Monday, June 30, 2008
Irena Sendler -VS- Al Gore
True Heroism Versus Political Buffonery
What human scum is the Nobel Peace Prize officials, who once accepted the nomination of Adolf Hitler for his "Judenrein" policies (on the premise that Hitler would expunge all the Jewish people from Europe, after which "peace" would break out), and later gave it to the mass-murdering terrorist Yassir Araft (student of the Mufti of Jerusalem, who was Hitler's man in the Middle East, setting about to build poison-gas death-camps for the Jews of Palestine before the British forces finally demolished Rommel), and since then to all sorts of mediocre idiots, political poseurs and "Little Man" villains.
By contrast, here's a true story of heroism, from someone who did NOT get the prize, and why, and who did. Very worthwhile.
Irena Sendler -VS- Al Gore
Hat-tip to Michael Elner for this item.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Signs of Muslim Pressure and Dhimmitude in Germany
German government sponsors Jew-hatred pro-Iranian "Terror Conference".
http://findalismonkeyinthemiddle.blogspot.com/2008/06/who-backed-anti-israel-conference-in.html
Who backed the anti-Israel conference in Germany?
It has been over 70 years since the horrors of the Holocaust has come to light. Yet this last week Germany's foreign and economics ministries hosted a conference that became a mouthpiece for anti-Semitic Iranian propaganda and a call for Israel's destruction.
I expected better from Germany, a nation where denial of the Holocaust is a criminal act. But it is also the nation where the Holocaust was conceived and implemented. So this latest bit of anti-Semitism should not really come as a surprise. ...
*snip* Read the whole depressing thing. Backsliding and slouching towards another bloody century.
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Pallywood Fakery and Propaganda Smears
Jew-hating Islamic and French media propaganda "journalists" take a lesson from Gobbles and outdo even their own worst expectations. Of course, they have been lying about nearly everything over decades. You won't read much about this milestone legal case either, not in the MSM or especially in the French media, as in "solidarity with fellow journalists (and other Jew-haters and terrorists)" few newspapers or media have given this revelation of facts even a peep of coverage. By contrast the claimed "murder of young al-Dura" was on every hit-piece and pair of sneered lips which appeared in the world mass media at that time. J.D.
http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/node/143/full
Faking a Killing
MELANIE PHILLIPS
July 2008
On September 30, 2000, two days after Ariel Sharon, then the leader of Israel's opposition Likud Party, went for a walk on Temple Mount, Palestinians mounted a demonstration at Gaza's Netzarim Junction. A 55-second piece of video footage of that demonstration, transmitted that day by the French TV station France 2, was to cause unprecedented violence in the Middle East and throughout the world.
The footage, with a voice-over by France 2's Jerusalem correspondent, Charles Enderlin, showed what was said to be the killing of 12-year-old Mohammed al-Dura by Israeli marksmen. Viewers saw the child crouching in terror behind his father, Jamal, as they sheltered next to a barrel under what Enderlin said was Israeli gunfire, and then slumping to the ground as Enderlin pronounced that he was dead.
That image of the boy screaming in terror before being killed was uniquely incendiary. It portrayed the Israelis as diabolically gunning down a child in cold blood, even as he cowered for his life. It ignited the Arab and Muslim world with apparent proof that the Israelis were deliberately killing their children, inciting a murderous frenzy.
Al-Dura became a poster boy for the Palestinian and Islamist war against Israel and the West. The day after the France 2 broadcast, the second intifada erupted in its full fury; according to the 2001 Mitchell report, the two events were directly connected. Twelve days later, a mob of Palestinians shouting, "Revenge for the blood of Mohammed al-Dura" lynched two Israeli army reservists and dragged their mutilated bodies through the streets of Ramallah.
When al-Qaeda decapitated the journalist Daniel Pearl, the video of this atrocity was punctuated with references to al-Dura. After -September 11 2001, Osama bin Laden said: "Bush must not forget the -image of Mohammed al-Dura." Several Arab countries issued postage stamps with his picture. On Palestinian Authority TV and in its school books, al-Dura's example is used to encourage other children to emulate his spirit of "sacrifice".
But we now know that this whole fiesta of violence and incitement was based on a lie. For whatever people think they saw in those 55 -seconds, it was not the death of that boy. He was not killed by Israeli bullets; he was not killed at all. At the end of France 2's famous footage, he was still alive and unharmed. The whole thing was staged, a fantastic piece of play-acting, an elaborate fabrication designed to blacken Israel's name, and incite the Arab and Muslim mobs to mass murder. .....
*snip* Go to the original for the rest...
Thursday, June 26, 2008
(Mandatory?) Bogus "AIDS Tests" for Bronx Citizens
Ok, all you people living in the Bronx, New York, listen up. Pretty soon you'll be getting a knock on the door from your local "health" (sickness) authorities, demanding blood for their Voo Doo AIDS hysteria. But take heart, it is also your chance to strike a blow for freedom and "Just Say NO!" to the official medical quackery of white-coat bone-pointing "AIDS" mumbo-jumbo. And if you think I am being too flip "about a very serious problem", then read below the recent report on AIDS and HIV from the Alive and Well organization. Yes, you can "test positive" on the bogus "AIDS Test" and remain alive and well --- but only if you fire your doctor, and run like hell from anyone trying to push their poison-pills down your throat. That's always been the message of the long-term "AIDS" survivors, who live long and happy in spite of the doctor's best death-sentences. Throw out the pills, and run like hell from anyone wearing a white-coat! Yes, it is a very serious issue, but not in the way the MSM and "do-good" AIDS organizations are claiming. This is Medieval witch-craft, folks. People may be dying, but it is not from any undocumented super-virus you get infected with today, but only get sick and die from ten or twenty years later. That is purely unscientific rubbish. J.D.
Two items below... more to follow.
++++++
http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/bronx_hiv_testing/2008/06/26/107712.html?s=al&promo_code=6505-1
N.Y. Wants All Bronx Adults Tested for HIV
Thursday, June 26, 2008 4:45 PM
By: Rick Pedraza
Community-based organizations, hospitals, and health clinics throughout New York City will voluntarily test every adult resident between the ages of 18-64 living in the Bronx for HIV, The New York Times reports.
The decision, announced by The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, comes on the heels of a recent report which shows New York City residents have the highest rate of practicing unsafe sex, and one of the highest HIV rates in the United States.
The Bronx, the report shows, has been hit especially hard.
In 2005, an estimated 250,000 Bronx residents aged 18-64 had never been tested for HIV, and one in four people with HIV did not know they were infected. The report also shows that one out of every four people that found out they were HIV-positive also found out they had full-blown AIDS at the same time.
The department of health website reports the goal of the initiative is that every Bronx resident learns his or her HIV status and has access to quality care and prevention services. .....
*snip* Read the full item at the above weblink.
++++++++
http://www.aliveandwell.org
From: Alive & Well AIDS Alternatives<christine@aliveandwell.org>
June 2008
- From the UK, Officials Say AIDS Pandemic is Cancelled
- India Asks, "Is HIV the Cause of AIDS?"
- New Radio Shows and Podcasts with AIDS Rethinkers
The Big Myth Officially Shattered:
Top AIDS Leader Admits There's No Heterosexual Pandemic
The latest news in AIDS is at least two decades old, but 20 years ago-and as recently as last month-UNAIDS and the World Health Organization continued to deny it, squelching data that showed AIDS was not affecting the general public around the globe.
Back in 1987, Rethinking AIDS board member Gordon Stewart, Emeritus Professor of Public Health at the University of Glasgow, tried unsuccessfully to point out that AIDS predictions didn't add up and that the notion of a global AIDS epidemic among heterosexual populations was at best a huge mistake, or at worst, a dishonest marketing scheme.
Now, hundreds of billions of dollars later, the recklessly ignored facts are coming to light as the top AIDS official at the World Health Organization finally admits there is no evidence that the world at large is--or ever was--at risk for AIDS, and UNAIDS comes under fire for promoting unfounded fear and squandering precious healthcare dollars on a problem that didn't exist.
The new official word on AIDS is the old word: Everyone is not at risk; AIDS is confined to distinct high-risk groups such as injection drug users and men having sex with men...except if you live in certain parts of Africa.
According to the new version of orthodox AIDS-think, unlike other people in other parts of the world, heterosexual Black Africans still remain at high risk for AIDS. Dr. James Chin, former epidemiologist for the World Health Organization, claims this is because 20% to 40% of the adult population in sub-Saharan Africa participates in "multiple concurrent overlapping relationships" involving sexual intercourse with several different people and several changing partners every few weeks.
The startling concept of African AIDS epidemics due to wildly promiscuous Blacks and the remarkable admission that 20 years of global AIDS policy followed a false premise have yet to be reported by any major US media.
Excerpted from the June 12, 2008 UK Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/12/aids.health
The Exploitation of AIDS
By Brendan O'Neill
"The AIDS scare was one of the most distorted, duplicitous and cynical public health panics of the last 30 years..."
Finally we have a high-level admission that there is no threat of a global AIDS pandemic among heterosexuals. After 25 years of official scaremongering about western societies being ravaged by the disease - with salacious, tombstone-illustrated government propaganda warning people to wear a condom or "die of ignorance" - the head of the World Health Organization's HIV/AIDS department says there is no need for heterosexuals to fret.
Kevin de Cock, who has headed the global battle against AIDS said that outside very poor African countries, AIDS is confined to "high-risk groups," and even in these communities it remains quite rare. In other words, all that hysterical fear mongering about AIDS spreading among sexed-up western
youth was a pack of lies.
Much of the media has treated Dr. De Cock's admission as a startling revelation when in truth, experts have known for many years that in the vast majority of the world, AIDS has little impact on the "general population." In her new book The Wisdom of Whores, Elizabeth Pisani - who worked for 10 years in what she refers to as "the AIDS bureaucracy" - admits that by 1998 it was clear that "HIV wasn't going to rage through the billions in the 'general population', and we knew it."
And it isn't the case that the heterosexual pandemic failed to materialize because officialdom's omnipresent pro-condom propaganda was a success. According to James Chin, a clinical professor of epidemiology at the University of California at Berkeley and author of the new book The AIDS Pandemic, it was always a "glorious myth" that there would be an "HIV epidemic in general populations." That myth was the product of "misunderstanding or deliberate distortions of HIV epidemiology" by UNAIDS and other AIDS activists, says Chin.
It is time to recognize that the AIDS scare was one of the most distorted, duplicitous and cynical public health panics of the past 30 years. Instead of being treated as a sexually transmitted disease that affected certain high-risk communities, the "war against AIDS" was turned into moral crusade.
Governments exploited the disease to create a new moral framework for society. Through baseless fear mongering, officials sought to police and regulate the behavior of the public. No longer able to appeal to outdated Victorian ideals of chastity or restraint, the powers-that-be used the specter of an AIDS calamity to terrify us into behaving "responsibly" in sexual and social matters.
They were aided and abetted by the radical left. Gay rights campaigners, feminists and left-leaning health and social workers stood shoulder-to-shoulder in spreading the "glorious myth" of a possible future AIDS pandemic. An unholy alliance of old-style, prudish conservatives and post-radical, lifestyle-obsessed leftists latched on to AIDS as a disease that might provide them with a sense of moral purpose.
And they ruthlessly sought to silence anyone who questioned them. Those who challenged the idea that AIDS would devour sexually promiscuous young people and transform once-civilized western societies into diseased dystopias were denounced as "AIDS deniers" and "heretics." Anyone who suggested that homosexuals were at greater risk than heterosexuals was denounced as homophobic. Nothing could be allowed to stand in the way of the glorious moral effort to make everyone submit to the sexual and moral conformism of the AIDS crusaders.
Even in Africa, the international focus on AIDS has been motivated more by pernicious moralism than straightforward charity. Diseases such as malaria and tuberculosis are bigger killers than AIDS. Yet focusing on AIDS allows western governments and NGOs to lecture Africans about their morality and personal behavior.
The relentless politicization and moralization of AIDS has not only distorted public understanding of the disease and generated unnecessary fear and angst - it has also potentially cost lives. James Chin estimates that UNAIDS wastes around $1billion a year in activities such as "raising awareness" about AIDS in communities that are at little risk. How many lives could that kind of money save?
===
Excerpted from Guerilla News Network, June 13, 2008
http://www.gnn.tv/articles/3739
WHO Confesses to 25 Years of Misguided AIDS Policies...But They Still Want You to Believe Them
By Liam Scheff
It's official: AIDS is not explicable by sexual transmission, at least not outside of Sub-Saharan Africans, gay men, intravenous drug users and prostitutes. For the rest of us, there is no heterosexual AIDS pandemic, and further, there will be no heterosexual AIDS pandemic.
"Threat of world AIDS pandemic among heterosexuals is over, report admits," The Independent announced on Sunday, June 8, 2008 (mimicking what I have been reporting for years and what some of my colleagues have been reporting for decades).
But take it from someone you trust, Dr. Kevin de Cock of the World Health Organization (WHO): "[T]here will be no generalized epidemic of AIDS in the heterosexual population outside Africa."
The authorities explain that they misled the entire world, for decades, because admitting the grandeur of their farce would have encouraged their critics: "Any revision of the threat was liable to be seized on by those who rejected HIV as the cause of the disease." Of course! We've got to protect flawed science from criticism!
But, regardless of past and current performance (and admissions of outright massive fraud), the authorities at the WHO and UNAIDS still want you to believe them when they talk about AIDS, Bird Flu, SARS, and other advertised but not achieved super-pandemics.
Such a weak defense might encourage a curious mind to wonder at the other flaws in their paradigm. For example, are we now to believe that there is a virus that causes a fatal disease, but only in Africans, (wherever in the world they may be), gay men and drug addicts? But not the entirety of the human population that is sexually active?
The answer to the riddle may be found in the actual cause of "HIV" - namely, "HIV testing." Figure out who is tested, how the tests work (or, more to the point, how they don't work), and who the tests are said to be accurate for, and you'll get an understanding of how the "AIDS" diagnosis - now, no better than a brand name applied to poverty and drug addiction - actually works.
"HIV tests" come up as "false positives" in numbers far exceeding "true positives":
"Sir, In the May 9 issue of The Lancet, Round the World correspondents discussed AIDS-associated problems in former Eastern bloc countries...I would like to emphasize another alarming concern - namely, the rapid growth in false-positive HIV tests in the former USSR, and in Russia especially. In 1990, of 20.2 million HIV tests done in Russia only 12 were confirmed and about 20,000 were false positives. 1991 saw some 30,000 false positives out of 29.4 million tests, with only 66 confirmations." (The Lancet, June 1992)
They have no ability to determine if someone has or does not have the antibodies they think they're looking for; the interpretation of "HIV positive" is subjective and not consistent:
"At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2 in human blood." (Abbott labs HIV-1/2 test, 1986 to the present).
They don't produce singular or diagnostically specific results - they cross-react all over the map:
"Heterophile antibodies are a well-recognized cause of erroneous results in immunoassays. We describe here a 22-month-old child with heterophile antibodies reactive with bovine [Cow] serum albumin and caprine [Goat] proteins causing false-positive results to human immunodeficiency virus [HIV] type 1 and other infectious serology testing. (CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY IMMUNOLOGY, July 1999)
"False-positive ELISA test results can be caused by alloantibodies resulting from transfusions, transplantation, or pregnancy, autoimmune disorders, malignancies, alcoholic liver disease, or for reasons that are unclear." (Doran, et al. False-Positive and Indeterminate Human Immunodeficiency Virus Test Results in Pregnant Women. Arch Family Medicine, 2000)
The secondary tests that are sometimes used to give a sense of validity to an initial test are either reformulations of the same material (the Western Blot), or are synthetic genetic probes (PCR Viral Load) that likewise cross-react and give no diagnostically specific reaction (and these tests are rarely to never used when you're talking about "AIDS in Africa"):
"Persons at risk of HIV-1 infection have been classified incorrectly as HIV infected because of Western blot results, but the frequency of false-positive Western blot results is unknown." (JAMA. 1998; 280: 1080-1085)
"The HIV-1 PCR assay was designed to monitor HIV therapy, not to diagnose HIV infection...In patients (like ours) with a low prior probability of disease, almost all positive test results are false positive." (False Positive HIV Diagnosis b HIV-1 Plasma Viral Load Testing. Ann Intern Med, 1999.)
"Helminth (parasitic worm) "load" is correlated to HIV plasma Viral Load, and successful deworming is associated with a significant decrease in HIV plasma Viral Load." (Treatment of intestinal worms is associated with decreased HIV plasma viral load. J.AIDS, September, 2002)
AIDS in Africa is and has always been a clinical diagnosis. Essentially, the test is dispensed with and "AIDS" is diagnosed based on the symptoms of hunger, TB and malaria - in other words, poverty:
"Our attention is now focused on the considerably large number of the seronegative group (135/227, 59%) who were clinically diagnosed as having AIDS. All the patients had three major signs: weight loss, prolonged diarrhoea, and chronic fever. Many of them also had other AIDS-associated signs, such as lymphadenopathy, tuberculosis, dermatological diseases, and neurological disorders." (Hishida O et al. Clinically diagnosed AIDS cases without evident association with HIV type 1 and 2 infections in Ghana Lancet. 1992 Oct 17).
The numbers that have been reported are also entirely fabricated based on exponential projections from one small group to entire populations. Very recently, these numbers have been revised to such a massive degree so as to drive the AIDS prognosticators to painful public redaction: In Swaziland this year, the rate of HIV infection among young women decreased remarkably, from 32.5 to 6 percent. A drop of 81% - overnight. UNICEF's Swaziland representative, Dr. Alan Brody, told the press "The problems is that all the sero-surveillance data came from pregnant women, and estimates for other demographics was based on that." (August, 2004, IRIN News)
Who are the tests considered "accurate" for? The tests are only considered to be "accurate" for certain groups. Those considered to be at "high risk" are much more likely to be tested, and to have their tests interpreted as either a "true positive," or, as you can see below, a "false negative." In other words, if they want you for the "AIDS" diagnosis, they'll get you:
"Suppose, for example, a single rapid test that has 99.4% specificity is administered to 1,000 people, meaning six will test false-positive. That error rate won't matter much in areas with a high prevalence of HIV, because in all probability the people testing false-positive will have the disease...
"But if the same test was performed on 1,000 white, affluent suburban housewives - a low-prevalence population - in all likelihood all positive results will be false, and positive predictive values plummet to zero. (Coming to Your Clinic - Candidates for Rapid Tests. AIDS Alert, 1998)
Here, from the Independent, is the new philosophy of AIDS, and it's quite a shift: "Whereas once it was seen as a risk to populations everywhere, it was now recognized that, outside sub-Saharan Africa, it was confined to high-risk groups including men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, and sex workers and their clients."
So how did we get to, "It's only gay men, Africans, drug addicts and prostitutes," from the version advertised for 25 years: "Everyone is at equal risk to contract HIV and to develop AIDS."
What happened to the theory of sexual transmission?
The 10-year 1997 study by Dr. Nancy Padian had a lot to do with its downfall. The study took 175 "mixed" heterosexual couples (that is, one partner testing "positive" and one "negative") who practiced vaginal and anal sex [for the latter - 37.9% at the commencement of the study, decreasing to 8.1% by the end], both with and without condoms [32.2% condom use at the beginning, increasing to 74% at the end]. But no matter how these folks did it, nobody who was negative became positive:
"We followed up 175 HIV-discordant couples [one partner tests positive, one negative] over time, for a total of approximately 282 couple-years of follow up... No transmission [of HIV] occurred among the 25% of couples who did not use their condoms consistently, nor among the 47 couples who intermittently practiced unsafe sex during the entire duration of follow-up...We observed no seroconversions after entry into the study [nobody became HIV positive]...This evidence argues for low infectivity in the absence of either needle sharing and/or other cofactors.""
Padian determined that outside of intravenous drug use, this was not a very transmissible "sexually-transmissible disease." But there is a contention made by Dr. de Cock that some sort of special sexual activity in Sub-Saharan Africa must (but is not evidenced to) explain the differences in "HIV prevalence." It's worth looking at studies of sex and "HIV positivity" for comparison. Does sex correlate with "HIV positivity" more than I.V. drug addiction?
In West Africa, these women, all prostitutes, have remained negative for more than five years:
"[This study involved] a group of repeatedly exposed but persistently seronegative female prostitutes in The Gambia, West Africa...have worked as prostitutes for more than five years, use condoms infrequently with clients and only rarely with their regular partners and have a high incidence of other sexually transmitted diseases" (Rowland-Jones S et al. HIV-specific cytotoxic T-cells in HIV-exposed but uninfected Gambian women. Nat Med. 1995 Jan)
In sum, lots of STDs, lots of exposure to HIV positive persons, and no HIV.
Here, as reported on PBS's "RX for Survival" (2005) a group of prostitutes refuses to get sick:
"In Nairobi, a group of prostitutes appear to have natural immunity against HIV...because they have an abnormally large number of killer T-cells." (New York Times, 2005. Author: ANITA GATES)
In this study in Tel Aviv, girl and boy prostitutes don't turn "positive," unless they're injection drug users:
"Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevalence was studied in an unselected group of 216 female and transsexual prostitutes ... All 128 females who did not admit to drug abuse were seronegative; 2 of the 52 females (3.8%) who admitted to intravenous drug abuse were seropositive. " (Modan B et al. Prevalence of HIV antibodies in transsexual and female prostitutes. Am J Public Health. 1992 Apr)
In Tijuana, among a group of hundreds of prostitutes, condoms were used by a slight majority, but then, they said, for less than half the time:
"In order to determine whether prostitutes operating outside of areas of high drug abuse have equally elevated rates of infection, 354 prostitutes were surveyed in Tijuana, Mexico... None of the 354 [blood] samples...was positive for HIV-1 or HIV-2. Condoms were used by 59% of prostitutes but for less than half of their sexual contacts. ... Infection with HIV was not found in this prostitute population despite the close proximity to neighboring San Diego, CA, which has a high incidence of diagnosed cases of AIDS, and to Los Angeles, which has a reported 4% prevalence of HIV infection in prostitutes." (Hyams KC et al. HIV infection in a non-drug abusing prostitute population. Scand J Infect Dis. 1989)
No condoms, no drug use - zero positivity. The same is found in the US and throughout Europe. Injection drug use, not sex, equals "HIV positivity."
"HIV infection in non-drug using prostitutes tends to be low or absent, implying that sexual activity does not place them at high risk, while prostitutes who use intravenous drugs are far more likely to be infected with HIV. Other prostitute studies tend to be small but similarly emphasize the central role of drug use as a major risk factor: in New York City, 50 per cent of 12 drug users were positive, compared with 7 per cent of 65 nonusers; in Italy, 59 per cent of 22 drug users were positive, whereas none of the nonusers were. None of the 50 prostitutes tested in London, 56 in Paris, or 399 in Nuremberg were seropositive." (Rosenberg MJ, Weiner JM. Prostitutes and AIDS: a health department priority?. Am J Public Health. 1988 Apr)
That doesn't sound like much of an STD.
So, do you still believe the WHO, and the medical authorities when they talk about AIDS? Despite their incredible, world-changing lies and deceptions, advertising campaigns and persecution of dissenting scientists, do you still believe them when they say that AIDS is still a sex-disease, but now, only if you're Black, gay or poor?
Desert Sands Absorb CO2
An interesting puzzle in the global CO2 balance, and another reason to be cautious about the CO2 theory of global warming.
New pieces in the climate-change puzzle
Studies of forests and deserts yield new insight into how much carbon dioxide those areas can absorb.
First Amendment Will Soon Be Erased....
Flush with Victory in the UN, the Organization of the Islamic Conference sets its sights on the USA.
Having failed to launch another 911 in many years, they now send their teams of mullahs and lawyers to do the dirty work. Make it impossible for anyone to point out the dangers and open threats of Islam, and woo everyone with narcotic smoke about what peaceful intentions they have....
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=27175
Gorge Orwell meets the OIC
by Robert Spencer
"We sent a clear message to the West regarding the red lines that should not be crossed."
That sounds like the statement of a victor in a war, dictating terms to the vanquished. And it may well be: free speech is under attack in Canada -- the prosecution of Macleans Magazine and author Mark Steyn -- and in the United States as well by Islamic governments and groups whose goal is to end free speech when it is aimed at exposing the truth about Islamic terrorism and its roots.
Their goal is positively Orwellian. Replace "Big Brother" with the "Organization of the Islamic Conference" and you have the world the OIC wants to impose on us all.
Apparently Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, believes that his powerful, multinational Islamic organization has already won the battle over free speech. Last week he boasted that "the OIC has become an indispensable player at the international level, in many domains." Notably, he said, the OIC, which comprises 57 Muslim governments in the Middle East, Asia, Africa, Europe, and South America, has been actively "defending the image of Islam, and combating the phenomenon of Islamophobia." ....
*snip*
Read the whole article at the weblink above.
And while you are at it, if you have the stomach, here's another item revealing the true face of Islamic Purity at work.
Again, Islam is no "religion" but instead is an emotionally-driven all-encompassing totalitarian ideology similar to Nazism or Communism, bent upon world domination, and willing to use every means available towards that goal, including genocide terrorism, economic warfare, smiley-face deception, and legal measures to silence their victims and rob them of the will to resist.
The Mullahs are the Generals, and the Mosques are the Military Headquarters and Propaganda Ministeries.
(Am I still allowed to say that? Just checking.)
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Free Speech Dead At UN, and UK? How Soon, the USA?
Two important items, about the continuing Islamic jihad against free speech.
In the UK, a novelist who writes about love is accused of a "hate crime" for his "despising Islam", when he comes to defend another writer who was accused of "racism" for daring to criticize Islamic hatred and violence. Both may be prosecuted.
British Novelist Who "Despises Islamism" May Face Hate Crime Charges
http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/MattPurple/2008/06/25/british_novelist_who_despises_islamism_may_face_hate_crime_charges
So today, if you dare to say factual things about Islamic violence and hatred, and Muslims who go along with Islamic agendas, then you are a "racist" who is engaged in "thought crimes", or a "hate crime". Down is up, and Up is down. But if you are a Muslim radical, you beat your multiple wives, advocate suicide bombing, stoning of adulterous women, hanging of homosexuals, and female genital mutilation, if you praise Osama Bin Ladin and damn the Jews, spew whatever kind of filthy lie about the West you can concoct, encourage mass-murder, sedition and treason, the only thing that happens is the government will double your welfare payments, and offer you a cushy seat on the local city council. After all, we can't allow our Muslims to be "oppressed", by living up to the standards everyone else is forced to live by. Or to allow their poor little ears to hear any criticism.
A war of words on similar issues is now taking place within the UN, where NGOs fighting against female genital mutilation and stoning are being silenced by... guess who? Yes, the Muslim nations are claiming NGOs cannot criticize their "religion"... and the rest of the UN is going along with it. In the UN Human Rights Commission, no less, today criticism of Islamic values and behavior is henceforth Verboten! Now, if Hiter were alive today, he could deflect criticism of mass murder in the death camps by simply declaring "those criticisms are an offense against the Germanic religion!" What a neat trick. The Muslims win another round in the global conflict, while our politicians chew coca and soma, playing their violins while the social arsonists stockpile gasoline and fuses. And like Max Frisch's hapless Biedermann (see "The Firebugs"), we will supply them with the matches....
The indefatigable Robert Spencer gives a report:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=79F671A7-DE83-4F6C-A219-B12076BA3AD3
Free Speech Dies at the UN
By Robert Spencer
FrontPageMagazine.com | Wednesday, June 25, 2008
The war against free speech is advancing rapidly: Associated Press reported Thursday that "Muslim countries have won a battle to prevent Islam from being criticised during debates by the UN Human Rights Council." Council President Doru-Romulus Costea explained that religious issues can be "very complex, very sensitive and very intenseĀThis council is not prepared to discuss religious matters in depth, consequently we should not do it." Henceforth only religious scholars would be permitted to broach them.
"While Costea's ban applies to all religions," AP explained, "it was prompted by Muslim countries complaining about references to Islam." The ban came after a heated session on Monday, when the representative of the Association for World Education (AWE), in a joint statement with the International Humanist and Ethical Union, denounced female genital mutilation, the penalty of stoning for adultery and child marriage as sanctioned by Islamic law. Egypt, Pakistan and Iran angrily protested, interrupting the AWE speaker, David Littman, with no less than 16 points of order, and succeeding in getting the Council's proceedings suspended for over half an hour. In the course of this contentious discussion, the representatives from the Islamic countries made numerous revealing statements - statements that are well worth examining as Islamic nations and organizations call with increasing insistence for restrictions on free speech in the West. ....
*snip*
Read the whole article at the above weblink.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Excellent Info and Video Movie on Cell Phone Hazards
Here's a resource you'll want to review and share with others. Like cigarette smoke, asbestos, and black-lung disease among coal miners, use of a cell-phone and the bio-hazards they represent will increasingly dominate the headlines. In these excellent video movies you will get an education beyond anything I've posted previously to OBRL News.
Public Exposure: DNA, Democracy and the Wireless Revolution
Part 1:
Part 2:
Also, this excellent list of resources, citizens' groups, etc.
Also, this excellent "Citizens Tool Box" for Cell Tower opposition
Again, if you are concerned about the health effects of cell tower microwave radiation, then realize that you are supporting that madness by use of your personal cell phone, helping to harm the health of your friends and neighbors who happen to live close to the towers. And, you get far more radiation from your own cell phone than you would from any nearby cell tower.
The bottom line is:
Council on Wireless Technology Impacts
We also continue to carry excellent Cell Phone/Tower RF Meters and books on this important subject, in our on-line bookstore:
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Will Criticism of Islam Be Outlawed in the West?
A very good, short video on the subject...
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Spencer - The Jihad Against Free Speech
The Jihad Against Free Speech
by Robert Spencer
by Robert Spencer
Posted: 06/17/2008
Freedom of speech is in imminent danger. Concerted attacks on it by the jihadist movement are increasing in number here and in countries that share America's dedication to free speech.
Mark Steyn, the author of "America Alone," is on trial in Canada for inciting hatred against Muslims in an article adapted from that book. Pakistan just asked the European Union to restrict freedom of expression so as to curb "offenses to Islam." Finland recently gave a blogger 2 1/2 years in prison for "insulting Islam." When Dutch police arrested the cartoonist Gregorius Nekschot, Amsterdam's public prosecutor explained: "We suspect him of insulting people on the basis of their race or belief, and possibly also of inciting hate." Against Muslims, of course.
...
*snip*
Read the whole thing now, before it is forbidden...
Saturday, June 14, 2008
And while we are on the subject of Freedom of the Press, and of Speech...
Nice to see the New York Times revealing its lib-fascist roots.... Yeah, maybe Mark Steyn ought to be jailed for writing that article in McLeans. Freedom of Speech, well, it is just so, you know... Old Fashioned... J.D.
From LGF:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/30305_NY_Times-_Unlike_Other_More_Nuanced_Nations_the_US_Clings_to_Free_Speech
NY Times: Unlike Other, More Nuanced Nations, the US Clings to Free Speech
Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 5:11:03 pm PST
The New York Times, scrupulously fair as always (cough), suggests that it might be time for the United States to reconsider this antiquated idea of "free speech" and join the rest of the world in prosecuting people like Mark Steyn: American Exception - Unlike Others, U.S. Defends Freedom to Offend in Speech - Series - NYTimes.com.
*snip*
From Jihadwatch:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021367.php
New York Times isn't sure that free speech is such a good idea
The original New Duranty Times headline on this appalling story was "Out of Step with Allies, U.S Defends Freedom to Offend in Speech," but now they have changed it to "Unlike Others, U.S. Defends Freedom to Offend in Speech" -- softening the "out of step" charge a bit, but not too much. The story glides from the Canadian case against Mark Steyn to a discussion of Nazis and racial epithets, without a shadow of a hint of the fact that what Steyn said was worlds away from Nazism or racism, but was instead essentially a straightforward presentation of Islamic supremacist statements made by Muslims. If that's hate speech, so was reporting what Hitler said in 1935. ....
*snip*
End of Speech Freedom in Canada?
Modern Liberal Fasicsm at work... through a "human rights" commission, no less.
"Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don't give it any value."
- Opinion from the Canadian Human Rights Commission
+++++++++++++++
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=84BD707B-E5EF-4630-8379-0A7DFDDC673C
Gagged in Canada
By Rich Lowry
New York Post | Friday, June 13, 2008
AT its best, Western civilization has fostered freedom of speech and of thought. But Canada has a better idea.
Last week, a Human Rights Tribunal in British Columbia considered a complaint brought against journalist Mark Steyn for a piece in the Canadian newsweekly Maclean's. The excerpt from Steyn's best-selling book "America Alone" argued that high Muslim birthrates mean Europeans will feel pressure to reach "an accommodation with their radicalized Islamic compatriots."
The piece was obviously within respectable journalistic bounds. In fact, combining hilarity and profound social analysis, the article could be considered a sparkling model of the polemical art - not surprising, given that Steyn is one of North America's journalistic gems.
The Canadian Islamic Congress took offense. In the normal course of things, that would mean speaking or writing to counter Steyn. But not in 21st century Canada, where the old liberal rallying cry "I hate what you say, but will fight for your right to say it" no longer applies.
The country is dotted with human-rights commissions. At first, they typically heard discrimination suits against businesses. But since that didn't create much work, the commissions branched out into policing "hate" speech. Initially, they targeted neo-Nazis; then religious figures who'd condemned homosexuality; and now Maclean's and Steyn.
The new rallying cry is, "If I hate what you say, I'll accuse you of hate." The Canadian Islamic Council got the Human Rights Tribunal in British Columbia and the national Canadian Human Rights Commission (where proceedings are still pending) to agree to hear its complaint. It had to like its odds.
The national commission has never found anyone innocent in 31 years. It is set up for classic Alice-in-Wonderland "verdict first, trial later" justice: Canada's Human Rights Act defines hate speech as speech "likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt." That language is so capacious and vague that to be accused is tantamount to being found guilty.
Unlike in defamation law, truth is no defense, and there's no obligation to prove harm. One of the principal investigators of the Canadian Human Rights Commission was asked in a hearing what value he puts on freedom of speech in his work, and replied, "Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don't give it any value." Clearly.
In British Columbia, the Steyn hearing proceeded with all the marsupial ungainliness of a kangaroo court. No one knew what the rules of evidence were. Hilariously, one of the chief complaints against Steyn was that he quoted a Muslim imam in Norway bragging that in Europe "the number of Muslims is expanding like mosquitoes." If that insect simile is out-of-bounds, the commission should swoop down on Norway and execute an extraordinary rendition of the imam.
The hearing has appropriately exposed the commissions to ridicule - and maybe some hatred and contempt (if that's allowed). There are calls to strip them of their power to regulate the media. This would limit the damage, even as free speech is endangered elsewhere.
In Europe, saying the wrong thing about gays or Muslims is routinely sanctioned by the state. In France, the bombshell-turned-animal-rights-activist Brigitte Bardot just collected her fifth fine, for complaining about how Muslims kill sheep.
Free speech is a very clean, neutral concept - "Congress shall make no law . . ." Once a government begins policing offensiveness, things get much murkier. It has to decide which groups are protected and which aren't - the "who/whom" of Lenin's power relations. So, even though there are plenty of fire-breathing imams in Canada, no one ever pesters them about their hatefulness.
It is the genius of Muslim grievance groups to leverage Western anti-discrimination laws to their advantage. In his Maclean's essay, Steyn noted how in much of the West, "the early 21st century's principal political dynamic" is whether something offends Muslims. Indeed - but in Canada, truth is no defense.
Friday, June 13, 2008
Global Warming and the Price of Gasoline
As someone who used to teach environmental science, earth-science and climatology in the universities, I'm always stunned at the wild misrepresentations and alarmism about the natural gas CO2, which we exhale and plants use for growth, as if it was cyanide. Or the declarations about its supposed immense power to affect global temperature, when the other natural gasseous form of H2O has about a thousand times the "greenhouse" effect of CO2. And also stunned that so many otherwise rational-thinking people seem to adore the very same alarmist politician (the one who got the Nobel Prize) who did absolutely nothing towards alternative fuels or environmentalism when he held the keys to power, but today quite nastily accuses his critics of being "flat-earthers", and develops a large following by speaking to people as if they were children. It seems always so, the guy who says it plain and simple, or who might stutter out an unwelcomed truth, is never so warmly greeted as the smooth-talkers who validate everyone's favorite prejudice. We should take more time to hear out the people who stammer and wear rumpled suits, and be more suspicious of the handsome favorites, who vie for absolute power, seek the keys to our national treasury, and declare openly how they will erase our hard-won freedoms -- all on empty platforms or "trust me" declarations we would never accept from a used-car salesman or a baby-sitter.
Here's another clear-minded essay on the CO2 subject, from an old climatologist in a rumpled suit. J.D.
(Tip 'O The Hat to Don Bill of Virginia for alerting us to this article)
http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/19842304.html
John Coleman's Comments Before the San Diego Chamber of Commerce
Global Warming and the Price of a Gallon of Gas
by John Coleman
You may want to give credit where credit is due to Al Gore and his global warming campaign the next time you fill your car with gasoline, because there is a direct connection between Global Warming and four dollar a gallon gas. It is shocking, but true, to learn that the entire Global Warming frenzy is based on the environmentalist's attack on fossil fuels, particularly gasoline. All this big time science, international meetings, thick research papers, dire threats for the future; all of it, comes down to their claim that the carbon dioxide in the exhaust from your car and in the smoke stacks from our power plants is destroying the climate of planet Earth. What an amazing fraud; what a scam. ...
*snip* Read the full article at the posted weblink.
Big-Bang Cosmology is Big-BS -- Princeton U. Prof.
How many ways can you say "I do not love thee, Big Bang Theoreee"
Rather than simply say, "Big-Bang Theory is wrong and is based upon false assumptions which have never been proven, and which are today fully contradictory to observation", and go back to the older and more empirically-founded steady-state infinite universe, you come up with something even more far-fetched, like this one:
BEFORE THE BEGINNING
By Ron Cowen
June 12th, 2008
Theory suggests a pre-Big Bang universe
HOT AND COLD
In this map of the cosmic microwave background, red and blue represent temperature variations in the radiation and show a slight asymmetry, with more temperature variation on the left half of the sky than the right.
Eriksen
HOT AND COLD
In this map of the cosmic microwave background, red and blue represent temperature variations in the radiation and show a slight asymmetry, with more temperature variation on the left half of the sky than the right.
Eriksen
Some people are loath to take a lopsided view of the universe, but cosmologist Sean Carroll and his colleagues are positively reveling in it. Embracing a study that suggests the pattern of radiation left over from the Big Bang looks surprisingly different from one side of the sky to the other, Carroll and colleagues have come up with some mind-bending possibilities to explain the puzzle, described in a paper posted online June 3.
In one scenario, the universe existed before inflation - the short-lived but enormous growth spurt associated with the Big Bang. In the other scenario, the universe is but a tiny part of a primordial structure now grown so big it exceeds the horizon of the observable universe.
Either way, the explanations suggest "that something outside our observable universe or before the period of inflation left a relic, left some imprint on what we can observe today," says Carroll, of Caltech....
*snip* Read it all at your leisure...
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Sunspots Vanished = A Cooling Earth?
"In the past, they observed that the sun once went 50 years without producing sunspots. That period, from approximately 1650 to 1700, occurred during the middle of a little ice age on Earth that lasted from as early as the mid-15th century to as late as the mid-19th century."
Actually it was more like 150 years of low sunspots, but I won't quibble. J.D.
+++++++
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080609124551.htm
Sun Goes Longer Than Normal Without Producing Sunspots
ScienceDaily (Jun. 9, 2008) - The sun has been lying low for the past couple of years, producing no sunspots and giving a break to satellites.
That's good news for people who scramble when space weather interferes with their technology, but it became a point of discussion for the scientists who attended an international solar conference at Montana State University. Approximately 100 scientists from Europe, Asia, Latin America, Africa and North America gathered June 1-6 to talk about "Solar Variability, Earth's Climate and the Space Environment."
The scientists said periods of inactivity are normal for the sun, but this period has gone on longer than usual.
"It continues to be dead," said Saku Tsuneta with the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan, program manager for the Hinode solar mission.
...
Dana Longcope, a solar physicist at MSU, said the sun usually operates on an 11-year cycle with maximum activity occurring in the middle of the cycle. Minimum activity generally occurs as the cycles change. Solar activity refers to phenomena like sunspots, solar flares and solar eruptions. Together, they create the weather than can disrupt satellites in space and technology on earth.
The last cycle reached its peak in 2001 and is believed to be just ending now, Longcope said. The next cycle is just beginning and is expected to reach its peak sometime around 2012. Today's sun, however, is as inactive as it was two years ago, and scientists aren't sure why.
"It's a dead face," Tsuneta said of the sun's appearance.
Tsuneta said solar physicists aren't like weather forecasters; They can't predict the future. They do have the ability to observe, however, and they have observed a longer-than-normal period of solar inactivity. In the past, they observed that the sun once went 50 years without producing sunspots. That period, from approximately 1650 to 1700, occurred during the middle of a little ice age on Earth that lasted from as early as the mid-15th century to as late as the mid-19th century.
...
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
WHO Shifts Gears "AIDS No More a Heterosexual Threat" but no matter...
The flawed and failed HIV theory of AIDS will be abused to push for Mandatory Male Genital Mutilations globally.
The basic thrust of the article below is firstly a tacit admission that the old theory of "infectious HIV" is incorrect. "Heterosexuals are not at risk". This was elucidated scientifically back in the early 1980s, but only WHO and the AIDS-pushers refused to embrace the facts. Now they will refocus upon the risk groups, of homosexual men, IV drug users, and prostitutes (who are often IV drug users). As pointed out years go, however, if "AIDS" was an infectious disorder, it would spread along paths similar to other sexually-transmitted diseases like herpes, syphilis, gonorrhea, etc. and most definitely would require a big effort to educate and change the behavior of everyone, including heterosexuals. Since they admit this is not the case (it never was), it confirms the original criticisms against "infectious HIV", as made by Dr. Peter Duesberg many years ago. That's a separate issue from whether or not HIV even exists as a demonstrable unique entity, a critical point repeatedly made by an even larger group of scientists, as with the "Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV Hypothesis of AIDS". But all of these criticisms have been angrily suppressed, for over 20 years, by both the scientistic medico-magical community and their cadres of mainstream journalist-believers. Such is the nature of so-called "HIV science", that top officials in WHO can get away with this back-stepping, keep their jobs, and not be called on the carpet about it.
But they are not waving the white-flag by any means. They have many more cruel and deadly tricks ready to implement, which will have even worse effects upon everyone, especially heterosexuals, in the years to come.
They will demand that all baby boys be circumcised.
Factually, this new theory demanding Male Genital Mutilations came from the observed spurious correlation of a lowered AIDS incidence in African regions with a higher incidence of penis cutting -- but this is readily understood as the consequence of several unique geographical patterns, which have nothing to do with each other in any functional sense. There are high levels of penis-cutting in dry northern Africa, where Islam prevails and demands male circumcision. In those areas, one does not find the kinds of tropical diseases and parasitical disorders typically found in non-Islamic regions of central and southern Africa. In those latter tropical regions, circumcision incidence is low, but tropical diseases such as malaria, leprosy, typhus, tuberculosis, etc., are at very high levels. So we find increased blood and immune system disorders in the southerly tropical areas of Africa, where the health-care systems are not all that robust towards treatment of such legitimately infectious tropical diseases, where contaminated water is often the only thing that is available, where parasites are abundant -- but also where men have intact penises, keeping their original foreskins.
Add to this the following fact: These same typically African diseases, and the parasites and malnutrition with bad water that often prevails, are documented to create blood antibodies that cross-react with the so-called "HIV tests" to give high levels of false positives. And where the ELISA or Western Blot "HIV tests" are not in use, because they are too expenisve for meagre African health-care budgets, the clinical "Benguai Definition" of AIDS is even worse -- chronic fever, chough and diarrhea -- mixing up confused definitions of AIDs with many other maladies that produce exactly the same thing, Years earlier, such ill Africans with multiple disease exposures and malnutrition were wasting away in what was typically diagnosed as "Slim" disease. But Slim could be treated with good food, good water, typical antibiotics and anti-parasite medicines. When "AIDS" came to become the new fad, those patients were often reacted to with horror, shunned like leppers, disowned by their relatives, and even isolated in special "AIDS wards" in the hospitals where NO medicines were given, of any sort, as they were expected to die. "HIV" is a super-virus, after all, with "no known cure". But Muslims in north Africa, who were geographically lucky enough to live far away from the malaria and tuberculosis regions, and did not drink swamp-water to any significance, did not suffer from things like Slim. This was credited by the WHO AIDS doctors not to what I discuss above, of the opposing geographical patterns, but instead to the point that they ritually sliced off the foreskins of their boy children.*
In short, the sequella of "AIDS" in Africa never had anything to do with a claimed "infectious HIV", but rather it was the product of a bogus and faulty "AIDS tests" and definitions, and other flawed diagnostic criterion which confused ordinary African diseases with the "new WHO definitions for AIDS". HIV is a flawed theory, combined with a bogus blood test and pushed by an arrogant medical community, profiteering pharmaceutical firms, and power-hungry bureaucrats.
Now, WHO does a neat two-step dance, to back away from pushing condoms and safe-sex programs, to now promote yet another bit of official medical quackery, that penis-cutting will "reduce AIDS". It never helped the predominantly-circumcised groups of homosexual men in the USA, who frequented the bath-houses and got sick in high numbers from the various toxic drugs they were ingesting in high quantities (in addition to the overlapping multiple STDs they acquired from unsanitary sexual practices, along with massive antibiotic consumption), nor did it help the IV drug users who continued to inject foreign proteins into their blood, something which produces a giant list of antibodies (as is the case with drug-injecting hemophiliacs) -- with or without clean needles. What's never mentioned in the quack-medicine circles promoting "AIDS" is, that the same correlation studies claiming a reduced incidence of AIDS among male-circumcising cultures, also showed a reduced incidence when they also practiced FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION. Yes, Muslims also slice up the genitalia of their women. So there also is a nice big fat geographical correlation between women with an intact genitalia, and higher levels of tropical diseases, parasites, bad water, etc.
So... all you AIDS Believers, for whom "Doctors Are Gods", get ready for the next New Horror Show of modern "official quackery" white-coat medicine, pushing firstly Male Genital Mutilation world-wide, into places where it never previously existed. Get ready for the numbers of boys being genitally mutilated in the USA and Canada, where it has steadily declined over decades from the hard work by the anti-circumcision movement, to level off and start climbing again. Get ready also for self-righteous proclamations by Muslim fanatics globally, to spread Female Genital Mutilation as an "AIDS Preventative" -- and with the new "hate crimes" laws, you won't be allowed to criticize that, as it will "offend Muslims!" So Female Genital Mutilation can be defended within the West not only as a "cultural practice" which cannot be criticized without being accused of being an "evil racist", etc. -- but it will soon enough gain the blessing of the medical community!
What a Madhouse!
Look also, ten years down the road, for another new admission by WHO, that "the levels of AIDS infections have not yet declined", with some new horrific "solution". Whatever problems there are with authentic immune system disorders, it comes from preventable environmental or lifestyle-linked stressors and pressures, which never had anything to do with "infectious HIV". Such as unsanitary practices, bad drinking water, malnutrition, ingestion of toxic street drugs, or toxic medical drugs, or toxic injection drugs, and so on.
Once again, for the umpteenth time...
A good starting point for articles and discussion is found in the resource list given here:
And the list of exceptionally good and accurate books and DVDs, which provide the facts for all of what I say above, as given here:
http://www.orgonelab.org/cart/xaids.htm
James DeMeo, Ph.D.
++++++++
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/threat-of-world-aids-pandemic-among-heterosexuals-is-over-report-admits-842478.html
Threat of world Aids pandemic among heterosexuals is over, report admits
A 25-year health campaign was misplaced outside the continent of Africa. But the disease still kills more than all wars and conflicts
By Jeremy Laurance
A quarter of a century after the outbreak of Aids, the World Health Organisation (WHO) has accepted that the threat of a global heterosexual pandemic has disappeared.
In the first official admission that the universal prevention strategy promoted by the major Aids organisations may have been misdirected, Kevin de Cock, the head of the WHO's department of HIV/Aids said there will be no generalised epidemic of Aids in the heterosexual population outside Africa.
Dr De Cock, an epidemiologist who has spent much of his career leading the battle against the disease, said understanding of the threat posed by the virus had changed. Whereas once it was seen as a risk to populations everywhere, it was now recognised that, outside sub-Saharan Africa, it was confined to high-risk groups including men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, and sex workers and their clients.
...
Critics of the global Aids strategy complain that vast sums are being spent educating people about the disease who are not at risk, when a far bigger impact could be achieved by targeting high-risk groups and focusing on interventions known to work, such as circumcision, which cuts the risk of infection by 60 per cent, and reducing the number of sexual partners.
...
But the factors driving HIV were still not fully understood, he said.
...
*snip*
Read the whole ridiculous and depressing thing at the weblink above...
Saturday, June 07, 2008
Clarification on the Robert Kennedy Assassination
Sirhan Sirhan was an Islamified "Christian".
In my last posting, carrying the short paragraph remembering the Bobby Kennedy assassination, I should have clarified, while technically his murderer was of Christian background, in practice he was overflooded with Islamic sentiments as the ideological background for the murder. Sirhan Bashira Sirhan was raised in the Palestinian Muslim milieu before his family emigrated to the USA. He was taught by radical Muslim teachers in a Muslim community, and carried with him a fanatical hatred of the Jews which for all intents and purposes was the emotional equivalent of Koran-inspired Jihad. He held a similar burning hatred of Robert Kennedy for his strong support of Israel. His sympathies, as reported in interviews and biographies, were with the various Muslim terror-bombers killing Jews in Israel, and from what I have read, he showed no sympathy or support for various Christian factions in either Israel or Lebanon who were then also under pressure or attack by Muslims. So practically speaking, his actions flowed from a social foundation of Jew-hating Islamic Jihad ideology combined with Nasserite Arab nationalism (which itself was rooted in Islamic jihad ideology), along with neo-Nazi propaganda which we know also was promulgated into the Middle East by the Mufti of Jerusalem and Nasser, with all the propaganda and indoctrination which characterized those kinds of views. His actions, in killing Kennedy, appeared more along the lines of "sudden Jihad syndrome" as described by Robert Spencer, where an individual filled with explosive emotional rage over real or perceived injuries or "dishonor" insults, and mis-educated about world events from politically-extremist sources, is pushed over the edge to independent violent actions against a hated other.
In studies about Sirhan Sirhan, I could not find any traceable roots to typical primitive Christian antisemitism ("Jesus-killers", etc.), though clearly he was proto-Nazi in outlook, admiring of Hitler's "Mein Kampf" and both preoccupied and enraged about "Zionism". Such views are known among some Arab Christian sects, as with the Maronite Phalange of Lebanon (who occasionally did the Nazi salute), but factually those kinds of sentiments are found in a far more widespread and deep manner among Muslims of the region, who also read the Hitler books, do the Sieg Heil, and dance in the streets when Jews or Americans are mass-murdered. Arab Christians are more likely, if questioned in private, to be filled with praise for Israel and desiring to move to Israel or America in hopes for freedom from Islamic tyranny, the Israelis having saved them personally on many occasions from organized Muslim butchery. A bit of history will clarify my point.
After WW-I, and in largest measure, both the Jews and the Christian Arabs of the Middle East considered the British and French to be liberators from their totalitarian Turkish Muslim overlords, and they did not merely wish to have yet another Islamic tyrant-king dominating over them. To keep controls over the old Turkish Empire remnants, the British took the approach of cutting it up into pieces which were then parceled out to various imported Shieks, Princes and Kings from the Arabian deserts. The Lebanese Christians and Jewish populations wanted none of that, though the Muslims of the region were insisting upon it, as were various pro-Muslim Europeans. The Jews and Christians wanted their own autonomous democratic states, lobbied hard for this starting in the middle of WW-I, fought on the side of the British in the military campaigns against the Turks, and anticipated the British and French would eventually concede to this demand (as per the Wilsonian "14 Points"). With removal of the hated Turks, who regularly oppressed local infidel populations with heavy taxation and punitive rules, Jews and Christians flourished under British and French protectorate status. They were European in outlook, multilingual, better educated, more technically skilled, industrial and agricultural in practice, etc. They allowed more freedom for women, public mixing of the sexes, and within a short time, abandoned the veil and other customs pushed upon them by their former Islamic masters. As fellow "inferiors" with dhimmi-slave status under the Turks, they were natural allies in the struggle against Islamic domination. The Muslims of the region were lesser educated, and pastoral-nomadic in outlook, eastward looking in philosophy, and submissive to or desirous of dictators. The Muslims had more power during Turkish periods, and lost out significantly with the defeat of Turkish and Nazi power in the region, under British and French protectorate status.
The carving out of Israel and Lebanon from formerly Turkish Empire territories, to give a homeland to the previously dhimmified Christians and Jews, was considered an affront to Islamic sensibilities, that the "inferior humans" should suddenly have self-rule. Or worse, that some Muslims should live under a state controlled by non-Muslim democracy. It was this quasi-racist hatred of the non-Muslim, that any patch of ground once under Muslim control should revert back to ownership by the non-Muslim dhimmi-slaves who originally owned and occupied it, which initiated an epoch of Muslim efforts to "take back" what was claimed to be "stolen from Muslims". Starting even before 1948, under British rule, Muslim populations rose in the regions of what later would become Israel and Lebanon, mainly due to immigration from all corners of the Islamic world, given the greater economic opportunity which developed under expanded Jewish and Christian industry, agriculture, and self-rule. But when Jews or Christians immigrated into the region from elsewhere, it was cursed as "Zionism" or "crusader invasions" by racist Muslim leadership. Multiple wars of extermination and conquest were launched by the collective Muslim states, failing in every case, but with inflammatory propaganda creating more hatred and the phenomenon of incessant on-going terrorism which has today taken on a global dimension.
That historical background of Islamic jihad "taking back" of lands liberated from Muslim totalitarian dictatorship, which they considered to be a permanent part of the conquered "Dar-es Islam" (House of Islam) and which the Koran demanded be "returned back" to Islamic control, is the foundation for virtually all of the wars and attacks aimed to "wipe out" Israel which developed since 1948. It is the underlying premise (and lie) upon which "anti-Zionism" is founded. The same is true with respect to current Islamic pressure to "take back" Christian Lebanon also.
Sirhan Sirhan and his family embraced all of that, which flowed from Islamic, and not Christian contexts. The following quote, from Mel Ayton's article "Sirhan was an 'Unaffiliated' Terrorist" speaks to these points, very directly:
Although Sirhan's school was nominally Christian teachers were mainly drawn from the Arab community, which was predominantly Muslim, with some input from foreign missionary workers. Christian Arabic children used Jordanian textbooks. From 1948 to 1967 Christian Schools in East Jerusalem were required to teach the Koran. Following his arrest for the murder of Robert Kennedy, Sirhan told of how he had been influenced by one particular teacher in his school, " Mr Suheil", who angrily denounced present day Arabs and compared them to the Arab [Muslim] warrior Saladin. Suheil tried to indoctrinate his pupils in Arab nationalism and urged them to be like Saladin and fight for the Arab cause.
As the Arab world ignored the United Nations call to legitimise the State of Israel, Arab Jordanian school textbooks continued to refer to Israel as 'foreign occupied Palestine'. The texts called for Israel's destruction and made reference to the obligation Palestinians had to defend Islamic land. In the textbooks Jews were portrayed as thieves, occupiers and 'enemies of the prophets', 'cunning', 'deceitful', 'wild animals', 'locusts' and 'treacherous'. The curriculum also exhorted children to violence and described the Jewish state in Nazi-like terms. They always described Arabs as 'victims'. In fact, the purpose of Arab schooling in Jordan and Egypt was to mobilise the population for future conflict with Israel.
http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/45937
Within that context, Sirhan Sirhan's murder of Bobby Kennedy appears as an extension of Islamic Jihad, having worked its influence through a nominally Christian individual, who became more deeply sympathetic to Muslim causes and propaganda, than he was to his own non-Muslim family and neighbors, or to his adopted American homeland into which they emigrated, but which they held in contempt. Does any of this sound familiar, with respect to the modern problem of Muslim immigrant communities in the West? One rarely finds similar problems among Arab Christian immigrants, but it certainly was the case with Sirhan Sirhan's "Islamified" family.
Mel Ayton's article provides a specific description of the Sirhan Sirhan family which is illuminating:
During the Easter vacation of 1968, Arab-American Lou Shelby, who hired Sirhan's brother Adel as a musician for his club The Fez, visited the Sirhans. Shelby thought the family were 'strange'. He had previously visited them in Pasadena on a number of occasions for musical rehearsals and was able to see them in a social setting. According to Shelby, "The Sirhans always struck me as being a weird family. By that I mean something quite strange and unusual. Perhaps the best way to explain it is by saying that though they were Christians, the general quality, the atmosphere, of their family was that of a Muslim family. It was serious and heavy and lacking in the adaptability and quickness which most Arab Christian families here have. And there were their relations with their mother; the sons were fond of her, of course, but she had little influence on them and they didn't take her wishes or feelings into account." [emphasis added, JD]
http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/45937
Today it is known that Arab Christian families living under Muslim dictatorship in the West Bank are fleeing to the West, or into Israel, or just about any other non-Muslim place in the world, by any and all means possible. Their numbers are dwindling, even in once-Christian but now-Muslim-dominated Bethlehem. Their businesses and communities are heavily suppressed, their churches routinely desecrated by Muslims, their men physically assaulted, their women at risk for forced "rape-marriages" with forced conversions to Islam, and all kinds of other repressions and cruelties. Christian Arab leaders rarely speak out about it, and often ape Muslim sentiments, in a variety of ways, most notably in Jew-hatred and adopting political agendas similar to their Muslim overlords, who consider them as sub-human dhimmis, no better than the hated Jews. In a manner of speaking, this is a culture-wide "Stockholm Syndrome", where the enslaved and chronically-punished and assaulted portion of the community becomes sympathetic to the ideas and causes of those who have enslaved them, who hold them hostage, and who demand tribute and inflict beatings upon them. World-wide, one sees similar things at work, where Islamic domination puts ideological and social pressures upon non-Muslims, to adopt Muslim ways and attitudes, Muslim dress and practices, Muslim political ideas, and to eventually become Muslims, either by direct conversion, or by indistinguishable mimicry. From a purely behavioral point of view, this is partly what lies behind the more strict forms of Christian ideology as found close to or within the larger Saharasian region of Muslim dominance, as compared to more reformist or protest-ing Protestant denominations farther removed from the Saharasian homeland of Christian ideology and mythos.
This adoption of Islamic attitudes and ideology by the non-Muslim is nothing new, and certainly is not restricted to the case of Sirhan Sirhan.
I will resist the temptation to draw comparisons to a current Senator from Illinois, who also was taught by Muslim teachers, and grew up in a Muslim milieu, whose father was Muslim, whose friends and mentors speak like (or simply are?) typical Jew-hating and America-hating Islam-sympathetic or outright Islamo-fascists, making trips to sit at the feet of Muslim terror-tyrants overseas, and who in actual sympathy, practice and actions may as well be a Muslim, even though he technically is a Christian.
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has web-feet and feathers, it is difficult to call it a dog, even if a sign proclaiming "dog" is hanging around its neck.
James DeMeo, Ph.D.
Author of Saharasia
Friday, June 06, 2008
Anniversary for D-Day, and Bobby Kennedy's Assassination
There are no immediately obvious connections between the two events, except that both events are being widely deconstructed, misrepresented, or forgotten.
June 6th, 1944 was the day when Allied forces, composed of American, British, Canadian and Free French, landed on the Normandy beaches starting a major battle for the liberation of Europe from Nazi tyranny. America lost more of its young soldiers in battle on that first day than have been lost in the many years of struggle against al-quaeda and other terror forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, for one comparison. The Brits and Canadians lost even more. For those who weren't taught anything about this in their history classes, or for the younger generation which seems more enamored with DVDs than books, I would recommend "Saving Private Ryan" or "The Longest Day" for a glimpse into the what their American (and Canadian and British) ancestors were up against, and what they did, to prevent the Hitler fanatics from grabbing even more of the world than merely Europe and North Africa. American ships were being regularly torpedoed off New York and Los Angeles harbors in those days, long before war was declared against the USA, long before Pearl Harbor was attacked, by Japanese and German U-Boats. The American military machine hardly existed only 20 years earlier, having been created out of nothing basically by FDR, who mobilized American industry to the task. All the people who today want to denounce American influence around the world, or how many American soldiers are stationed overseas at critical geographical locations, would do well to remember the totalitarian condition of the world prior to the Normandy Invasion, or VE and VJ Day. And if you don't know what those terms mean, then really you do need to study the history.
June 6th, 1968 was also the day Robert Kennedy was assassinated. A decent fellow and promising candidate for President, he was shot dead by a Muslim terrorist, one of the very many Islamic atrocities which occurred in the 20th Century, long before the word "Islamofascist" or "Jihad Terrorist" was coined for popular understandings after 9-11-2001. But in fact he was gunned down by a Muslim fanatic for his strong support for Israel, for his dislike of the totalitarian Arabist and Islamic wars and agendas he personally eye-witnessed, especially during his trips to Israel in 1948. You can read Bobby Kennedy's views in his own words at the link below, and contrast them to the views and beliefs of those who abuse his name as justification for every kind of incredibly naive or hard-left program. As a young journalist for the Boston Post, he got it more accurate and correct than most, including the NY Times, whose reporters have a chronic habit of fabricating stuff to support the COMINTERN, or to denigrate the Jews of Israel, or their fellow Americans. I remember how, when Bobby Kennedy was killed, all my liberal-left friends automatically collapsed into terrible rants about CIA conspiracies, or vented hatred at the Republicans. I was ignorant also, but was wise enough to keep my mouth shut about things I did not know. But in fact, as I learned later, it was the Muslim fanatics who killed Bobby Kennedy, while his brother, most people will forget, was killed by a dedicated Communist assassin.
Historical accuracy is important, if only to recognize similar patterns emerging, and to hence avoid repeating the bloody errors of the past.
J.D.
++++++++
http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=1&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=376&PID=0&IID=2165&TTL=Robert_Kennedy%27s_1948_Reports_from_Palestine
On the 40th Anniversary of His Assassination:
Robert Kennedy's 1948 Reports from Palestine
-----------------------------------------------------
If you find this material of value, please donate to OBRL:
http://www.orgonelab.org/donation
Or, purchase books on related subjects from our on-line bookstore:
http://www.naturalenergyworks.net
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml]
