Wednesday, July 28, 2010

London Calling: Cameron, the perfidious Albian

If the idea is to collapse the EU by overloading it with Turkey, he's playing a very dangerous game -

The Worden Report: "Euroskeptics Urge Turkey’s Accession to the EU to Dilute “Ever Closer Union”?"

On his first visit to the Turkish capital since becoming prime minister in May, 2010, David Cameron of Britain likened France’s opposition to Turkey’s bid join the EU to the French veto of Britain’s bid to become part of the EEC in the 1960s. However, Britain and Turkey do not occupy the same situs with respect to Europe. Britain is in Europe, whereas only ten percent of Turkey is on the continent. Cameron pointed to Turkey’s role in NATO, particularly in the organization’s efforts in Afghanistan. However, Turkey has made it clear that it will not join EU sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program. In other words, Turkey does not have the same interests as do the states in Europe because Turkey is not in Europe.

To add a very large Middle Eastern state to a union of European states would compromise, and perhaps buckle, the EU. Already, the EU has struggled to make changes internally to accommodate its expansion to the east. Turkey’s very different culture and interests could render the EU impotent, given the amount of power still being exercised by the governments of its states. (...) >>>

Jul 28, 2010

Cameron, the progressive -

It was to be expected, but he's a disappointment nevertheless. He's also attacked Israel, calling Gaza 'a prison camp'. Yeah, run by Hamas -

Telegraph: "David Cameron urges European Union to drop 'prejudice' against Turkey"

In a speech in the Turkish capital of Ankara, he will tell of his "anger" that a country which is a member of the Nato coalition fighting in Afghanistan should be asked to: "guard the camp but not be allowed to sit inside the tent". He will claim that those who seek to block the incorporation of a Muslim nation into the 27-member EU are misguided and prejudiced. His words are likely to be construed as criticism of France and Germany, which both oppose the country's membership. (...) >>>

Jul 27, 2010

The Cameron cabinet -

BBC: "Cameron coalition: Full ministerial team to be named"

David Cameron is expected to complete his government team, as the coalition enters its third full day in power. More Liberal Democrat MPs are in line for jobs, in addition to their five cabinet posts and six middle-ranking ministerial roles. (...) >>>

May 14, 2010

Perhaps in relation to the preceding entry Accuracy in Media opine the Tories are actually a herd of RINOs. But it's true Europeans are historically less socially conservative than American Conservatives are. Yet, in view of the Dunn thing and the copying of Blair, one can't help hoping Cameron will drop the agenda real soon. (Although that would put him on a par with the Obama deception). Meantime, the notorious British papers have taken a stance ... and there's a surprise -

Sky: "Newspapers Set Out Support To Sway Voters"

The newspapers are announcing their political allegiances in an attempt to sway voters ahead of the General Election. The traditionally Labour-supporting Guardian newspaper has switched to back the Liberal Democrats after a third poorly-received leaders' debate performance from Gordon Brown.
In an editorial entitled The Liberal Moment Has Come The Guardian said if it had a vote it would opt "enthusiastically" for Nick Clegg's party. But it said "under our discredited electoral system" readers in marginal constituencies should consider voting tactically for Labour if they wish to keep the Conservatives out. The Sunday Telegraph and The Times have endorsed the Conservatives. But Mr Cameron warned supporters that the election is still far from won. (...) >>>

Apr 30, 2010

Cultural Marxism infiltrates Tory Party - In the preceding post we posed the question, is David Cameron the UK's John McCain or is there still time for a pivot. Well, he's made one. Turns out he's taking his cues from Anita "Mao Tse" Dunn (Anita Dunn KeyWiki). No wonder he's ending up as a follower of Lucifer "community organizer" Alinsky -

Nourishing obscurity: "Apocalypse now", by James Higham

(...) Hung parliament, Brown still in charge, still promoting this sort of thing, all common sense departed from the land, Parliament stacked with Labour clones, Lib-Dem socialists, Tory socialists and a small rump of true conservatives in two parties plus some independents. The EU onslaught begins, the command and control.

People who fifteen years ago would have been called patriots, ordinary Brits going about their business, not thinking too much about politics – now they are taking to blogs, ranting and are being marginalized as racist, sexist, extremist, [in some cases religious] dinosaurs, the government seeing these people as dangerous subversives who need to be silenced. (...) >>>

Apr 4, 2010

To the archive >>>
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Thursday, July 1, 2010

Legal Jihad: a new waive of universal jurisdiction on the way

Hudson: "Anti-Israel "Lawfare" in Europe", by Soeren Kern

Pro-Palestinian activists are launching a new round of anti-Israel lawsuits in European courts. The lawsuits, which exploit the legal principle of universal jurisdiction, are being used to harass current and former Israeli political and military leaders, with the twin aims of tying Israel's hands against Palestinian terror and delegitimizing the Jewish state.

Although so far none of the lawsuits filed against Israel in European courts has reached the stage of a trial in which Israeli leaders have appeared before a foreign judge, even short of actual prosecutions, pro-Palestinian activists have scored huge propaganda victories by charging Israeli officials with war crimes. This alone makes the pursuit of frivolous universal jurisdiction lawsuits a winning proposition for many activist groups.

On June 23, two Belgian lawyers, representing Palestinians, filed suit in Belgium against 14 Israeli officials on charges of war crimes allegedly committed during the Gaza War, a three-week armed conflict that took place in the Gaza Strip during the winter of 2008–2009. Those charged include Israeli opposition leader Tzipi Livni for her role as foreign minister during the war, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai, and other Israeli military and intelligence officials. (...) >>>

Jul 1, 2010

Boring within, at the Dept. of Justice -

WSJ: "Gitmo's Indefensible Lawyers", by Debra Burlingame and Thomas Joscelyn

Legal counsel to some of the detainees went far beyond vigorous representation of their clients. Doesn't the public have a right to know?

(...) The attorney general has the right to select whomever he chooses to work in his department, and to set policy as he sees fit. He does not, however, have the right to do it in the dark. The policies he advances must face the scrutiny of the American people, his No. 1 client. The public has a right to know, for instance, that one of Mr. Holder's early political hires in the department's national security division was Jennifer Daskal, a former attorney for Human Rights Watch. Her work there centered on efforts to close Guantanamo Bay, shut down military commissions—which she calls "kangaroo courts"—and set detainees who cannot be tried in civilian courts free. She has written that freeing dangerous terrorists is an "assumption of risk" that we must take in order to cleanse the nation of Guantanamo's moral stain.

This suggests that Ms. Daskal, who serves on the Justice Department's Detainee Policy Task Force, is entirely in sync with Mr. Holder and a White House whose chief counterterrorism official (John Brennan) considers a 20% detainee recidivism rate "not that bad." It is entirely legitimate to ask who else among Mr. Holder's hires from the Gitmo bar is shaping or influencing national security policy decisions. Meanwhile, the public can decide whether the lawyers at Paul, Weiss who are volunteering at Guantanamo are an example of the legal profession's noblest traditions. We spoke to Ms. Mason's executive assistant on Friday seeking her comments. Multiple calls and emails had not been returned as this paper went to press last night. (...) >>>

Mar 15, 2010

Gordon Brown: "universal jurisdiction abused" - With former Foreign Minister Zipi Livni being unable to travel to Britain for fear of arrest on the basis of pomo law - so-called "universal jurisdiction", a legal concept that allows judges to issue warrants for anyone accused of committing war crimes anywhere in the world - PM Gordon Brown seems to have woken up to the fact this kind of hampers his foreign policy. Pro-Palestinian groups have abused the law to try to arrest former or retired Israeli officials, including Livni. Retired General Doron Almog narrowly dodged arrest at Heathrow airport in 2005 -

Telegraph: "Britain must protect foreign leaders from private arrest warrants", by Gordon Brown

In recent years the world has made huge progress in the way it acts against those suspected of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. Significantly, the United Nations has embraced our responsibility to intervene in countries where such atrocities are being committed. And the complement to this is the principle of universal jurisdiction, which allows for prosecution in any country of certain serious offences wherever and by whoever they were committed. (...) As we have seen, there is now significant danger of such a provision being exploited by politically-motivated organisations or individuals who set out only to grab headlines knowing their case has no realistic chance of a successful prosecution. (...)

There is a case now, therefore, for the evidential basis on which arrest warrants can be allowed to be tougher and for restricting the right to prosecute the narrow range of crimes falling under universal jurisdiction to the Crown Prosecution Service alone. (...) But by bringing the risk of arrest into closer alignment with the risk of prosecution, our system of universal jurisdiction can be stronger. For it would be clear that we only bring cases based on evidence of sufficient strength to convince the Director of Public Prosecutions that there is a credible case. With this approach, I am confident that an amendment on better enforcement of existing legislation will serve to enhance Britain's status in the eyes of international law, world opinion and history. (...) >>>

Mar 4, 2010

Icon for censorshipImage via Wikipedia
Middle East Forum: "Islamist Lawfare Defeated in Texas", by Daniel Huff

Libel suits are not normally associated with national security, but a case the Texas Supreme Court ruled on January 15 carries just such implications. The suit against internet journalist Joe Kaufman is a prime example of how libel law can be manipulated to stifle dissemination of information about terrorism and radical Islam. (...) This result is important for two reasons. (...) >>>

Feb. 1, 2010

Times Online: "Hamas using English law to demand arrest of Israeli leaders for war crimes" - Hat Tip: Tom Carew

The Islamist group Hamas is masterminding efforts to have senior Israeli leaders arrested for alleged war crimes when they visit European countries including Britain, a top Hamas official involved in the effort has told The Times. The claim comes amid continuing diplomatic fallout after a British arrest warrant was issued last week against Tzipi Livni, who served as Foreign Minister during Israel’s Gaza offensive last winter. (...) President Peres described the incident as “one of the greatest political mistakes” that Britain could have made and calling for the law to be changed. “Everything is based on ... a hostile majority public opinion,” he said last week. “The British promised they would fix this and it is time that they do so.” Gordon Brown and David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, have each expressed their concern and their opposition to the warrant. (...) >>>

Dec. 22, 2009

The transnational push for Islamophobicphobia ...


Christopher Hitchens warns us not to say anything negative about Islam, particularly since the UN is considering a resolution that will criminalize your opinions: (...) U.N. Resolution 62/154, on "Combating defamation of religions," actually seeks to extend protection not to humans but to opinions and to ideas, granting only the latter immunity from being "offended." The preamble is jam-packed with hypocrisies that are hardly even laughable, as in this delicious paragraph, stating that the U.N. General Assembly (...) "Islamophobia" is not a phobia at all-- it is a completely rational fear of an insane and irrational force that seems to be sweeping the world.

Being afraid of the so-called "religion of peace" after the innumerable acts of violence, terror and depravity committed in the name of Allah worldwide is not exaggerated; not inexplicable; and most certainly not illogical. Being afraid of Islam as it undermines freedom of speech and thought, as well as and other critical values of Western civilization, is far from a phobia--it is a natural response to the sad reality. What the UN (and the Islamic world) would like to mandate is a sort of meta-Islamophobia--an Islamophobicphobia, to be precise; or, as I would define it, " an exaggerated, usually inexplicable and illogical fear of mere criticism of Islam, as well as a pathological reluctance to hold it to account for the actions and behavior of its followers."
(...) >>>

Mar 5, 2009

WMD: "Universal Human Rights vs Islamic Human Rights"

Presented here is a comparison of the texts of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam. The two texts are presented side by side. There has been no attempt made to match declarations and both texts appear strictly according to the order in which they were originally published.
For an excellent and reasoned comparison of these two texts please read the article "Islamic Human Rights?" by Ohmyrus at Faith Freedom (...) >>>

Updated: 5th Aug. 2008

Front Page: "Tears for a Terrorist" (includes video material)

Pity Omar Khadr. That is the theme of a disinformation campaign being waged by lawyers for the Toronto-born al-Qaeda terrorist, imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay since 2002, when he killed an American soldier with a hand grenade. Designed to win Khadr’s release and to publically discredit the U.S.-run detention facility in Cuba, this campaign received a propaganda boost this week when Khadr’s lawyers released a misleadingly edited eight-minute video, itself part of a seven-hour interview conducted with Khadr in 2003 by Canadian intelligence interrogators, depicting him as a sympathetic victim. The video is indeed pathetic. (...) Unmentioned by his public advocates is that Khadr hails from Canada’s “first family of terrorism.” (...) the anti-American and “legal Left” – are determined to see Khadr as a victim of American injustice. (...) “a teenager begging for help and (...) interrogation that violates U.S. law and any international law concerning the rights of children,” Dixon claimed. Actually, you see nothing of the sort. So far from brutalizing him, Khadr’s interrogator repeatedly tries to calm and reassure the detainee. (...) In this environment, to portray Khadr as a victim of military child abuse is to distort the facts beyond recognition. (...) >>>

Updated: 18th July 2008

- Terror Finance Blog (Rachel Ehrenfeld, Darko Trifunovic)
- The Legal Project (protection of analysts from predatory lawsuits to silence free speech)


- "The Unholy Alliance"
- "In Defense of Liberty"
- "The Jihad Project"
- "The Balkan Caliphate"
- "Stop Islamization of Europe"
- "Eurabia"
- "Islamization=Apartheid"
- "Apostating Islam"
- "Muslims versus Sharia"

Archive: >>>
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]