RUTHFULLY YOURS

A few months ago I wrote a piece titled Putin’s moral clarity on radical Islam at the UN – Did I just say that? To be sure it was a bit of surrealism – just check out the title! Amongst many other inclusions, in the article I quoted Putin’s speech at the UN, during which he describes the dangers of ISIS and the poor results of US foreign policy in terms of various dangers emerging as a result of our (Obama’s) failed Middle East efforts. Well it’s time to look at how the Middle East, global events, and my predictions played out from when it was first posted.

Let’s recap what has transpired since I wrote that….Putin has control over Santa’s Village and the North Pole. His air force has invaded our sovereign air space – both the continental US territory, and our US Navy. He has turned part of Syria into a Russian outpost. Iran has enjoyed an influx of money, as European interests invest in that energy rich nation. The fine friendly folks of Tehran have advanced their missile capacity, and are continuing nuclear development, as well as other forms of advanced weapons. Iran’s proxies continue the strategy of death by a thousand cuts on Israel. Iran has outplayed Obama deftly, and is reaping the benefits without any sacrifice. ISIS is a global franchise holder with offices across the Western world preparing to attack at opportune moments – whether bringing an airliner down, or attacking public transportation centers or office buildings, ISIS has had significant success. It is destroying historic landmarks of incalculable value, raped and murdered children, slaughtered families, and embarked upon a policy of genocide against Christians that has gone largely unnoticed by Obama, and ignored by the media. The US military budget is being cut, and our capabilities degraded. Obama has put boots on the ground in Iraq while the media largely turn a blind eye. Palestine is getting away with atrocities against Israel – while the UN and team Obama, along with team Bernie continue providing political cover.

While Al Qaeda and its various franchisees still have influence, and pose a great threat in certain regions, not the least of which are Yemen, Eastern Africa, and parts of North Africa (you know, the places Obama and Hillary claimed were becoming democracies, and closer friends with the US), ISIS has emerged as a leading danger to the West and US, having infiltrated major global capitals, and inspired or carried out major attacks in historically important cities such as Paris and Brussels. Christians, Jews, (and Muslims who do not subscribe to the ISIS brand or dogma), have a target on them. Crucifixion has returned, and ISIS uses it deftly to warn adversaries, especially Christians, of their fate under the growing Caliphate in the region.

Putin and Prime Minister Netanyahu were, and are correct about the growing threats of ISIS – you know, the folks President Obama referred to in one speech as the “JV” and in another speech as “killers with good social media.” Putin revealed a clarity about a clear and present danger that Obama has yet to demonstrate, starting with the basics, like acknowledging or naming “radical Islam” as a problem, and identifying the terrorists, the various jihadist groups within the broader family of radicalized Moslems – ISIS, Al Qaeda, Boko haram, and AQIM and the list of subsidiaries and free agents of various permutations of fanatic terrorists worldwide.

Here is an excerpt from the article:

“Beyond a few glaringly obvious issues, like Russian influence in Iran, and criminal money laundering, nevertheless, Putin highlights important facts.

Yes Putin is calling us out. He has announced his role as global statesman, sheriff, and arbiter. Putin is telling us, Russia is back, and he will fill “the power vacuum. ” He is saying we are foolish to arm folks who are no more virtuous than the savages they are fighting.

We would be wise to reflect upon such foolishness since Obama became POTUS in terms of “‘the mythical moderate in the Middle East.’ It is Obama’s white whale. It truly is a fool’s errand. The Arab Spring, to which Putin refers, was a glaring example of this folly.”

Is there anyone with even half a brain unable to recognize when there is a power vacuum, someone will fill it – whether in the board room or world stage. Does anyone think Obama is a strong leader? His red lines in the sand are laughable. He negotiates so poorly that it would almost appear he is trying to disadvantage US interests (think the Iran deal). By comparison, and unhappily for those of us on Team USA, Putin is all too willing to fill the leadership void. And sadly he has become a sort of ‘go to guy,’ while simultaneously remaining bad boy public enemy number one for the US State Department and POTUS. One day Obama and Kerry are nearly pleading with Putin for assistance, and the next day are chastising Putin for coloring outside the lines. Putin is the school yard bully, the school yard big brother, energy czar, military threat, and agent provocateur on the global stage all in one. Putin is part spy, part killer, part politician, and part statesman – all likely how he would describe himself.

In Sweden’s third largest city, Malmö, the children of illegal migrants receive income support payments from the government, and the unemployment rate among foreign-born men aged 18-24 years is at 41%. In Sweden, those who do not have jobs receive generous welfare payments from the local authorities, and families in the country illegally have their rent paid by the taxpayers. It is an open invitation to more migrants to come to Sweden.

The Swedish establishment tells Swedes that the more immigrants come to Sweden, the richer Sweden will become — no matter which country these immigrants come from.

The Swedish establishment is characterized by incompetence combined with an extreme left-wing ideology and a hillbilly-like mentality that refuses to see the rest of the world and the risks involved in it. The Swedish establishment has not dealt with Sweden as if it were a country, but as if it were a village.

By gross miscalculations, the Swedish establishment has eroded its own legitimacy. Today, fewer than one in four Swedes have confidence in their government. Meanwhile, the Swedish media is a major threat to Sweden’s security today: it downplays the migration crisis with ridiculous arguments.

A major threat to Sweden’s security today is the Swedish journalistic establishment: it downplays the migration crisis with ridiculous arguments.

As migrants flooded into Sweden in December 2015, Fredrik Virtanen, a writer for Sweden’s largest newspaper, Aftonbladet, wrote an article entitled, “Have refugees forced you to buy worse red wine?” It is not really dangerous, Virtanen argues, that that Sweden was accepting 160,000 migrants; such migratory movements, he wrote, do not really impact anyone’s life.

The new constitution “will emphasize Islam and faith in Allah.” — Abdulkadir Selvi, pro-government columnist.

“We are a Muslim country. That is why we need a religious constitution,” said Ismail Kahraman, Speaker of Turkey’s Parliament. He lamented that, unlike in other Middle Eastern countries, the word Allah did not appear in the current version of the Turkish Constitution even once.

“The chaos in the Middle East is the result of politics instrumentalizing religion.” — Kemal Kilicdaroglu, leader of the opposition Republican People’s Party.

“One cannot be secular and Muslim at the same time.” — Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

The Speaker of the Parliament is no ordinary office in Turkey. The speaker comes second in the state protocol only after the president (and even before the prime minister). Such is the seat occupied since November by Ismail Kahraman, an MP from the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Along with Erdogan, former president Abdullah Gul and eight AKP heavyweights (mostly cabinet ministers) Kahraman comes from the ranks of the National Turkish Student Union (MTTB in its Turkish acronym). Another MTTB bigwig, Huseyin Velioglu, later formed what became the militant Islamist group, “Turkish Hizbullah.” Especially between 1965 and 1980 when a military coup administration dissolved it, the MTTB operated as the youth organization of Turkish political Islam. Kahraman, in late 1960s and early 1970s, was MTTB’s president.

Once, the left was for the rights of women, minorities and free speech. Now, as we await the next Islamist massacre, its purpose is to weave rationalisations and sophistries into the whole cloth of a dissembling drapery tailored to obscure the obvious.
In the aftermath of every latest Islamist assault on civil society, mainstream news coverage and commentary invariably follows the same path. First, after the initial horror, there is a restriction on language: one may speak of Islam or of terror, but not in the same breath. Break this rule and expect to be charged with Islamophobia at best, rank and racist bigotry at worst. Next, the death toll of the incident is balanced against the many alleged depredations of the West which, of course, is said to be the cause of all terrorism in the first place. For intellectual support, voices crying “Perspective! Perspective!” drift down from the ivory tower. Weeks after 9/11, a Melbourne University academic was conceding that, yes, it had been a jolly nasty sort of day, but such a fuss! Smart people like herself understood that bad hamburgers kill more people than terrorists. Always, amid the moral relativism and equivalence, we are the real monsters.

To put it in a nutshell, the left’s response to terror is an aggressive denial borne of a civilizational self-hatred. In the so-called ‘quality press’, a category that most certainly includes our publicly funded ABC, such sentiments are artfully portrayed — take the ubiquitous Waleed Aly, for example, who reacted to the bomb slaughter at Boston’s marathon by dismissing it as “an irritation” and positing that it was, most likely, the work of white rednecks.

Further downmarket, we encounter publications such as New Matilda, a digital scrapbook often mistaken for a news source, whose principal merit, if I can lend the word a measure of charity, is in its headlines. Even in the current depths of its dying days, Fairfax’s subs would never have been so gauche as to headline Aly’s effort with a bluntly accurate, ‘Terrorism: nothing to worry about (except if white men did it)’. New Matilda, by contrast, prefers language to match in bluntness the imbecility of the article below. It is an editorial style that exalts in a telling precision. For example, Sam Oldham’s response to last year’s atrocity in Paris was bannered, The Awful Truth About France: The Citizens are Innocent Victims. The State is Not. Not much doubt about who had it coming. I also recall John Salisbury’s personal essay reflecting on his march from Sydney to Canberra in support of Palestinian rights. Now, however, he is sparing the shoe leather: Why I Won’t Walk to Protest Against Islamic State.

Now that you have some idea of New Matilda’s editorial and foreign policies, consider Michael Brull’s recent column, The Truth About Modern Jihad: It’s Not Really About Religion. It is nonsense, but that is New Matilda‘s stock in trade when it rises above the sleazy. This is the “news” site that rifled Barry Spurr’s private emails and splashed the stolen details of a private scholarship awarded to Tony Abbott’s daughter — all trumpeted in “the public interest”, it goes without saying. Not that association with sleaze is an obstacle to membership and influence within the New Establishment. New Matilda’s publisher and editor, Chris Graham, is an “industry nominee” on the Press Council.