One of the best ways to train them is to be around people who are better than yourself, notice what they’re doing and emulate it. Thus, going to meetings, and apply that listening skill to pick up good stuff.

Let’s look at them in detail:
– – – – – – – – –
1) Listening

This is first, because without this one it’s near impossible to get very far. We need to listen, with real respect, to those who are more skilled and experienced than ourselves. It doesn’t mean that we’ll take what these persons say as gospel, but it does mean to take their statements and their logic with the benefit of doubt, and consider with curiosity statements and details that at first sight seem strange. Listening is essential to learning, and people who don’t have this skill tend to turn autocratic very fast.

2) Reading skills

This is quite obvious, but needs to be mentioned. Anyone looking for influence on society and the future needs to read up left and right, including official stuff, reports, books, and newspapers, Preferably a good blog or two on top, as much of the best intelligence can be found there (as can some of the worst, for that matter), and many good ideas are circulated on blogs where they can be picked up by smart people and passed on.

3) Knowledge

One may be tempted to believe that the politicians we see on television know a lot more than we do, not least if they say things abstract or incomprehensible. Reality is somewhat different. Our politicians are so busy they hardly have time to read books, which is frequently reflected in incoherent, confused, hasty and downright stupid reactions from their side.

Take Yugoslavia. When it fell apart, politicians who had never bothered digging into the history of the country were jumping past each other to tell the citizens of the country what to do — without even basic knowledge of the history of the country, the Ustasja regime or the crimes in WWII. This led to a disaster which in hindsight could have been avoided, had the history of the country been respected. OK, that was a controversial one. Don’t worry, it won’t be the last.

Another reason to have a healthy supply of knowledge is that once you seek some influence on society, detractors will appear. They frequently sling around charges of racism, fascism, and the like, in order to make you stand back and leave the spoils of influence to them. That’s not what we’re in the game for, so instead it’s better to outwit these wannabes. For that’s usually all they are. The very common charge of ‘fascism’ is countered most effectively by knowing what fascism is, and the details of what makes it bad. It turns out very frequently that those accusing others of fascism have significant fascist attitudes themselves. Joseph Stalin was a prime example of this twisted logic. Stalin used this to get rid of his opponents by sliming them. Knowing how to avoid this trap is good.

4) Philosophy

Now, this is getting weird. We need philosophy to make a difference? Absolutely yes. We need some coherent system behind our line of thinking, or it will very easily devolve into populism. If not at first sight, then under pressure. Many interesting philosophies exist, but it’s not quite arbitrary which one to pick. It needs to be one that you have confidence in, that you believe will benefit people. Technically speaking, one can also succeed with one that exploits people, disempowers them and lets the people of influence run with all the benefits. But this I find too unethical to mention, so better focus on philosophies that will bring wide benefit in the long term. It doesn’t quite matter if it’s socialist, capitalist, conservative or libertarian, as long as it is one trusted to improve the life quality of people at large. Having one with clear, abstract principles is a huge advantage against the trap of populism. Becoming a teacher of philosophy is quite possible — but in disguise, of course, a disguise of politics. Opinions abound, but those held together by a coherent philosophy are rare, and valuable.

5) Curiosity

This is easier. To be involved in society and forming the future, curiosity for a lot of things will be needed. One might start out with a single issue, like I personally started out examining the deceit surrounding the Turkish EU negotiations, only to find that the principles involved are so interesting and so widely applicable that there’s no end to what contexts the principles can be applied to. It’s endless.

6) Diligence

Perhaps not obvious, but worth remembering. One gets only so far without an appetite for work and processing of knowledge, as well as for keeping working under harder circumstances. Diligence is one of the most important qualities if one wishes to go really far into politics and influence. But it’s booby-trapped! If the workload gets too heavy, if no time or capacity is left for fun and enjoyment, working too hard may lead to making serious mistakes of taking corruption or playing too many intrigues. Better to take some time off before it gets too bad, and let someone else take the bribe and have the scandal.

Related to diligence is a bit of patience. We may have all wonderful ideas about how to change society and improve the future, but quite frequently very few are receptive to the revolutionary, progressive ideas. In that case, it might be useful to write an essay to seed the ideas with some other people, release it to the world for others to pick up and ‘steal’ the ideas, then respond with appreciation when your great ideas suddenly come back from someone else. No need to claim them back, of course — what matters is that great ideas are put into action, not who specifically does it. It might be, of course, that the ideas get lost in space, never to return. If they’re really important they can be taken for another spin. But hey — it might be that they were not really so great to begin with, and that it was better that they went into oblivion.

7) Rhetorical skills

By now, you may wish that you were back at the PlayStation trying to figure out if the shotgun or the rocket launcher is the most appropriate weapon for your next enemy. But this article is relentless. Rhetorical skills can be subdivided into at least three kinds:

• The logic of discussion and arguments
• The skill of maximizing emotional impact
• The skill of diverting attention from important points

The first of these is the classical Greek art, arguably their most important contribution to civilization. Arguably, in that I will argue that is was more persistent than their invention of democracy (which was re-invented in Europe anyway), and much more systematically useful than the synthetic idealism they passed off as ‘science’. Rhetoric is classically described as the third of the Trivium (not to be confused with ‘trivial’, BTW), the two first being grammar and logic.

While this might sound real alien, it actually isn’t. Grammar we usually master quite easily. Logic is something that we may or may not appreciate on its own, but it has a lot of meaning in debates, where it’s essential to figure out how to construct a good argument, what a real counterexample means and the like. Rhetoric, in this context, is the art of maximizing debate skills, making your presentation and your arguments as compelling as possible. Interestingly, it’s very rare to convince an opponent. But the 100+ ‘lurkers’, who just read your thread, will have a great time enjoying a well argued debate, and will be inclined to adopt the point of view of the most compelling person. Which is what we want.

Rhetoric, as in formulating oneself in the way that causes maximum emotional impact, is a finer art yet. Churchill may be the best teacher.

Rhetoric, as in diverting attention from important facts, is discouraged.

The whole point of this, of course, is to do well in public debates. Blogs are great places to practice as you’ll find all kinds of opponents and allies, and will be able to try out various approaches. One of my favorites is “Show, don’t tell”, and it’s important. Everyone’s entitled to have an opinion — sure — but if your opinion is to be more than just that (ideally it’s also convincing, right?), the reasons for that opinion become more important than the opinion itself. Why bother accusing someone of being stupid if you can demonstrate it by picking apart his logic? Why just give your own conclusion when you can present the evidence it is based upon, thus helping everyone reach that same conclusion on their own? These skills are vital for maximum impact.

8) Writing skills

Once grammar, logic and rhetoric is covered, good or at least decent writing skills are also needed. Now, one doesn’t need to have the skills of Dostoyevsky, but a basic joy and mastery of presenting an article or a letter is needed. If one is a bit weak in this field, it can be compensated for by having a healthy supply of knowledge and sticking to the nuts and bolts of facts and reason.

9) Discipline

Before escaping for that PlayStation, please consider this. You may play a great karate master on the screen, but being one, also in terms of influence, takes real discipline, not just fast reflexes (well, being a karate master in real life also does). Real discipline means being able to stay focused on your target, even when obstacles or emotions blur your vision or distract your attention. It takes training, but the raw power of real discipline is staggering.

One example of useful discipline is to avoid ‘ad hominem’ attacks in blog debates. Your opponents are human just like yourself, and deserve respect. Their points of view, however, are a completely different matter. Since you’ve read up on facts, philosophy and logic, there’s a really good chance that your point of view is better substantiated than theirs, and it’s open season on theirs. And precisely the discipline of attacking the confusion, not the persons, will earn you a lot of support and goodwill out there. Even when attacked yourself, countering the attack, not the person, is the way to go. And it takes exactly one thing to do so: discipline.

10) Stamina

When going into the battlefield of public debate, chances are that you’ll be slimed. Stabbed, assaulted. Vilified. Insulted. Falsely accused. All kinds of nasty attacks will be coming your way. While it’s technically not a game (since you’re still reading, I assume the PlayStation is still off), it feels like this. One needs the ability to withstand quite a bit of heat without resorting to anger. And the attacks deserve to be handled suitably, including fast, appropriate reactions, adequate strength and suitable spells.

One of my favourite spells in this context is called ‘Libel’, and it is extremely effective in neutralizing the oft-used spells of ‘Racism’ or ‘fascism’. Pointing out that libel is punishable under the law usually cools off those overheated spell-casters instantly. Failing to react to these slanderous attacks has unpleasant long-term effects, not unlike poisoning. Immediate, fast reaction is good, and in case of libel will make it very clear that you find the charges utterly unjustified.

One may think that these personal attacks are too stupid to be taken seriously, but they do seem to be part of the game. Many, not least on the so-called ‘left’ of the political spectrum, simply use personal attacks in an attempt to make their opponents back down so they can have their (frequently quite confused) ways.

Standing up against these stupid attacks can be very unpleasant, but it’s important. Having a good cause, good documentation and good style will win eventually, and others will suddenly turn to you for support when they face similar trouble. And it can be navigated out of, for what’s important in society is not so much who decides as what is being decided. Rather obvious, in a way, but it bears repeating.

11) Supportive friendliness

After all this fighting, a good dose of friendliness is a very healing quality. Being polite doesn’t cost anything, and if you’re able to be precise at the same time, it won’t cost you impact in the debates, either. Actually quite the opposite, as restraining from anger while still making a precise argument is one of the most compelling ways to make your case. Abstaining from ‘ad hominem’ attacks is vital, as your opponents are (probably) not vile, poison-spewing abominations from the nether realms, but (more likely) human beings with various interesting kinds of confusion. Curing them of these confusions — or at least preventing others from becoming infected — is a compassionate act. Politeness is helpful in this.

On a related topic, it is important to support others in doing well. Your friends here and there will already have more detractors than they can handle, and anyone giving them information and ideas that make their lives easier and help them achieve their goals earns gratitude and good connections. Support is also an interesting way to further any good ideas one may have at hand. And it’s very possible to make underhanded criticism through genuine support anyway. For instance, one may talk about how good an example Jesus was for human behaviour, telling between the lines that certain other founders of religions were perhaps not quite as beneficial, but without actually denouncing them. That can be polite, yet very effective.

12) Joy in swimming

This is a metaphor, to be sure. What I mean here is to participate in debates, meetings, exchanges, large and small, here, there and everywhere. To be in the details, to apply the above tools to real-life problems, and even some that seem benign. This is work, and it takes time and effort that could otherwise have been perfectly wasted playing computer games.

But why play computer games where you have to deflect incoming missiles when you can play the same game in real life, learning to deflect incoming attacks on your credibility and character? It’s a lot more exciting to take these battles in real life, and the outcome will not only be a significant sharpening of knowledge and debating skills — it may even influence decisions made by politicians and others in a positive direction, thus bringing benefit to many others.

This joy in participating in real life exchanges will also bring in new contacts, new information and new opportunities, and once going, there is no end to how far into the rabbit hole this can go.

Remember, it’s a magic world

Of course not in a strict literal sense. We know the world, the things it has to offer, the way to drive a car. And we know that if we want to lift something heavy, a crane is much better than a magic spell.

Still, some things appear to work like magic. For instance, someone recommends an important book to you, and a couple of years later you get in a position to invite the author to a conference, digging deep into his knowledge. Or you go to a meeting, and happen to meet someone who’ll have influence on something that’s important to you, and you get the chance to have your say and change how things work. These things just happen. Somewhat unpredictably, sure, but effectively.

One thing that’s harder to get than influence is prestige. But what’s the good of that anyway? Only a limited number of us can be the ones on the front pages, and frequently these people are not the ones who really make the difference. Probably the most influential position is a bit removed from the spotlight, where people don’t attack you too much, and there’s time to work things through and forge the bullets that others will be using.

It’s a great world out there. And one of the greatest contributions we can make is to unplug from the stream of senseless entertainment and use our talent, intelligence and our good intentions to make a better future. It has never been more important, or easier, to make a difference than now.

Final wish: Have fun!