RUTHFULLY YOURS

“I believe in Jesus Christ who died on the cross for the sins of mankind. What did your Prophet Mohammed ever do to save mankind?” — Asia Bibi, the words for which she is on death row, for “blasphemy.”

Mobs attacking blasphemy victims in Pakistan know that nothing will happen to them.

According to a recent report, “Blasphemy Laws in Pakistan” published by the Center for Research and Security Studies, 247 blasphemy cases were registered between 1987 and 2012; 52 of the people involved were killed extrajudicially.

The history of Pakistan is filled with hatred and intolerance toward the people who raise their voices against the blasphemy laws: Salman Taseer, the former governor of Punjab Province, and Shahbaz Bhatti, the federal Minister of Minority Affairs, were murdered for supporting Asia Bibi and protesting the blasphemy laws.

For the first time since her arrest in 2009, Asia Bibi saw a sign of hope on July 22, when the Supreme Court of Pakistan gave her permission to appeal the death sentence she was served twice: first by the High Court in 2010 and again in 2014. She is, however, still waiting for justice.

Asia Bibi, 50, and a mother of five, was accused of blasphemy in June 2009 by her coworkers in a dispute over bowl of water. They told her that, as she is a Christian, she could not drink water from the same bowl as they were. The argument that ensued led to an angry mob assaulting her, and her arrest on the charge of “blasphemy” — that she allegedly had uttered derogatory remarks about the Islamic Prophet Mohammad.

Bibi became the first woman to be sentenced to death for blasphemy in Pakistan. Since her arrest, her family has also faced threats which have forced them to move to an undisclosed location.

Bibi was charged with violating section 295-C of Pakistan’s Penal Code, which states:

“Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to a fine.”

The words that Asia Bibi said to her coworkers, in response to their remarks against her, were: “I believe in Jesus Christ who died on the cross for the sins of mankind. What did your Prophet Mohammed ever do to save mankind?”

If you have entered a major sports stadium recently it will have been only after a bag search and, possibly, a body scan at the turnstiles — one example of the way in which the freedoms and safety we once took for granted are being inhibited. The only response is to speak frankly about the reason why.
In his excellent Quadrant essay, “Weaponising Our Weaknesses”, Edwin Dyga detailed the peril faced by Western civilisation and the maladies rendering us all but incapable of mounting a credible defence in the interests of its survival. That article identified the disease and outlined the dire prognosis if left untreated. What follows are the obvious and clinical steps which logic says governments must be encouraged to adopt as the most efficacious remedy.

The first and fundamental requirement is the changing of prevailing attitudes and the language that goes with it. Political correctness must be banished. The legal and moral acceptability of any view or opinion is to be determined solely by its veracity, irrespective of the way it is subjectively perceived by any group or individual. The only restriction on freedom of expression must be that which prohibits the expression of actual and outright hate and which advocates violence, as distinct from mere criticism or disapproval. Laws contrary to the letter or spirit of this determination — Section 18C, for starters – must be abolished. Our Western traditions take as a given that democratically elected governments will be champions of free and unfettered speech. Any hedged or qualified restriction on what can be said, written or broadcast betrays all those who, in many cases, gave their lives to win for all who came after the liberty of candour.

Next, with absolute confidence in the protection of the law and authorities, we must actually dare to say what we think. If, for example, you find the veiling of young girls an insult to our traditions of female emancipation, being told that such observations are “offensive” or, that universal catchall, “inappropriate”, cannot be accepted as a valid defence of repugnant cultural practices. Let those at the pointy end respond to such criticism on its merits or otherwise. Yes, harsh opinions expressed openly can be upsetting, but those that are suppressed fester and burst like toxic abscesses.

In daring to say what we know to be true, we must openly acknowledge and decisively proclaim that our civilisation, based on Judeo-Christian principles, is under mortal threat from Islam. It must be proclaimed, and proclaimed unambiguously, that we are determined to maintain our culture and customs and, further, that we firmly oppose all attempts, open and surreptitious alike, to change them. The inevitable objections by Muslim leaders and non-Muslim “progressives” is to be firmly and confidently countered by the wealth and breadth of empiric evidence, starting with Islamic scriptures’ assertion that the faith of Allah is divinely destined to rule the world. We must not be deterred by spurious accusations of racism and Islamophobia. Only the facts must matter. The inconvenient ones can no longer be swept under the rug in order to placate the habitually offended.

Imagine being a pro-coal activist — or a climate sceptic, for that matter — and enjoying open access to Australia’s schools. Inconceivable, right? But if you’re pushing Oxfam’s green myths and downright lies, there is a welcome mat outside very nearly every classroom.
Officially-encouraged child abuse involves greens’ lobbyists brainwashing primary and secondary-school kids. A leading lobbyist is Oxfam Australia, gearing up for a renewed assault this month on our idealistic and gullible schoolchildren.

Oxfam this Term 4 is pushing “Hunger Banquets” for kids — “a fun, eye-opening (and mouth-watering!) interactive and experiential learning event centred on the issue of global hunger: and particularly food insecurity resulting from climate change.”[1] Principals, teachers and their unions have put out the welcome mat[2] for Oxfam’s zealots and their green-drenched propaganda.[3] As Oxfam says, “The Hunger Banquets project is mapped to the Australian Curriculum (AC) cross-curricular priority of Sustainability. It is also accompanied by a whole heap of classroom resources, linked to AC Geography Yr 9, AC English Yrs 7-10, and AC Health.”

Oxfam Australia, the $110 million local arm of the global $A1.5 billion international charity behemoth, will “help you [teachers] bring social justice into the classroom.”

“Social justice” includes Oxfam exhorting kids’ pocket money into its own coffers:

“Hunger Banquet money box: Download our moneybox template if you’re asking Hunger Banquet participants for a gold coin donation or raising money for Oxfam’s work in other ways. Handy tip: Sticking your printout onto a manila folder or old cereal box will make your moneybox more sturdy.”

It matters not that half our kids’ parents are conservative voters. There is no push-back from conservative politicians: parents have to suck it up. Moreover, Oxfam is hardly the sole green-left-socialist indoctrinator with entrée to classrooms. Come on in, Greenpeace, plus the Australian Conservation Foundation, Youth Climate Coalition, GetUp, teams of Al Gore’s indoctrinators, the Australian Academy of Science, World Wildlife Fund, Cool Australia– each and every one promoting and cross-promoting[4] students with activist urgings. I asked a Liberal Party tactician what the party could do about all the brainwashed future greens voters emerging from high schools, and he said he had no idea.

Oxfam also throws its weight behind the cross-gender-promoting and Marxist-inspired Safe Schools indoctrination, mandated in Victoria by CFMEUpuppet premier, Dan Andrews. Oxfam says,

We are proud to stand in solidarity with, and state our support for, Safe Schools Coalition Australia … as an ally in working towards a world that is more just, peaceful, harmonious and fair.”

No kid is too young to escape the Oxfam net. Oxfam wants to saturate schools at class-, year- and whole-of-school level, pegging “hunger banquets” in particular to World Food Day , October 16.[5] Oxfam’s Hunger Banquets involve kids sorting themselves into high, medium and low-income groups, corresponding to global regions. Most kids get only a cup of rice and water for the lunch, but the small group of First Worlders win a tummy-filling three courses that includes Italian pasta. Point made. Except that the point is a bucketful of Oxfam bull faeces: “Hungry for a fair climate? Climate change is the single biggest threat in the global fight against hunger.”

LONDON—Britain’s government should do more to resettle Syrian refugees and strengthen border controls to clamp down on the smuggling of migrants, an influential committee of U.K. lawmakers said in a report to be published Wednesday.

The cross-party panel also criticized the European Union’s handling of the migrant crisis, saying the EU failed to anticipate and tackle the crisis and has done “too little, too late,” according to an advanced copy of the report by the Home Affairs Committee, which examines the U.K.’s interior ministry.

“Europe’s efforts to address this colossal refugee crisis has been lamentable,” said Keith Vaz, a member of the opposition Labour Party, who heads the panel. While it has no formal powers to compel the government to act, the committee’s high-profile role can shape political debate.

In the U.K., committees comprising lawmakers publicly scrutinize the workings of different government departments, providing oversight and advice.

The report’s publication follows the U.K.’s June vote to leave the EU. Polls showed unease about the rise of immigration played a big part in the referendum result. Despite these concerns, Mr. Vaz said it was imperative that the new British government stick to a commitment by former Prime Minister David Cameron to house 20,000 Syrians by 2020 as part of a program to relocate refugees from camps to the U.K. Mr. Cameron had wanted the U.K. to stay in the EU and resigned after the referendum. He was succeeded by Theresa May.

According to the report, approximately 1,602 Syrian refugees have been processed under the program since Mr. Cameron made the pledge in September. Most have been resettled in Scotland and northern England. CONTINUE AT SITE

Who do you think made the following statement on X Radio?

She does not want France to become Muslim. There is a massive Arab-Muslim invasion. If we want to maintain our cohesion and cultural harmony, we have to make a new balance in immigration. With regard to radical Islam: “I want the Salafist mosques closed and demolished! We have a problem with the organization of Islam in France.

She is against the full facial veil, “walking advertisement for radical Islam.” Veiled women should be punished by law and deprived of their civic and social rights.

You’ll find the answer at the end of this update.*

I am an optimist because I believe in reality. No matter how hard people try to deny it, reality sticks to its guns. It won’t vanish. It keeps popping up and sooner or later they have to deal with it. That’s what will happen.

No, I don’t think the world is coming to an end. I don’t think Europe is finished. We received a report on two Polish experts that raised an alert on the imminent collapse of European civilization. My father z”l was born in Przemysl (near Lvov). His family left Poland in the early years of the 20th century. Those that stayed behind were, with rare exceptions, exterminated. If Europe didn’t end then, it might just as well stay on for the next session of the adventured-packed film, known simply as The World.

BFM TV covered the entire funeral service in the Rouen Cathedral for the slaughtered priest Jacques Hamel. A majestic, moving, carefully orchestrated ritual. I don’t think I have ever attended a Mass or seen one in its entirety. In their modest eulogies the priest’s sister and niece brought to life his down to earth warmth and decency. Hamel’s sister related two stories about her brother’s military service in Algeria. He chose to remain a simple soldier, refusing to accept a promotion to officer because he did not want to be in a situation where he would have to order the soldiers under his command to kill. On one occasion, he was the sole survivor of a “shooting” [Were they ambushed or had they gone into battle?] He asked why, why was I the sole survivor? And for his sister the answer is now, standing before us, the simple wooden coffin covered with a white chasuble and red scarf of martyrdom. Why did he survive? [To have his throat slit by an allahu akhbar neighbor?] To testify by his martyrdom to Christ’s sacrifice?

At a time when Muslims all around the world are terrorizing and slaughtering non-Muslims in the name of Islam, Pope Francis, the head of the Catholic Church, continues trying to distance Islam from violence.

Last Sunday a journalist asked him about the recent and “barbarous assassination of Fr. Jacques Hamel” in France, and how the priest was clearly “killed in the name of Islam.” To this Francis

replied that he doesn’t like speaking about Islamic violence because there is plenty of Christian violence as well… [He] said that every day when he browses the newspapers, he sees violence in Italy perpetrated by Christians: “this one who has murdered his girlfriend, another who has murdered the mother-in-law… and these are baptized Catholics! There are violent Catholics! If I speak of Islamic violence, I must speak of Catholic violence. And no, not all Muslims are violent, not all Catholics are violent. It is like a fruit salad; there’s everything.”

Is the Pope really that dense? Is he incapable of distinguishing between violence committed in the name of a religion, and violence committed in contradiction of a religion?

Yes, Catholics—and people of all religions, sects, creeds—commit violence. That is because humans are prone to violence (or, to use Christian language that some—maybe not Francis—might understand, humans are fallen creatures). And yes, the Catholics that Francis’ cites do not commit crimes—murdering girlfriends and mother-in-law—because of any teaching contained in Christianity or Catholicism; on the contrary, Christian teachings of mercy and forgiveness are meant to counter such impulses.

On the other hand, the violence that Muslims are committing around the world—the beheadings, the sex slavery, the church burnings—are indeed contained in and a product of Islam, and they have been from day one.

Francis continued offering half-truths in the interview. After he acknowledged that there are “violent persons of this religion [Islam],” he immediately added that “in pretty much every religion there is always a small group of fundamentalists. Fundamentalists. We have them.”

This is another sloppy generalization. Sure, “in pretty much every religion there is always a small group of fundamentalists,” but that which is “fundamental” to them widely differs. One may say that Muslim and Christian fundamentalists adhere to a literalist/strict reading of their scriptures. While that statement may be true, left unsaid by those who think the issue is settled right there is: what do the Bible and Koran actually teach?

Pope Francis spoke to reporters on board the papal plane again — and that never leads to anything good. His latest comments about Islamic terrorism were doubleplusungood.

Via NBC News:

Pope Francis said he doesn’t like singling out violence carried out by Muslims because people of all religions are guilty of deadly crimes.

He told reporters the situation was like “a mixed fruit salad” and that there were “violent people in all religions.”

“I do not like to talk about Islamic violence because every day when I skim the papers … I read about violence in Italy: this one who killed the girlfriend, another killed the mother-in-law … and they are all baptized Catholics,” he said aboard a Rome-bound flight from Poland on Sunday.

“If I talk about Islamic violence, then I also have to talk of Catholic violence. Not all Muslims are violent, just like not all Catholics are violent,” the pontiff added. “It’s like a mixed fruit salad. There is a bit of everything. There are violent people in all religions.”

Yes, the pope just compared domestic violence to Islamic terror — as if a Catholic dirtbag murdering his girlfriend is the same thing as an Islamic jihadist in a truck mowing down a hundred people watching fireworks in Nice. Or Islamic State jihadists beheading 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians in Libya. Or Kenyan jihadists killing 68 people at a shopping mall. Or an Islamic terrorist gunning down dozens of people at a Christmas party in San Bernardino or a gay nightclub in Orlando. I can go on and on, obviously, because Islamic terror attacks around the world happen on a daily basis. But you get the idea — murderous Catholic boyfriends may be bad, but the damage they do is limited to one or two people and their impact on society as a whole is minimal. Islamic jihad is a threat to us all.

But stop the presses — Pope Francis had another pearl of papal wisdom for us with the stunning revelation that there are violent people in all religions. Has anyone ever suggested otherwise? The problem is there is currently only one religion where a significant number of the faithful are finding justification for murder and mayhem against unbelievers in their sacred texts. Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi understands this and has called for a religious reformation of the Muslim faith. “We need to revolutionize our religion,” he proclaimed on News Year’s Day of 2015 to an audience of Muslim clerics and scholars.

We shouldn’t be surprised when an intractable ideologue like Barack Obama — the worst president in American history — ignores much-needed calls for the reform of Islam. And we’ve come to expect him to make morally and intellectually vacuous comparisons. But it is beyond disturbing to hear it coming from a pope.

The media and effete powers-that-be have been twisting themselves into Halal pretzels Islamsplainin’, rationalizing how a given Muslim terrorist attack isn’t really “Islamic” or isn’t significant. These contortions can become quite ridiculous, such as suggesting that recent Allahu Akbar-shouting Munich shooter Ali Sonboly might somehow have had “right-wing” motives because, among his violent passions, was an interest in Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik.

A more common (un)intellectual contortion is the minimizing tactic of claiming, as is politically correct authorities’ wont, that a given jihadist attacker “has no ties to IS” (the Islamic State), as if there’s nothing to see here if a man doesn’t provide notarized evidence of allegiance to the boogeyman du jour. Yet this is much as if we’d claimed during the Cold War that a Marxist terrorist attack wasn’t really a Marxist™ terrorist attack because we couldn’t find a connection to the Soviet Union. The issue and problem wasn’t primarily the Soviet Union but communism (Marxism birthed the USSR, not the other way around), an evil ideology that wreaks havoc wherever it takes hold. Likewise, the IS didn’t birth Islam; Islam birthed the IS.

Nonetheless, moderns will often use the misdirection of focusing inordinately on national or group associations when discussing terrorism. This is a dodge, one designed to help us avoid uncomfortable truths, and which relegates us to playing an eternal game of whack-a-mole. The USSR is gone but communism is still a problem (witness North Korea and Cuba), and insofar as it’s less of a threat, it’s largely because its ideas have been discredited. Bad ideas’ standard bearers will change. But as long as the bad ideas remain tolerated and credible, they’ll always win converts.

In fact, the reality that today’s terrorists are diverse makes the point. They may be Iranian, Afghani, American, Albanian, German or from any nation whatsoever; they may be part of Hamas, IS, al Qaeda, the U.S. Army (Maj. Hassan), some other organization or no organization; they may be of any race or ethnicity, be rich or poor, and male or (occasionally) female. They only have one truly common thread: being Muslim.

The point is that, ultimately, this is a battle not of nations or organizations but of ideas, and ideas are powerful. Beliefs matter. Every action begins with a thought — or, at least, with a reflex response reflecting a worldview that has shaped one’s thoughts and emotions.

Jihadis, trained and armed by Pakistan, are purging Kashmir of its native Hindu and Sikh population, and waging a terrorist campaign to carve out a separate Islamic country in that part of India.

What New York Times did not say is that these ‘boys with guns’ are members of Hizbul Mujahideen, a group designated as terrorist organisation by both the European Union and the United States.

After being at the forefront of gun control campaign in U.S. for decades, the New York Times finally supports ‘open carry’ – but only for terrorists waging Jihad against “infidels”.

India is not ‘occupying’ Kashmir, which is already part of India. India is waging a war against Islamic terrorism which has claimed the lives of more than 4,800 Indian civilians and more than 2400 Indian security personnel.

The mainstream media, quick to blame India for the ongoing unrest, will not tell its readers how the province of Kashmir became the Islamist hellhole that it is today.

The minarets of the mosques, reserved in times of peace for prayer calls, were proclaiming armed jihad against Hindus in towns and cities across the province. Kashmiri Hindus were given three option; either to convert to Islam, leave their ancestral homes, or face certain death.

“We order you to leave Kashmir immediately, otherwise your children will be harmed — we are not scaring you but this land is only for Muslims, and is the land of Allah. Sikhs and Hindus cannot stay here. If you do not obey, we will start with your children”. – Notice to Hindu Sikhs in Kashmir

In an ultimate act of humiliation, Hindu men were told to move out of Kashmir without taking their property or women.

Arming the police with BB guns — regardless to how dangerous the BBC or the New York Times editorial staff might consider them — is not going to put an end the aspiration of turning Kashmir into another ‘Islamic State’.

Indian security forces are again waging pitched battles with violent Islamists on the streets of the Muslim-majority province of Kashmir. Mobs began congregating in towns on July 9, after the customary Friday prayers to protest the killing the previous day by Indian security forces of a prominent Islamic terrorist, Burhan Wani. The protestors waved black ISIS flags and pelted stones at riot police. The riots have so far claimed 49 people, including 2 policeman.

UPDATE AUGUST 1

Why does it matter to get things straight, even seemingly small details? Why does it matter to say, again, that Abdelmalik Petitjean was not a flagged security risk when he got hired, through an interim employment agency, as a baggage handler at the Chambery airport? It was not a full-time job. He worked weekends. He was finishing his studies. It matters because he is not an example of flagrant negligence in the hiring of airport personnel; he’s an example of a nearly undetectable risk that was to all intents and purposes smoothly integrated into French society. He’s one more element of proof against the sociological argument about discrimination breeding resentment and sharpening the slaughterer’s knife. So, if you don’t think the free world will live or die on the toss of a coin, then you might agree that we are in the early stages of a process. And it matters how we present the facts. Democracies will learn, improve, and defend themselves. There is no reason for despair.

Abdelmalik Petitjean wasn’t an ex nihilo jihadist with nothing but the Net for inspiration His cousin, identified as 30 year-old Farid K., has been charged and imprisoned; preliminary investigations have concluded that he knew a murderous attack was imminent. Jean-Philippe J. a twenty year-old who had tried to reach the caliphate with Petitjean in June has also been charged and jailed.

Charitable Christianity

We didn’t get news this weekend, we got preached at: We will not answer hatred with hatred and violence with violence. They wish to divide us, we will stick closer together than ever. We always loved, respected, admired and hung out with our fellow men of the cloth. Now we are inseparable. The media surfed on giant waves of peace & love. We drowned in it, suffocated, strangled, choked and nothing could stop it. We were like geese stuffed to make foie gras. You would think the entire French population that would normally be reeling from an unending series of attacks and atrocities (I don’t have time or space to list the “minor” incidents that have occurred over the past month) has only one wish in its collective mind: Christian-Muslim communion. Correspondents stood in front of little churches, big mosques, majestic cathedrals, swooning over fraternity in the pulpit, in the congregation, on the doorsteps, and in the churchyards. Muslim and Christian spokesmen stood shoulder to shoulder, outdoing each other in interfaith devotion, overflowing with kindness in their hearts and in their places of worship. Some Catholic clergy went as far as merciful forgiveness for the executioners.

Methinks the lady doth protest too much. Turtle dove reporters cooed over the presence of “many” Muslims in the cathedral but the camera didn’t find the right angle to prove the point. A bit of truth slipped into an article in the Journal du Dimanche: the Christians at Ste. Thérèse Church in St. Etienne du Vouvray didn’t quite make it into the neighboring Yahya mosque for Friday prayers as planned. They were put off by “all those women in long black robes and the men with long beards.” The service was led by Abdellatif Hmito, the imam from Oissel, known for his eloquence in French, in the absence of the mosque’s regularly officiating imam, who does not speak French at all.

Adel Kermiche was the black sheep of a respectable family. His older sister is a surgeon, all his siblings have degrees and successful careers. His mother is a teacher. There has been no mention of a father. Though the family does not worship at the mosque, the mother sought help for her radicalized son. Mosque president, Mohammed Karabila, regrets that he had to curtail his deradicalization efforts because of a lack of subsidies.