Calling Coyotes by Cross-Country Communication in all Counties

Wednesday, November 19, 2003

Battle of the sub-headlines: MSNBC v. Newsweek

"Eight plans released, initial reaction from families is positive" (MSNBC, AP article)

"Families of victims of the September 11 attacks say plans are beautiful but fall short" (Newsweek)

Next week: v. Washington Times

Tuesday, November 18, 2003

Rep. Jim "The Jews Control Everything" Moran endorses Dean at a Dean campaign event...

...Leading me to again urge people to not vote for Dean. Pay the Deandertals no heed. If Dean is elected president he will be a huge disaster in foreign policy.

Monday, November 17, 2003

Why do people hate the Jews?

Because of a cycle. The early Christians rejected the Jews because they would not convert, so the Jews became less connected with the society of Christian nations. Because they were less connected, they would not be drawn into the demagoguery of the political and religious leaders. Because they did not buy into the demagoguery, their only use to those in power and the mob was as the scapegoat. Whenever there was religious extremism, the Jews refused to convert, and the mob and the church used them as scapegoats. Because they were used as scapegoats, they learned to distrust demagoguery and mob politics.

Because they had learned to distrust demagoguery and mob politics, they would always oppose it. Because they would always oppose it, the only recourse of the demagogues was to suppress their opinion. Because the only recourse was suppression, anti-Semitism became the last resort of dictators and despots. Because it was the only recourse, Hitler saw that even if he controlled all of Europe, the Jews would still dissent his rule unless he suppressed them all. Because he needed to suppress them all, he tried to kill them all.

He had succeeded at suppressing six million by the time he drank poison like a rat.

Because he had killed six million Jews across more than eight countries, the European Jews saw that they would not be safe as long as they had no power. Because they needed power to be safe, they argued for a Jewish state. That state could only be in the one place that held religious meaning to the Jews, the place they had come from nearly two millennia ago. The Jews began to go back to Israel.

Because the Jews went back to Israel, the Muslims saw a threat to their cultural hegemony over the Middle East. They saw a place where those they had persecuted in their own lands could go to for freedom. They saw a nation filled with people that would never accept being dhimmas to the Muslim world. Most of all, they saw a people who would not be ruled by nobles or imams, people who would show the Arab world that they were oppressed by their leaders, because they were not. They would make a nation that would show a tolerance of ideas and people that was anathema to the religious and political leaders of the Muslims. And so it was necessary to destroy them.

But that was not all that was necessary. They also had to slander every facet of their culture, lie that they were in conspiracy to destroy the Muslim people, lie that they were a satanic people who drank the blood of Muslims, a people who were the incarnation of evil. And only then would the Muslim people reject the Jews, and reject everything that was part of Israel.

But in 1948, they failed. Israel survived. And because it survived, the Arab leaders invented the Palestinians to criticize the Jews for surviving and cast the mere existence of a Jewish state as causing suffering. They brainwashed those who had left during the war and could not return to Israel to think that Israel was the root of their problems, and that if they could return to Israel and destroy the state they would no longer suffer. In fact, their suffering was due only to Arab despots who had exiled the Jews of their own nations, tried and failed to destroy Israel, and then refused to offer a single hand to those Arab "brothers" who could not return to Israel. Even today many Palestinian "refugees" cannot find good employment in the Arab world because they are not recognized as citizens or residents by their so-called brethren. Even thought they impugned Israel with accusations of causing a "diaspora," the Arabs would not lift one finger to help these "refugees." The best proof of this is that the PLO predates the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, neither of which were independent states or the center of any nationalist Palestinian activity t the time.

In 1967, Israel showed again that they would not be defeated by the Arab world, and suddenly the democratic and independent state clashed with European romanticization of the Arab world, and their "principles" of world peace through equilibrium and homogeneity. The same forces that led to the sacrifice of Czechoslovakia were at work again, prepared to sacrifice a "shitty little state" called Israel. They are the same forces that opposed the overthrow of the most brutal tyrant in this generation, loved only by the Arab mob and European elitist.

I don't pretend to understand why some European cultures have historically been craven about their own interests, while completely rejecting that others have any right to anything, or that others are capable of doing something that is just. I don't think that Sharansky is correct to characterize it as a merely left-wing problem, because he fails to explain how it became like that, and ignores the very relevant right-wing opponents of Israel, which include Chirac and his past extremist opponent le Pen, as well as Nazi remnants in eastern Europe.

So here we are today, and again anti-Semitism has become the last resort of despots in the Middle East. I honestly do not think Muslim society is perverted enough for someone as craven and manipulative as Yassir Arafat or as violent and hateful as the leaders of Hamas to rise to any role of importance and respect if they could not beset loose on Israel. Osama bin Laden is Churchill in comparison to the corrupt and useless leadership of Yasser Arafat, and at the very least the Arabs know exactly what they are getting into when they support him. Who knows how many people Yasser Arafat has betrayed and tricked to gain and hold onto power and wealth? (King Hussein, the leaders of Lebanon before the invasion, the UN, the UNRWA, the Israelis, Abu Mazen, Clinton, the Palestinians, the Palestinians...)

I see a gathering storm on the horizon. When the storm breaks, it will lead to the end of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and it can only end in the complete devastation of one of the sides. Significant anti-Semitism will only end when Israel and the world show that we will not tolerate persecution, will not tolerate oppression, will not tolerate genocidal hatred, and will not tolerate mass murder. At various points in the past and present the world has done very well at tolerating all of those.

Monday, November 10, 2003

"Yeetgadal v' yeetkadash sh'mey rabbah B'almah dee v'rah kheer'utey.
v' yamleekh malkhutei, b'chahyeykhohn, uv' yohmeykhohn, ba'agalah u'veez'man kareev, Amein.

Y'hey sh'met rabbah m'varach l'alam u'l'almey almahyah.
Yeet'barakh, v' yeesh'tabach, v' yeetpa'ar, v' yeetrohmam, v' yeet'nasei, v' yeet'hadar, v' yeet'aleh, v' yeet'halal sh'mey d'kudshah b'reekh hoo L'eylah meen kohl beerkhatah v'sheeratah, toosh'b'chatah v'nechematah, da'ameeran b'al'mah. Amein.

Y'hei shlamah rabbah meen sh'mahyah, v'chahyeem aleynu. Amein

Oseh shalom beem'roh'mahv, hoo ya'aseh shalom, aleynu. Amein"

(Mourner's Kaddish)

Friday, November 07, 2003

The Kim du Toit post: Yeah, it's a caricature of itself. There's a joke I could make about his name and "essay" but that is just really stupid. And the absurd neo-antifeminist rant that it is isn't worth it. An ad hominem that is worth bringing up because he claims to be a "real man," is that in his bio he claims to have been married three times, and one wonders what degree of personal anger he is expressing in paragraph 23, in his Cheerios rant. Another thing is that he is obviously arguing to remove suffrage from women given that he says it is the root of the problem.

Kim, you're a whiner, a misogynist, and a hypochondriac. If you're so manly get off your ass and prove it by doing something useful.

If anyone thinks I'm being hypercritical, may I note that his only concrete insight into the state of men today is a Cheerios ad and an old comedy sitcom. That is just stupid, and is equivalent to saying that Fatal Attractions proved that independent working women were vilified in the '80s.