Friday, January 19, 2007


Has anyone else been following the circus and fallout regarding the Weather Channel's Heidi Cullen calling for decertification of a meterologists who are skeptical the man is responsible for Global Warming?

If you haven't heard of this call for silencing dissent, and that is what it is, (When you threaten someone with decertification of his or her professional credentials you're saying shut up or we won't allow you to make a living or support your family.) here is the post that started it all and a couple of responses.

"If a meteorologist can't speak to the fundamental science of climate change, then maybe the AMS shouldn't give them a Seal of Approval. Clearly, the AMS doesn't agree that global warming can be blamed on cyclical weather patterns..."


"It's like allowing a meteorologist to go on-air and say that hurricanes rotate clockwise and tsunamis are caused by the weather. It's not a political's just an incorrect statement," Cullen added."

Cullen's Blog

This caused one poster to observe "Hurricanes (Cyclones) in the Southern Hemisphere do rotate clockwise."

Cullen also on her TV program "The Climate Code" had as a guest Dave Roberts of Grist Magazine who has called for Nuremberg style trials and the death penalty for scientists who are skeptical of man caused Global Warming.

This led to the following response from a AMS certified meterologist on his blog:

The Weather Channel Mess

January 18, 2007 | James Spann | Op/Ed
Well, well. Some “climate expert” on “The Weather Channel” wants to take away AMS certification from those of us who believe the recent “global warming” is a natural process. So much for “tolerance”, huh?
I have been in operational meteorology since 1978, and I know dozens and dozens of broadcast meteorologists all over the country. Our big job: look at a large volume of raw data and come up with a public weather forecast for the next seven days. I do not know of a single TV meteorologist who buys into the man-made global warming hype. I know there must be a few out there, but I can’t find them. Here are the basic facts you need to know:
*Billions of dollars of grant money is flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story. Even the lady at “The Weather Channel” probably gets paid good money for a prime time show on climate change. No man-made global warming, no show, and no salary. Nothing wrong with making money at all, but when money becomes the motivation for a scientific conclusion, then we have a problem. For many, global warming is a big cash grab.
*The climate of this planet has been changing since God put the planet here. It will always change, and the warming in the last 10 years is not much difference than the warming we saw in the 1930s and other decades. And, lets not forget we are at the end of the ice age in which ice covered most of North America and Northern Europe.
If you don’t like to listen to me, find another meteorologist with no tie to grant money for research on the subject. I would not listen to anyone that is a politician, a journalist, or someone in science who is generating revenue from this issue.
In fact, I encourage you to listen to WeatherBrains episode number 12, featuring Alabama State Climatologist John Christy, and WeatherBrains episode number 17, featuring Dr. William Gray of Colorado State University, one of the most brilliant minds in our science.
WeatherBrains, by the way, is our weekly 30 minute netcast.
I have nothing against “The Weather Channel”, but they have crossed the line into a political and cultural region where I simply won’t go."

And critics ARE being silenced. Here is an excerpt from
SENATOR INHOFE to the congress on the IPCC:

"...The flaws in the IPCC process began to manifest themselves in the first assessment, but did so in earnest when the IPCC issued its second assessment report in 1996. The most obvious was the altering of the document on the central question of whether man is causing global warming.

Here is what Chapter 8 – the key chapter in the report – stated on this central question in the final version accepted by reviewing scientists:

“No study to date has positively attributed all or part [of the climate change observed to date] to anthropogenic causes.”

But when the final version was published, this and similar phrases in 15 sections of the chapter were deleted or modified. Nearly all the changes removed hints of scientific doubts regarding the claim that human activities are having a major impact on global warming.

In the Summary for Policy Makers – which is the only part of the report that reporters and policy makers read – a single phrase was inserted. It reads:

“The balance of evidence suggests that there is a discernible human influence on global climate.”

The lead author for Chapter 8, Dr. Ben Santer, should not be held solely accountable. According to the journal Nature, the changes to the report were made in the midst of high-level pressure from the Clinton / Gore State Department to do so..."

(I hope that the fonts all came out correctly, I have to edit them in html because the post control panel seems to randomly pick and choose font, sizes, and between bold and

Sunday, January 14, 2007


Liberals are fond of calling Conservatives “fascists” and “racists” and other lovely epithets. These are truly despicable terms, which flash disturbing images of Hitler, concentration camps, mass murder, the enslavement of citizens by tyrants, and imperialism. Fascism as perfected by the Nazis easily represents the lowest point to which humanity has ever sunk. When a Liberal brands someone with Conservative beliefs as a fascist, the victim usually dismisses the accusation as utter nonsense or recoils in shock and anger. But do you ever wonder what the hell the Liberals are really talking about? Do you wonder why this outrageous charge by Liberals has now become so routine? This article allows a Conservative to see himself from a Liberal perspective.

Here are definitions from Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary comparing the two terms:

Conservatism- a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change.

Fascism- a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

As I asserted in Conservative v. Liberal World Views - Part I, the essence of Conservatism is the celebration of the individual's free will. So attainment and protection of freedom are central to the Conservative philosophy. Therefore fascism and all forms of tyranny have the exact opposite goal from that of the Conservative. Ironically, it is the Conservative who typically honors the sacrifice of military heroes and patriots responsible for the total destruction of Hitler and similar fascist and racist tyrants.

However, according to SERMON: Living Under Fascism by Rev. Davidson Loehr, First Unitarian Church these are the specific reasons Liberals attempt to assert that Conservatives are fascist:

Identifying Characteristics of Fascism
(Excerpted from Fascism Anyone? By Laurence W. Britt )

[With translation from moonbat to English]

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

[Translation: Apparently our brave troops, who defeated uber-fascist Hitler, were themselves probably fascist because they were patriotic Americans. Displaying a flag is a symbol that someone loves his country, and the U.S. and other evil western countries are not worthy of such recognition. Flag-waving is considered very un-cool by the Liberal elite, who are still bummed that the Communism thing didn’t work out. So if you wave a flag, or recite the Pledge of Allegiance or sing our national anthem, then you might be a fascist.]

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

[Translation: If you think the events at Abu Ghraib prison were appalling, but doubt that some gal putting panties-on-the-head of terrorists warranted 32 consecutive New York Times front page articles, then you might be a fascist.]

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

[Translation: Some sophisticated Liberals hold that terrorists attacking the U.S. was deserved—that it simply represented a case of “chickens coming home to roost” in repayment for all the “evil” the U.S. has done over the years. After the attack, a bogus “perceived common threat”, President Bush said:

Our nation -- this generation -- will lift a dark threat of violence from our people and our future. We will rally the world to this cause by our efforts, by our courage. We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail.
If you cheered when Dubya promised this, then you might be a fascist in the throes of a patriotic frenzy.]

4. Supremacy of the Military
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

[Translation: The military is evil; confiscatory transfer payments from achievers to full-time-Oprah-watchers represent the pinnacle to which a civilization may aspire. So if you favor a strong military or object to major universities from Harvard to Berkeley banning military recruiters or ROTC on campus, then you might be a fascist.]

5. Rampant Sexism
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

[Translation: If you believe that a human life begins at conception, that the sacrament of marriage exists between a man and woman to provide a stable environment for raising children, and that the traditional family is in dire trouble and deserves protection from the Liberal political agenda, then you might be a fascist.]

6. Controlled Mass Media
Sometimes the media are directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media are indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

[Translation: Any news source which departs from the New York Times or PBS Liberal agenda is probably controlled by evil Republican corporations. If you criticize the anointed folks of the mainstream media, then you are attempting censorship, and you might be a fascist.]

7. Obsession with National Security
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

[Translation: Just like Michael Moore says, the World Trade Center was destroyed by Bush so he could invade Afghanistan and Iraq. If you believe that terrorists are real, then you might be a fascist.]

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

…the greatest threat to our freedom lies not in some mosque in Mecca, but in a simple church in the Bible belt. The time has come for all patriotic Americans to unite under a common cause: getting rid of the Christians…Their backwards, outdated belief system is based on unwavering moral absolutes, which only alienate those enlightened Americans who have no morals at all. Ironically, these so-called "morals" Christians claim to possess aren't even true morals, as they stem not from a Noam Chomsky pamphlet or a Michael Moore film - but from some silly old book they found in a motel room dresser. -Doglip All-Sader
So if you are a Jew or Christian or someone who fails, to embrace the secular humanist agenda as championed by the ACLU, then you might be a fascist.]

9. Corporate Power is Protected
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

[Translation: Corporations and the free market economy are evil, as are corporate contributions to political action committees. Only contributions from lawyers and labor unions should be allowed. If you own a share of stock in a corporation, or work for a corporation, or buy anything from a corporation, then you might be a fascist.]

10. Labor Power is Suppressed
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

[Translation: If you fail to acquiesce to every union demand for exorbitant wages, bloated pensions, or lower productivity; if you believe that unions destroy jobs by driving them into foreign countries; if you believe that every person has the right to choose whether to join a union or pay dues for political purposes, then you might be a fascist.]

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

[Translation: As history will attest, Hitler’s failure to fund the arts was his most egregious error. So don’t dare protest when taxpayer money goes to fund the piss-Christ or feces-smeared-Virgin-Mary “art” exhibits. And if you do, or if you protest when taxpayer funds are used to bankroll vicious America-haters like tenured college professor Ward Churchill, then you might be a fascist.]

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

[Translation: If you favor three strikes laws for repeat violent offenders, life or chemical castration for child molesters, and the death penalty for murderers, then you might be a fascist.]

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

[Translation: Halliburton is evil because…because…uh well Halliburton, Halliburton. If you don’t believe Halliburton is evil and Cheney is their stooge, then you might be a fascist.]

14. Fraudulent Elections
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

[Translation: Bush stole the election…actually both of them. If you don’t believe this or if you voted for Bush, then you might be a fascist.]

[15. Firearm Confiscation.
Um, actually I added this item to the list because Laurence W. Britt seemed to over-look it despite his extensive “analysis of seven regimes which reveals fourteen common threads”. The Nazi Weapons Law of 1938 was used together with inherited registration lists to seize privately held firearms . Firearms ownership was restricted to Nazi party members.
Gun Control's Nazi Connection

Translation: Guns are a scary right-wing obsession; my Liberal buddies and I don’t like them, so I have omitted the fascists’ consistent gun confiscation pattern from my research. Hopefully, no one will notice that this omission makes my work look sloppy and/or biased.]

Fascism is utterly disgusting; no Conservative would ever allow his country to be taken over by fascists. Perhaps the only thing almost worse than actually being a fascist, is falsely accusing someone of being one. To do so trivializes the horror perpetrated by real fascists and minimizes the honorable sacrifices of those who oppose tyranny--whatever it is called--wherever it raises its ugly head.

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Conservative v. Liberal World Views - Part I

The essence of humanity is free will. In other words the ability, to make a decision, is the primary characteristic which distinguishes a human from the rest of creation. An ideological world view is continuum representing the degree to which an individual is free to make decisions. It follows that a world view which encourages a person’s ability to make decisions would be the ultimate in allowing a person to realize his full potential as a human.

I submit that Conservatism has these corollaries:

• Each adult of sound mind is primarily responsible for his own happiness and welfare. Accepting personal responsibility is the most important principle of all because it underlies most of the other principles. Before accepting personal responsibility, a person must rely upon decisions of others to achieve happiness, as does a child. When a person accepts responsibility for his actions he stops blaming others for his failures; he enters life as an adult; he is empowered to achieve success.

At that moment, he stops seeing the therapist who encourages him to blame his parents for his deficiencies. He rejects the “legal lottery system” which encourages him to bring bogus lawsuits against fast food chains blaming them for forcing him to be fat or allowing him to drop hot coffee on his crotch. When a person accepts responsibility for his actions he stops seeing the President and other authority figures as his surrogate parents, who are primarily responsible for taking care of him.

• Success in a person’s life can be measured in terms of the degree to which a person achieves goals he sets for himself. Therefore, a person must set goals in order to become successful.

• Freedom is paramount. Economic, social, religious, political, and all other freedom is precious because it provides a framework which allows an individual to make decisions. Some folks believe freedom is free—like air. It’s not; it is a fragile candle flame flickering in a world filled with hostile tyrants. That’s why Conservatives honor patriots with the nobility and compassion to lay down their very lives when necessary to defend the right of their friends to enjoy freedom and safety. Eternal vigilance against tyranny is the price of maintaining freedom.

• Making good decisions requires rigorous thought and access to accurate information. Accurate information is also known as “facts” or “truth”. Truth is a constant which exists independently from a person’s perception. An honest, thoughtful person continually strives to grasp the truth and maintains a healthy skepticism toward unsubstantiated information.

Information which is in conflict with other facts must be resolved in order to be useful. Individuals who do not value truth are purposefully deceitful, intellectually lazy, consumed by emotion, or insane. Such individuals are often guilty of lies, hypocrisy, and spreading ridiculous conspiracy theories and rumors. These individuals relish their ability to hold and act upon inconsistent ideas. They sometimes become dishonest shysters, politicians, or sociopaths who embrace deceit as a sophisticated art form. They are experts at mentally “compartmentalizing” such conflicting beliefs. They are adept at rationalizing any whim using an ever changing moral relativist philosophy. They often maintain an air of superiority with meaningless explanations like Emerson’s “consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds”.

• A person’s freedom should be restricted only to the extent that it interferes with another person’s freedom. Your freedom ends where my nose begins.

• A person starts life as an innocent blank slate. A healthy society is one which provides the best opportunities for a child to grow into a productive adult. The demise of the intact family has led to a plethora of social problems, arising from confusion and disillusionment which children experience when deprived of this stability. A stable two parent family provides the best foundation for raising a child. This is the main reason that marriage has been held in such high esteem for millennia and remains the cornerstone of a healthy society.

• When did your life begin? Technically this is unknowable by mere mortals. Religious scripture suggests that a person’s soul exists even before conception. But let’s begin with what we know about the development of a human’s body. We can agree that a person becomes human at sometime between and including conception and birth. Many people believe that conception marks the beginning of life. This is probably the most logical conclusion because it is a discrete event at which moment all the genetic instructions are in place to produce a human being. However, only the mother, and whomever she cares to share the information, is aware of her pregnancy in its early stages. Furthermore, many people reject that, regardless of morality, the government has any role to play in regulating the early stages of pregnancy. But how about when the fetus becomes viable? I have friends who, as a couple, gave birth to fraternal twins-a boy and a girl-slightly before the third trimester of pregnancy. Today the twins are in first grade. I think that society is correct in restricting the ability of doctors to destroy an infant in the course of a premature third trimester delivery.

True this is a controversial topic, but it is far from irrelevant. Today the U.S. Senate is torn apart in debate over nominations to the judiciary. The reputations of good people are smeared; and it all stems from the debate on abortion. Is this the way it is supposed to be? Is this what we can expect in 25 years? 50? 100? This issue was supposed to have been resolved by the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, but we continue to fight about it. Personally I think this decision was a fairly good compromise. However, in so ruling, the Supreme Court exceeded its duty to uphold the U.S. Constitution, which obviously is silent with regard to abortion or even the right to privacy. Furthermore the court violated the 10th amendment which stipulates that powers not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution are reserved to the states or to the people.

We need to respect the Constitution by amending it to include a provision addressing abortion. But before we do this must be willing to discuss it and reach a national consensus with regard to the question of when life begins. We need to stop calling each other bad names, respect each other, and reach a workable solution. If we believe in individual responsibility, we should remove this burden from our court system and put it back into the hands of the people where it belongs.

• Superficial characteristics such as race and gender are irrelevant to most discussions about human potential. Society should recognize and deal with each person as an individual and not as a member of some arbitrary group.

• People are fundamentally good. However, a person consistently will do what ever is in his best interests. These two concepts are in harmony provided a person embraces the golden rule, as taught by Christianity and which appears as a theme in most religions. Greed is defined as wanting something for nothing; greed cannot be determined merely by observing a person’s accumulation of wealth. In other words, a person deserves to have anything he wants in life, as long as he is willing to exchange it for something of equal or greater value. The ultimate greedy person is a criminal who steals what he wants from another person.

• Capitalism, which is more descriptively termed “Free Enterprise”, is the economic system most consistent with the fundamental nature of humanity. It affords the most choices, is the most responsive to changing human needs, is the most efficient--has the least administrative baggage, and is best able to harness human productivity by providing a system of incentives which balance risk with reward. In a Free Enterprise system, wealth is freely created because each willing party to a transaction benefits. Free Enterprise is in harmony with the natural forces of supply and demand.

• Socialism, in its various forms and euphemisms, represents the removal of economic choices from the domain of the individual. Because it is inconsistent with human nature, generally socialism must be implemented through force, thereby reducing personal as well as economic freedoms. Socialism is basically an attempt to shift ever more wealth and power into the jurisdiction of a centrally planned government at the expense of individual freedom. As a consequence less wealth is created and each person has less ability to realize his full potential.

Socialists see wealth as a static pie to be redistributed among constituents. Therefore they discourage incentives for producers to create additional wealth, and society becomes poorer overall as a result. Many Socialists contend that they just want to provide for this one very good cause du jour. In reality most Socialists never met a higher tax they didn’t embrace, never met a government program too ambitious, and are unwilling to answer a simple question: What is the maximum proportion of taxation, as a percentage of income, which is fair for the government to take? At this moment, I am discouraged that neither Republicans nor Democrats are willing to curtail rampant government spending until the economy begins to suffer.

• Government is valuable to the extent it builds a safe environment which supports freedom and affords an individual the opportunity to reach his full potential. The most important function of government is to provide a national defense to protect its citizens from international threats. Other valid functions of government are to provide a police force, fire fighting, coordinate the building of roads and other common infrastructure, and other functions which are impractical to be provided by the private sector.

However, most human needs are best met by the private sector. Why? If the government fails, how do you know? You don’t; standards to measure success are avoided at all cost. If the government fails to efficiently provide goods and services can it go out of business? No usually it raises taxes which you are forced to pay. If the government saves money do taxpayers receive a refund or are efficient government employees rewarded? Don’t be ridiculous; at the end of the year government frantically strives to spend any unused funds, so that its budget will not be cut the following year. There are government programs still in place to solve problems which haven’t existed for decades. Government waste is notorious. Government programs are not consistently scrutinized by independent audits.

Inefficiency is not a just a characteristic of the U.S. government, which is probably one of the more efficient governments; it is a characteristic of all government. And the farther government gets from the people who pay taxes, the less responsive it becomes; so local government is preferable to federal government.

The private sector will almost always be more efficient in providing goods and services because it has measurable goals and it must survive. It must be accountable to its shareholders; it must provide superior products at lower costs, or it will be driven out of business by its competitors. What happened to Enron when it became corrupt? How about Enron’s partner Arthur Andersen, once the world’s largest auditor? These entities no longer exist.

• Unlike Libertarians, Conservatives also believe that providing a social safety net is an important function of government. Government should guarantee a minimum level of subsistence for all its citizens. However, the state of being poor or disadvantaged should be viewed as a result of temporary circumstances. Each person, regardless of current social status or background or temporary setbacks, has the potential to become a productive, happy, fulfilled member of society, and is capable of achieving success. It is government’s function to ensure equality of opportunity not attempt to achieve equality of results.

• Individuals can be compassionate; government cannot. Charity is best provided by individuals not government. Individual and faith-based charity is consistent with human nature because it harnesses the euphoria experienced when a person selflessly gives of himself to assist those less fortunate. Try this test: Write a check for Katrina disaster relief large enough that it takes your breath away. Volunteer to personally assist disaster relief victims. How do you feel? Now write a large check to pay for your income taxes on April 15th. Then tally up how much of your salary you get to control after paying federal, state and local income taxes, gas taxes, excise taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, etc. Then consider how much of your taxes will actually reach people for whom you are grieving. Realize that much of your tax dollar will pay for bureaucrats’ generous salaries, benefits and pensions, and be otherwise wasted to buy votes.

Each person holds a world view which is essentially a projection of the way he views himself and his role in the world. A couple of hundred years ago the vision, of humanity freed from the chains of tyranny, was a radical idea held by "Liberals" of the period. In contrast, today the objective of Liberalism is to reduce each citizen's choices by building ever larger and more intrusive government. So today the flame, to nurture and protect the radical experiment in human freedom conceived by the founding fathers of the United States, is carried by Classical Liberals also known as "Conservatives".

The breath-taking picture on this post is of a statue, at the George Bush Library at Texas A&M, called "The Day the Wall Came Down". The bronze by Veryl Goodnight of Santa Fe, New Mexico depicts Freedom as enormous bronze mavericks trampling down the old Berlin wall bringing sweet liberty to the East Germans.

May precious Freedom ring throughout the world. Happy New Year!

Sunday, January 7, 2007

Oriana Fallaci - Heros of Freedom Part I

"We suffer[ed] the sad loss of an icon [on September 15, 2006] in the passing of Oriana Fallaci in her native Florence. This passionate and powerful voice of the 20th Century was forever bold and brazen in her dissection of politics, power and ego, and their devastating effects on democracies everywhere. She wrote with an integrity and force of character that defined her life's work up until the very last days. Fallaci was perhaps my greatest inspiration as a journalist. Her dynamic, dramatic and distinct point of view on the demise of democracies, especially in her latest works that evoked death threats against her, did nothing to silence her conviction or her writings. She died as she lived -- with passion, conviction, purpose and power. They don't make writers like her anymore. "
-Giselle Fernandez, journalist and filmmaker

Citizen of the World - Prophet of Decline
WSJ, June 23, 2005

NEW YORK--Oriana Fallaci faces jail. In her mid-70s, stricken with a cancer that, for the moment, permits only the consumption of liquids--so yes, we drank champagne in the course of a three-hour interview--one of the most renowned journalists of the modern era has been indicted by a judge in her native Italy under provisions of the Italian Penal Code which proscribe the "vilipendio," or "vilification," of "any religion admitted by the state."

In her case, the religion deemed vilified is Islam, and the vilification was perpetrated, apparently, in a book she wrote last year--and which has sold many more than a million copies all over Europe--called "The Force of Reason." Its astringent thesis is that the Old Continent is on the verge of becoming a dominion of Islam, and that the people of the West have surrendered themselves fecklessly to the "sons of Allah." So in a nutshell, Oriana Fallaci faces up to two years' imprisonment for her beliefs--which is one reason why she has chosen to stay put in New York. Let us give thanks for the First Amendment.

...The impending Fall of the West, as she sees it, now torments Ms. Fallaci. And as much as that Fall, what torments her is the blithe way in which the West is marching toward its precipice of choice. "Look at the school system of the West today. Students do not know history! They don't, for Christ's sake. They don't know who Churchill was! ... Europe needs a Cavour."

Ms. Fallaci describes herself, too, as "a revolutionary"--"because I do what conservatives in Europe don't do, which is that I don't accept to be treated like a delinquent." She professes to "cry, sometimes, because I'm not 20 years younger, and I'm not healthy. But if I were, I would even sacrifice my writing to enter politics somehow."

..."You cannot survive if you do not know the past. We know why all the other civilizations have collapsed--from an excess of welfare, of richness, and from lack of morality, of spirituality." ...

"The moment you give up your principles, and your values . . . the moment you laugh at those principles, and those values, you are dead, your culture is dead, your civilization is dead. Period." ...

"I feel less alone when I read the books of Ratzinger [Pope Benedict XVI ]." ... "I am an atheist, and if an atheist and a pope think the same things, there must be something true. It's that simple! There must be some human truth here that is beyond religion."

Ms. Fallaci, who made her name by interviewing numerous statesmen (and not a few tyrants), believes that ours is "an age without leaders. We stopped having leaders at the end of the 20th century." Of George Bush, she will concede only that he has "vigor," and that he is "obstinate" (in her book a compliment) and "gutsy. . . . Nobody obliged him to do anything about Terri Schiavo, or to take a stand on stem cells. But he did." ...

John Paul II--"Wojtyla"--was a "warrior, who did more to end the Soviet Union than even America," but she will not forgive him for his "weakness toward the Islamic world... The scant hopes that she has for the West she rests on his successor. As a cardinal, Pope Benedict XVI wrote frequently on the European (and the Western) condition. Last year, he wrote an essay titled "If Europe Hates Itself," from which Ms. Fallaci reads this to me:

"The West reveals . . . a hatred of itself, which is strange and can only be considered pathological; the West . . . no longer loves itself; in its own history, it now sees only what is deplorable and destructive, while it is no longer able to perceive what is great and pure."

"Humanity owes its freedom to its heroes. A hero is an ordinary person who does extraordinary things, which affects the lives of others in a positive way. We must recognize our heroes and acknowledge their bravery and courage. Today, Mankind is facing, perhaps one of the biggest threats to its peace. There is a great danger looming over our heads that could destroy millions of lives. This danger comes from an ideology of hate that is mindlessly and uncritically believed by a billion people to be the only true religion. They believe that anyone who does not share their irrational views is hated by God and consequently should be hated by them too. The proponents of this ideology of hate are menacing mankind with terror. Many of them are ignorant of the inhumanity of their cult. They would leave it if they come to see the truth. However, left on their own, they see sheer evil as divine. They cherish in the pains of others and yearn for the blood of the innocent people whom they don’t know. ...

Oriana was a true heroine. She was an indefatigable enemy of tyranny since she was an adolescent until she closed her eyes to this world for ever. She will pass to history and will be remembered mostly because of her fight to save Europe from Islamofascism. Beatrice Siccardi, the judge who ordered Oriana to stand for trial will also be remembered as the result. Oriana will be remembered as a heroine, that other woman, for something else. "
-Ali Sina, Founder of

Charles Johnson of recently started an annual award called the "Anti-Idiotarian" also known as the "Fallaci" in honor of the wise Oriana Fallaci.

Eventually the timorous and rudderless flawed souls among us will grasp the wisdom and humanity of the noble giant named Oriana Fallaci.

As the great Oriana Fallaci passes into the next life, lovers of freedom throughout the world mourn, but we find hope and courage for the future.

Saturday, January 6, 2007

The World Is At War. Will We Survive?

The world is at war. It is a global war of epic proportions; it is like none other we have ever faced. I am deeply concerned that we may be losing this war. The short term success of our enemy is virtually assured because we have failed to recognize the nature of our enemy, and political forces from within have successfully demonized our current leadership and convinced many of us that our enemy is actually ourselves. Ironically this is true, but in the opposite way they intend.

"We have met the enemy... and he is us"
-Walt Kelly

The war of the 21st century is between people, whose minds and culture have remained in the 14th century, and people in the rest of the world who choose to live in the 21st century. Our enemy really hates us not because of what we have done, but rather because of what they themselves have failed to do. Witnessing our success serves only to cause them embarrassment and envy. Our enemy’s theocratic traditions prevent them from changing while encouraging them to conquer or destroy us.

Our enemy’s crippling 14th century culture suffers from all seven of the
“Key Factors for Failure” identified by LtC Ralph Peters in 1998:
• Inability to accept responsibility for individual or collective failure.
• Domination by a restrictive religion.
• Restrictions on the free flow of information.
• The subjugation of women.
• The extended family or clan as the basic unit of social organization.
• A low valuation of education.
• Low prestige assigned to work.

Our enemy’s culture is dominant throughout the Middle East, the northern half of Africa, Indonesia and Malaysia. However demographically, our enemy’s culture is rapidly spreading throughout Europe and much of the western world. Europe and many western nations like Canada are dying because fertility levels are well below replacement levels. To survive, Europe must import labor from other countries; over the last several decades, these immigrants often came from Islamic countries. For example, France is now approximately 10% Muslim and growing.

But the statistics only tell part of the story; the immigrants are the young folks who will rapidly replace the aging original inhabitants. As we are aware from the French car-burning riots, Muslims rarely assimilate into the culture of their host country; in fact their religion forbids it. Muslims are convinced that their culture is superior, whereas the people of the west are full of self-doubt and are ashamed to promote or defend their own once magnificent but dying culture.

Our enemy has failed in every measurable way and they can no longer ignore their own collective failure because they have been thrust into the information age; each day they must contrast the abject failure of their culture with the success of western culture. They were once successful in blocking out the influence of modern culture, but they can no longer do so. Our enemy cannot afford to admit failure because to do so would mean that their religious beliefs are a lie.

Similarly, our enemy cannot change because they are taught from birth that their religion requires belief or death. This religion is intolerant of all other religions and any attempt to reform or soften its requirements is considered blasphemy. These poor people are trapped and there is no escape even for those who want to escape.

Our enemy cannot accept the status quo and they cannot change. Their only alternative is to attempt to destroy us as commanded by their religious scripture. Unlike all our previous enemies, our new enemy is not afraid to die. They welcome death because they believe that death brings honor and paradise, and as a bonus it will free them from the squalor and embarrassment of their failures on earth. Their profit from petroleum provides the means necessary to purchase modern 21st century weaponry. They will not hesitate to use them.

Ironically, America and the western world is now the strongest it has ever been both economically and militarily. In the 20th century, America and its allies succeeded in conquering fearsome enemies, but there was no doubt about the identity of the enemy. However, this war is different because most of us cannot even recognize the enemy and many deny the terrifying danger that we face. The mantra of multi-culturism has placed blinders over our eyes by convincing many of us that western culture is evil and its achievements have all come at the expense of those who have not achieved. Any courageous soul who dares defend his proud western culture will endure bogus charges of bigotry and intolerance; protesting intolerance is deemed intolerant. The daily worldwide atrocities committed by our enemies are either ignored or excused by somehow blaming ourselves. Our own occasional failures, like the disgusting treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, are played and replayed endlessly. Our mainstream media, once merely embarrassed by its inherent bias, has now been cowed to the point where it can no longer honestly report news, as was illustrated by the recent Danish cartoon controversy.

What does the future hold? In a couple of years the current Republican leadership of the United States will end. The war will not. Because the Republicans have been successfully demonized as imperialist, nazi-like war-mongers, it is likely that the next U.S. President will be a Democrat; many suggest it will be Hillary Clinton.

In the U.S. there will continue to be enormous political pressure for us to abandon the work we started in Iraq. We will probably withdraw militarily before the 2008 elections and Iraq’s nascent democracy may falter as a result. Meanwhile we will continue to demonstrate that we are powerless to stop Iran from developing a nuclear arsenal. It is obvious from the rhetoric of Iran’s current leadership that they plan to use those nuclear weapons as soon as possible. Meanwhile there are many tactical nuclear weapons unaccounted for in the former Soviet Union; it is likely that these will end up in the hands of terrorists seeking paradise. The next Democrat administration will likely ignore our enemy or negotiate from a position of weakness which will only encourage them to act sooner rather than later. The evisceration of our Patriot Act will cripple our ability to detect and prevent the next catastrophic terrorist act.

Only after the next historic conflagration erupts on American soil, will America realize that it must defend its very survival with the resolve necessary to utterly destroy the enemy. Half measures and appeasement will no longer be acceptable as we found after WWI. Unfortunately, America will respond with the over-kill mentality which she always does when her survival is at stake, and many more innocent people will die. The irony is that today’s doves probably will be the ones screaming the loudest for blood. They will scoff at their erstwhile allies in Europe who will continue to blame the victims and urge calm. This confluence of events will also lead to a worldwide economic depression which will last for many years. Fortunes will be wiped out, retirement savings will evaporate, and many will be bankrupted. Eventually the survivors will recover and 14th century values will be soundly rejected. Progress back toward current levels of prosperity will slowly occur, but the lesson will have had an unprecedented cost in terms of lives and treasure.

Please convince me I’m wrong. I sincerely want to believe that I am. Maybe all bad things really are the fault of George W. Bush, and after he leaves office everything will be fine.

"It may sound strange to say, but [somehow] what we have to do is to take the 14th century culture of our enemies and bring it into the 17th century…But they've got to accept [responsibility for] their own failure, personally, nationally and culturally. That is the essential first step."
-Stephen Den Beste

Friday, January 5, 2007

Why I Fly The American Flag

Someone once told me that if I could express why showing respect to the U.S. flag was important, that he would consider flying his flag properly rather than upside-down as a protest of the current administration.

This is what I wrote: Throughout the history of the world, humanity has rarely tasted freedom. History is replete with tales of domination by rulers, kings, and tyrants. The suffering and oppression of one man at the whim of another is the typical state of affairs. We may not appreciate this since many do not have a historical perspective and most of us have never known anything but freedom. A common attitude seems to be: Freedom? It's like air; so what's the big deal?

Freedom is vital because it allows each of us to exercise free will, thus it allows us to achieve the level of self-actualization at the apex of Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs. Free will is the essence of being human; it is the unique characteristic which exists nowhere else in creation as far as we know. I believe it is the divine reflection of God's image in each of us.

I fly the flag every day to show pride in my country. To me it represents the spirit of a proud and courageous group of people and their commitment to the noble and precarious ideal of freedom.

However, some of my countrymen are much too sophisticated to express a love of country. They don't find anything of which to be especially proud in the principles expressed in our Declaration of Independence, nor do they recognize the wisdom and genius of our founding fathers in writing the U.S. Constitution. They fancy themselves to be "citizens of the world" and look to the United Nations for principled leadership. Such folks consider flying our flag to be an expression of blustery, macho jingoism; an assertion that we are better than people of other countries. Such folks mock our country and prefer to dwell endlessly on all her mistakes and flaws.

But these folks miss the point. Every country has flaws; what really matters is whether we have made, and will continue to make, progress in acknowledging and overcoming those flaws. By any standard, we have done remarkably well in a very short period of time. So when someone disrespects the flag he shows that he doesn't value his country nor understand her unique contribution to the history of the world. It means he is not prepared to make sacrifices nor does he appreciate the sacrifices made of others in defending precious liberty.

When I see Old Glory wave, or see the Statue of Liberty, or hear the Star-Spangled Banner I feel a swelling in my chest and a lump in my throat. I feel an overwhelming sense of awe and love. I feel humility toward those whose sacrifice for liberty I can never possibly repay. I feel a profound sense of continuity with my departed father and others of the finest generation who served with honor in World War II. Because I fully grasp the horrors of war, I realize how courageous my ancestors truly must have been. I revere those who protected liberty from tyrants over the course of more than two centuries, as well as our brave soldiers who currently serve in the Middle East .

Some parts of the world still subsist in the Dark Ages; some countries have experienced the Enlightenment but seem to want to return to the dark. But when I see the Stars and Stripes wave, I feel hope that our noble experiment in freedom will not flicker out as a candle in the wind-- a mere fluke in the long timeline of history. I want to contribute my modest part throughout life to carry the flame so that our children will be able to breathe in the sweet smell of liberty, and pass it along to their children. I also want oppressed people of all other countries to experience this thrill called freedom. We are the strongest county in the world and as such we have a responsibility to lead and show others what is possible when a people embrace freedom coupled with individual responsibility and acting within the principles of the Golden Rule.

The flag is more than a piece of cloth. The flag represents much more than actions of any particular President; Presidents make mistakes; Presidents come and go. The flag represents much more than Republican or Democrat; it represents all of us regardless of political affiliation. The flag stands for our collective spirit and our shared values as a people. I have a deep, abiding, unshakable love of my country and its people and our leadership role in the world.

That's why I fly our flag. Proudly. Every day.

Wednesday, January 3, 2007








Monday, January 1, 2007

Learning About Islam With Imam Ellison

By Don Feder | January 1, 2007

Rep. Virgil Go
ode (R, VA.) finds himself in the line of fire.

The Anti-Defamation League says it’s time for Goode to “rethink” his “ill-considered remarks” which demonstrate “a serious lack of understanding of the fundamental religious guarantees enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.” That bad, huh?
The Council on American Islamic Relations (Jihad R US) says of
Goode’s comments, “There can never be a reasonable defense for such bigotry.”

Even the American Humanist Association is agitated. Its president, Mel Lipman, fumes, “If Virgil Goode is to continue serving in Congress, he needs a refresher course in basic American civics” -- from the ACLU, no doubt.

The occasion for these fevered condemnations was a letter Congressman Goode sent to a number of his constituents, in response to the announcement of Rep-elect Keith Ellison (D, Minn.) – a convert to the Religion of Peace – that he would bring a Koran with him to his swearing-in ceremony.

“I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way,” Goode wrote. While The Ten Commandments and “In God We Trust” are prominently displayed in his congressional office, “The Koran is not going to be on the wall of my office.”

If that weren’t enough of an offense against multiculturalism, Goode went on to observe that unless we “stop illegal immigration totally” and end “the diversity visas policy, pushed hard by President Clinton” allowing more immigration from the Middle East, “I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States.” And that’s not a good thing?

Meanwhile, Ellison wowed the Sons of the Prophet ( Dearborn , MI chapter) at a conference on Sunday. “You can’t back down, you can’t chicken out, you can’t be afraid, you got to have faith in Allah, and you got to stand up and be a real Muslim,” Ellison told those gathered for the annual convention of the Muslim American Society and the Islamic Circle of North America.

According to Jihad Watch, the Muslim American Society has ties to the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood. Terrorism expert Steven Emerson says the Islamic Circle of North America “is on record as calling for jihad in the United States .” They sound like real Muslims to me.

Abu Ellison rhetorically inquired of the Dearborn Brethren: “How do you know that Allah … did not bring you here so that you could understand how to teach people what tolerance was, what justice was?”

Right you are, Keith. After all, there are so many shining examples of justice and tolerance in the Muslim world, where minorities are treated with such admirable fairness, justice is impartially administered and respect for human rights is a standard we could all emulate. (Please note the sarcasm here.)

“We all support the Constitution, one Constitution that upholds our right to equal protection,” Ellison told CNN’s Wolfe Blitzer.

Yes, but wouldn’t you say Goode is a vile bigot? Blitzer inquired. Ellison nobly declined to engage in “name-calling.” “I don’t know the fellow and I’d rather just say he has a lot to learn about Islam,” Ellison condescendingly replied.

Poor, ignorant Virginia backwoodsman that he is, Goode just doesn’t know enough about Islam to appreciate its exquisite beauty and lofty principles – like the thing about Jews being the descendants of apes and pigs.

We all have much to learn about Islam, and perhaps the Minnesotan can help to enlighten us.

But first, consider this: The book which Ellison will proudly schlep to his swearing-in has been used to justify the following:

· The Madrid bombings of 2004, the London bombings of 2005 and the plot to blow up as many as 11 trans-Atlantic flights that unraveled in 2006

· The Beslan massacre – where 186 Russian school children and 158 adults died in a hostage crisis in 2003

· Rioting in Pakistan , Afghanistan , Nigeria and Libya (over Danish cartoons dissing Mohammed) in which 139 were killed

· A series of blasts in Mumbai , India , in July, which left 209 dead and more than 700 injured

· Attacks during this year’s celebration of Ramadan (280 in 17 countries) in which more than 1,600 were killed. I didn’t kill anyone for Hanukah. Guess I’m just not serious about my religion.

· The murder of a priest and a nun, the firebombing of churches in the West Bank and multiple death threats following the Pope’s comments on Islam and the balance between faith and reason

· The ethnic cleansing of 90% of Kosovo’s pre-1999 Serb population, not to mention the destruction of hundreds of churches, monasteries, convents and shrines in the province

· The ritual slaughter of Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh

Think anyone in the mainstream media is curious about how America ’s first Muslim congressman feels about the foregoing? Think again.

There’s a teenaged girl in Indonesia on whom an indelible impression was made. Noviana Malewa has a scar from a machete cut running from her cheekbone across her face and down her neck.

Noviana was lucky. On October 29, 2005 she was walking home from school with four teenaged companions, when the group was set upon by machete-wielding attackers dressed in black. Her friends were decapitated.

The inspiration for this atrocity came from which literary work: 1) “The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin” 2) “Sense and Sensibility” 3) “Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm” 4) “It Takes a Village” or 5) “The Koran”?

It is the very book Ellison will proudly carry to his swearing-in that was the motivation for these murders.

The heads of the four teens were found in bags on the steps of a church with the following message, “We will murder 100 more Christian teenagers and their heads will be presented as presents.” When apprehended, one of the murderers said the killings were planned as a “gift” to mark the end of Ramadan.

To help us ignoramuses learn about his faith, perhaps Imam Ellison could explain the following verses in the Koran, with special reference to their relationship to justice and tolerance:

· “Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends. They are friends with one another. Whoever of you seeks their friendship shall become one of their number.”

· “Fight those who do not believe in God…Nor acknowledge the religion of truth (Islam) even if they are people of the Book (Christians and Jews) until they pay the Jizya (poll tax) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

· “Ye Muslims are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind.”

· “As to the thief, male and female, cut off his or her hand: A punishment by way of example, from Allah for their crime.”

· “The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication, flog each of them with a hundred stripes.”

· “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is crucifixion, or the cutting off of the hands and feet from opposite sides or exile from the land.”

· “The last hour will not come before the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims kill them, so Jews will hide behind stones and trees and the stone and the tree will say ‘O Muslim. ‘O servant of God! There is a Jew hiding behind me: come and kill him.’”

And please -- I beg you -- don’t cite the Bible verses about dealing with civilians in conquered cities, or the penalty for blaspheming or cursing one’s parents.

It’s been 3,000 years since a Canaanite city was put to the sword. ( Israel doesn’t even have capital punishment for Muslims who murder Jews in the name of Allah.) Christianity’s last crusade was half-a-millennium ago. I know of no Western nation that applies the death penalty to those who sass mom and pop.

On the other hand (the one that hasn’t been cut off), execution for adultery, fatwah/death warrants for “insulting the Prophet,” the rape of female captives, honor killings of women suspected of extra-marital sex, suicide bombings and other excursions into holy war are regular occurrences in the Muslim world.

Such crimes are condoned by the highest religious authorities in Islam, including the scholars of Al-Azhar University and Adb al-Rahman al-Sudais, sheikh of Mecca’s Grand Mosque. (Ain’t Islam grand?)

On January 3, Ellison will take an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States with his hand on the Koran. But are the two in any way compatible?

Our form of government is based on the Bible. At the dedication of the Bunker Hill Monument (1843), Daniel Webster declared that the Bible “is also a book which teaches man his own individual responsibility, and his equality with his fellow-man.”

As Franklin Delano Roosevelt put it in 1935 (speaking on the 400th anniversary of the printing of the English Bible), “We can not read the history of our rise and development as a nation without reckoning the place the Bible has occupied in shaping the advances of the Republic.”

Christianity and Judaism are embraced voluntarily. Throughout its history, unto today, conversion to Islam is often under duress. (Ask the 1.9 million who died in the Sudan’s second civil war – 1983 to 2005) The Bible appeals to reason. Islam is based on blind, unthinking adherence to the Koran. Benedict XVI alluded to this in his famous remarks at the University of Regensburg.

The Bible contains the seeds of our current conception of equality under the law and human rights. (The American Revolution was preached from colonial pulpits. The anti-slavery movement started in the churches of New England.) That’s why the Western world pioneered the abolition of slavery. That’s why the Islamic world still has it.

If there’s anything in the Koran compatible with civil liberties, it has yet to be discovered. The Koran is the basis for the system of dhimmitude – the subjugation of non-Muslims. That’s why democracy has never developed organically in the Islamic world. If the Islamic advance into the heart of Europe hadn’t been stopped at the Battle of Tours (732 AD), our government might resemble Iran’s or Saudi Arabia’s – where freedom of conscience is not exactly enshrined in law.

The concept of tolerance that permits the election of a Muslim in an overwhelmingly Christian country is not based on the Koran, but the book Muslims believe it supersedes.

While Ellison is teaching us benighted Islamaphobes about justice and tolerance, perhaps he could save a few lessons for his co-religionists in the Muslim world (like the headhunters of Indonesia ) – where such concepts are non-existent.

And this was in 2003.


  • Islam is one of the fastest-growing religions in the US. By the year 2010, America's Muslim population is expected to surpass the Jewish population, making Islam the country's second-largest faith after Christianity
  • There are currently about 6 million American Muslims. There are about 2,000 mosques in the US
  • Most American Muslims, 77.6%, are immigrants – 22.4% of American Muslims were born in the US.
  • (Source: US State Department)