We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
“This is my open letter to the Great Satan America.
You may ask, why do I hate America and fight against it? I answer, because America is the propogator of all the evil in the world and you worship only Jewish Usury and Krispy-Kreme Donuts. What kind of a culture is that? Only America sends coach-parties of Senior Citizens to desecrate and despoil our Holy Lands. I can but weep for despair amidst an ocean of Land’s End polo shirts and stretch pants. Is there no end to your cruelty, America?
Until now, I have been content with making rude gestures to them behind their backs and grossly overcharging them for bogus relics and bottled water. But no more can I suffer these indignities. Now is the time to act.
I now declare endless jihad on the Great Satan but, you have one last chance, America, to avoid this eternal war which will lead to your destruction, by agreeing to meet my demands:
1. Bill Clinton is not black and he must get over it.
2. Britney Spears must perform her next music video wearing chador
3. Do something about Michael Jackson. Now!
4. It is time for Barbra Streisand to retire. Nothing worth so much as a camel-dropping has come out of that woman’s mouth since ‘Funny Girl’
5. You must arrange a guest starring role for me on ‘The Simpsons’
6. Please tell Al Gore to shut the f*ck up about the Florida recount. He lost! Enough whining already.
7. You must immediately refund the sum of $275 that was outrageously stolen from my cousin, Musal, by a Jew-inspired tax audit of his dry cleaning business in Chicago.
Unless you accede to all of my demands, America, then I will be all over you like a cheap burqa. You will know no respite from me. I will haunt you both by day and by night. I will take the women from your homesteads, the cattle from your farmsteads and the knobs from your bedsteads.
You have been warned, Infidel.
Osama”
According to Ros Coward of the Wanker, we should be grateful to the Islamic rioters in Nigeria for reminding us of our shortcomings and just how far we have strayed from acceptable civilised standards:
“What an irony that fundamentalist Muslims managed to do what feminism ultimately failed to do: make Miss World a global political issue. As contestants flee to London, and Nigeria counts its dead, it is almost impossible to retain the idea that an annual parade of female flesh is just an innocent quest for universal beauty acceptable to all reasonable people.”
Of course! (Slap to the forehead) I should have realised that ‘Miss World’ is a deeply symbolic manifestation of class and gender struggle; the very antithesis of the dialectic rationale for the liberation of..er..something or other.
“In the west, the contest became as naff as bingo. It was feminism that represented modernity.”
That’s funny, I thought things like the silicon chip and the space shuttle represented modernity.
“Last year’s winner, Miss Nigeria herself pointed out that she is “the first black African woman to win”, because, for all its multiculturalism, the winners from black countries remained resolutely pale.”
That’s right, they weren’t ‘black’ enough. They were the wrong sort of ‘black’. In fact, they were all Uncle Toms still grovelling to ‘de White Massa.’
“How was this circus of womanhood going to respond to an issue of global political concern for women: the sentencing of Amina Lawal to death by stoning for adultery? Even a bunch of brainless bimbos would have found this a problem, but our post-feminist intellectual beauty queens couldn’t avoid it.”
‘Brainless bimbos’? Excuse me, but isn’t that a rather pejorative, sexist remark? Hate speech, in fact?
“The riots in Nigeria were ultimately triggered, not by the contest itself but by a piece in a local paper claiming the prophet himself might have chosen a wife from these beauties.”
If only all newspapers could be as sensitive as the ‘Wanker’ then surely there would be world peace!
“This is the same cultural naivety exposed by the bombing of the Sari club in Bali. The consolation some clubbers exchanged after the outrage betrays this same sense that the world is a playground where the true human (western) values can be paraded. Because no harm is meant, no offence should be taken. One clubber mourned the passing of the club on a website, saying “it was the United Nations of decadence” without any sense that this is what made it a target.”
Translation: the victims of the Bali bomb got what deserved and deserved what they got. They should have shrouded themselves in self-effacement and sensitivity. Instead they recklessly taunted and tortured those poor Islamic terrorists until they could tolerate it no more. They are the real victims.
“Now the reluctance to attack representatives of western values has disappeared even among those with no involvement in extremist organisations.”
And, let’s face it, in that extremist organisation known as the ‘Wanker’, that reluctance never existed in the first place.
“In such a world we should think carefully about what values we want to parade. Democracy, equality and tolerance certainly. But a beauty contest?”
We must abandon our sinful ways and foreswear all this drinking, dancing, laughing, carousing, loving and generally celebrating our lives. It’s unseemly; it’s uncivilised; it’s dangerous, dammit. We must aspire to the true hallmarks of civilised behaviour, like wearing sensible shoes, cross-referencing files in the Department of Social Security, exchanging Outreach Initiatives and discussing gender politics over an organic vegetable curry in a ‘Fair Trade’ workers co-operative canteen. That is the zenith of Western civilisation and it behoves us well to aspire to nothing more than that.
In order to survive we must be boring, po-faced, monochromatic, insecure, shot through with crippling guilt and terminally earnest. Just like…well, just like Ros Coward I should imagine.
Would somebody please send a message to Al-Qaeda to the effect that the editorial staff at the ‘Wanker’ are planning to sponsor a Naked Lesbian Dance Collective in Mecca. With a bit of luck, they’ll be next on the hit-list.
In response to rioting by Muslims in Nigeria which has left over a 100 people dead, the organisers of Miss World have hastily arranged for the whole competition to be moved to Britain.
Rumour has it that the international beauty pageant will resume in Finsbury Park
Jacob Resler wonders what would have happend to Britain in World War II if the United States had taken an ‘even handed’ approach between the UK and Nazi Germany.
The British Government has imposed a de facto embargo on the supply of defence related items to Israel. A spokesman of the Israeli Defence Ministry by the name of Mr. Kuti Mor confirmed this in an interview. There were 130 items that the Ministry of Defence whished to purchase from British suppliers, but an export permit has been denied by Britain. British officials said it was their policy not to send military supplies to zones of conflict though they never openly declared an embargo. Most of the items were spare parts, and two of them have been cited as examples: one is a pyrotechnic charge needed to eject the pilot from Phantom fighter planes in emergencies; the other is a small engine used in unmanned aircraft (drones).
It seems Britain’s government idea is that the best way to fight terrorism is to punish its victims. In this Britain fits very well in the EU, it behaves exactely like France, Belgium or Germany. (I could not think of a worse curse). Interesting what would have happened in both World Wars if the US had adopted a policy of not sending supplies to zones of conflict. I think this piece of idiocy needs to be more exposed to the public.
Jacob Resler
Donald Rumsfeld listed Saddam’s available options in an interview with a reporter from El Mercurio, a Chilean newspaper:
“That’s a possibility. A number of leaders of countries have decided they were in a corner and they had no choice and, rather than have a conflict in their country, or rather than have their family and friends killed, that they will leave. So, that is a possibility.
Another possibility is that he will try to do what he has done repeatedly before: to lie, and to pretend-as he is already saying-that they do not have weapons of mass destruction and see how long he can fool the inspectors.
Another possibility would be simply to say, “Fair enough. We’ve got them, and you can come in and we will destroy them and life will go on.” And try to stay in office that way. Try to keep his regime intact that way. Which of those three courses of action he will end up taking I think is probably a function of how the world behaves as much as how he behaves.
If there is a determination and a steadiness of purpose, so that the countries of the world and the United Nations demonstrate to him that he really does not have a lot of choices; he does not have the choice of not disarming.”
Donald missed one, and it’s the one I’m starting to believe is the one which will actually happen.
Let’s think in medieval terms. Why would a King or Warlord arrange for his family and favorite courtiers to be sent out the backdoor of the castle? Why would he pay large sums of money to another Kingdom to ensure their safety?
Saddam knows he is going to lose. He is going to go down fighting.
He will use everything he has. Saddam expects to die and will go down shooting. Whatever you may think of him, Saddam is no soft bureaucrat. He killed his first man when he was in his teens or early twenties. He knows how to handle military weapons.
I suggest he is following a twofold strategy. First and foremost he is trying to buy time. He hopes he can pull off a fudge once again but doesn’t really believe it is going to work this time. He is using the time he buys to prepare for his final battle.
If he has made the Roman-like decision “to die well”, he has a number of options open to him. He might try hitting US forces or local allies first. Suicidal? Yes, but he might think it his best chance for inflicting casualties on us. Even if the kill ratio is badly against him he could think it a good idea to grab the initiative. We know high casualties don’t bother him much: just look to the Iran-Iraq war for proof.
There could be secret operations going on right now to deploy his nasties for the last “glorious” stand. He’ll take down half the population of Iraq if it will take more american soldiers with him. If he has bio and chem, they will be released not only in the desert. He will use them in urban battles, even in heavily populated areas. If he has nukes, he will have them pre-positioned with orders to set them off when defeat is imminent. His Fedaheen will certainly be prepared to die with and for him as they cannot expect to long survive his passing.
I assume the US military has already worked through this scenario and has plans to minimize it. They most likely have contingency plans for quickly regaining initiative if Saddam strikes first.
Make no mistake. We are dealing with someone fully capable of making a last glorious stand his statement for the history books. In his mind it’s the chance for the Persians to play the Spartans with him in the starring Leonidas role.
This game has no rules… and no limits.
A few days ago I wrote about my anger at Arabic translators being kicked out of the military. It seems I am not alone in my condemnation.
I don’t know who Johnathan Galt is but his name has a certain resonance round these here parts for reasons which don’t need a great deal of explanation.
I do know that he has a website that contains a number of video clips which most certainly look and sound authentic. (You will need some sort of reliable media-playing software to view).
Of particular interest is the footage of a man called Abu Hamza who preaches at the Finsbury Park Mosque situated but a few miles from where I live. According to Mr.Hamza, ‘kuffirs’ (er, that’s us, gentle readers) are fair game for robbery, enslavement and murder. Charming.
Jack Bell makes a timeless point and leads many at Samizdata.net wonder if not just Iran but some Western societies are not well overdue for Jefferson’s prescription.
Reason has an editorial everyone should read. It discusses the story of Dr. Hashem Aghajari who is facing a death sentence in Iran because he called for secular and religious reform. He has turned down a negotiated appeal with the religious courts of Iran because, as Dr. Aghajari says
“… those who have issued this verdict have to implement it if they think it is right or else the Judiciary has to handle it.”
Basically he is willing to die to make his point.
In these days of jihad where our focus is on the religious fanatics and their facist fellow travellers, it is good for us to know that there are also those in the Middle East who share our belief in the rights and dignity of man and the liberty of the individual. In freedom from religous and secular tyranny. Share it strongly enough to pay the same ultimate price as was once paid here in America to secure those very rights for us.
I wonder how many of us will be standing up for the count in a decade or so if (when) the apparatus of protection we are so busy erecting is used for darker purposes? Personally I think Thomas Jefferson said it best:
“What country before ever existed a century & a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.”
Jack Bell
Medact, the British affiliate of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, released a paper on Tuesday which predicts that an invasion of Iraq could lead to a ‘human catastrophe’. The document is called Collateral Damage: The Health and Environmental Costs of War on Iraq.
Environmental Costs? Environmental Costs? These people are talking about the environmental costs of removing the man who ordered the systematic torching of all of Kuwait’s oil fields from power. I have some news for you, guys… there is already a ‘human catastrophe’ in Iraq. Killing Saddam Hussain and exterminating Ba’athism and its supporters is the only way that will ever end.
It is interesting that the ‘International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War’ think the best way to do that is to leave Saddam Hussain alone long enough that he can develop or acquire nuclear weapons of his own. One must remember that these are the same people who wanted the Soviet Union and NATO to disarm… but of course the West should do it first.
I will start taking these apologists for mass murdering tyranny seriously when they publish a paper called “Willful Murder: The Health and Environmental Costs of having a Socialist Dictator in Iraq”.
I have been of the opinion that Saddam Hussein will say ‘yes’ to the latest UN resolution, based on his opportunity to simply buy time and to exploit the rifts in Western opinion and short-and-shallow attention span of the Western public. I was not surprised by the Iraqi parliament’s ‘defiance’ since Saddam is the top man anyway. But Salam has more to say about it all: Nobody inside Iraq even bothered to tune in to hear what the parliamentarians had to say, while Al-Jazeera thought it was worth live coverage. But the Iraqi government did make it worth while for them. Who would have thought that they would reject the resolution? My money was on the Iraqi Parliament accepting the resolution and Saddam reluctantly giving the OK because that was the “will of his people”. Now I am very interested in the speech he will make to “justify” the acceptance of the UN resolution despite the recommendation of the Iraqi Parliament. (not that he has to justify anything or listen to recommendations, but since the whole thing was public he will make his views known, he likes to give speeches).
I may share Salam’s opinion but I can only imagine what it is like to be there:
As much as I find the resolution unfair, provocative, unrealistic in it’s demands and timeline, vague enough to allow for all sorts of traps I hope saddam does accept the resolution. Only to buy us time. It is a lose-lose situation for the Iraqi people no matter how you look at it. The USA is still talking of regime change, I think Iraq will not go past the first 30 days before the USA shouts “foul”. And in a case of war I do believe that if saddam has any biological or chemical weapons he is very likely to use them on his own people to give the CNN and Jazeera the bloody images everyone doesn’t want to see.
It’s not just a question of whether it is right or wrong to fight war with Saddam. The blogosphere has been throbbing with arguments for and against. On this blog we know which course of action to defend. So far the Big Picture, that we are used to seeing both in current affairs and history, rarely includes the individual (usually he is the one driving it, often by means of oppression and violence). Salam’s lone voice reminds me of millions of human tragedies that do not get played out on the world stage.
The blogosphere may be one way of redressing the balance. Reading Salam’s interpretation of events has had a tremendous impact on my understanding of reality of the war on Iraq. I cannot conceive of such information originating from the traditional media. Not only because I do not have faith in their abilities and motivation, but simply because they have not been designed to fulfil such role. They correspond to the Big Picture view of the world, together with historical analyses, diplomatic discourse and political decisions. The media claims of unbiased reporting and enlightenment through controversy ring hollow as there is a mismatch between their explicit role and understanding of their own limitations.
So Salam’s blog is important, not only in the context of the current international events. For now, I just hope that individual voices will become audible more and more.
For me, the highlight of last weekend’s Libertarian Conference in London was the after-dinner talk delivered by Richard Miniter.
Richard is one of those people who has a resume so chocked full of impressive achievements that it leaves one wondering how he manages to fit it all into one life. As well as being an award-winning business journalist he is also an expert on security matters and will shortly be publishing a book on America’s terror war with Al-Qaeda.
He is currently a Senior Fellow at the Centre for the New Europe.
His presentation was utterly captivating, not just because of the breadth and depth of his knowledge but also due to his style of delivery which makes every person in the room feel as if he is talking to them personally. During the hour that he spoke, I heard not one cough, nor saw one fidget, nor even one yawn stifled.
So fascinating and important were Richard’s insights that they are worth replication here, if only in a précised form. There is no way I can do the presentation full justice, nor replicate it in its entirety. I was far too interested in what was being said to bother with the distracting and unseemly practice of taking notes.
→ Continue reading: Miniter’s World
Putin really laid into the EU and reporters about his handling of Chechnya. He’s certainly got a clear idea of what it is he is fighting.
I’d say Russian and American interests are being driven ever closer together at the same time both are diverging from the EU. This is definitely one of the developing features of the geopolitical landscape to watch closely.
It could well be the defining global political feature of the 21st Century.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
