Liberal Dhimmitude in Canada

The shallow, vacuous magazine cover that passes for a Prime Minister in Canada is supporting a bill introduced into Parliament by Iqra Khalid, a Muslim MP, to “condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination.”

Note that it is not Judo-phobia or Christiano-phobia or Hinduo-phobia, only Islamophobia. A phobia is an irrational fear. Islamophobia means an irrational fear of Islam. But since Islamic societies treat women like cattle, stone them to death, cut their heads off in public, enslave Christian girls and murder gays, it is hardly irrational to fear Islam.

Islamophobia is another fake word invented by the PC class to suppress criticism of Islam and to criminalize people who point out its deleterious effects on free societies.

Khalid was a member of the Muslim Student Association when she was at York University, an institution well known by its reputation for anti-Semitic student activities. A book handed out at York University in 2015 contained an edifying chapter on “Wife Disciplining”.  Some famous alumni of that Association include:

Canada’s most infamous terrorist, Ahmed Sayed Khadr, was radicalized while a part of the Muslim Student Association at the University of Ottawa.[1] Calgary suicide bomber Salma Ashrafi was the President of his Muslim Student Association.[2] Others such as Awso Peshdary, John Maguire, Khadar Khalib, Chiheb Esseghaier, Youssef Sakhir, Samir Halilovic, Zakria Habibi and Ferid Imam all had ties to the Muslim Student Association in Canada. (h/t TSEC)

Further interesting tidbits concerning Khalid reveal:

Ms Khalid is the daughter of Dr. Hafiz Khalid, a long-time associate of the ISNA and formerly a vocal supporter of Jamaat-e-Islami….
…The ISNA ‘Development Fund’ had its charitable status revoked for funding terrorism in 2013. The ultimate recipient of the money was the Jamaat-e-Islami, which is seen as the south Asian wing of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Toronto Star also reported on extensive fraud inside the ISNA whereby money for the poor was squandered.

Why is the Liberal Party of Canada, which is constantly preening itself and bragging endlessly about its support for women’s rights, and the Prime Minister, who describes himself as “a feminist”, considering supporting a bill designed expressly to suppress criticism of the most misogynistic cult active in the world today? Hypocrisy is not a strong enough word.

Islamists are infiltrating the Liberal Party with a view to use it to further their cause, the first of which is to suppress free speech and criticism of Islam.

Check out further details on this woman here and here.

Rebel Yell

Elon Musk on artificial intelligence

Forty years ago I argued that the idea that we would travel through space in ships (mechanical canisters) to find extra-terrestrial intelligence was one of the dumbest ideas ever, and that it would seem to future humans to have been incredibly culture-bound mechanistic idea. I suggested that the way we would first start to experience aliens was through computers.

Well, dear readers, Elon Musk agrees with me.

The business magnate, who was being interviewed by Mohammad Abdulla Alergawi, the Minister of Cabinet Affairs and the Future for the UAE, told the slightly perplexed crowd: “One of the most troubling questions is artificial intelligence. I don’t mean narrow A.I  – deep artificial intelligence, where you can have AI which is much smarter than the smartest human on earth. This is a dangerous situation.”

He also warned world governments: “Pay close attention to the development of artificial intelligence.

“Make sure researchers don’t get carried away – scientists get so engrossed in their work they don’t realise what they are doing.”

When asked if he thought A.I was a good or a bad thing Musk said: “I think it is both.

“One way to think of it is imagine you were very confident we were going to be visited by super intelligent aliens in 10 years or 20 years at the most.

 “Digital super intelligence will be like an alien.”

There is such a thing as poor white trash

 

Before Australia was used as a penal colony, the British off-loaded criminal elements into the Carolinas. The tale is told in Albion’s Seed, without reading which you cannot understand the United States. These two charmers were arrested in Louisiana for abandoning their 5 year old daughter. I think they were doing her a favour.

Do not doubt why Americans own guns. People like this live within a few miles of the rich, and they have cars. And guns. And would kill for some oxycodone, fentanil, or just because they felt like it.

Fighting the ctrl-left in Canada

From Rebel Media.

Last night, approximately 750 Canadians from all walks of life came to the Rebel’s Freedom Rally to protest M103, the Liberal motion to oppose “Islamophobia” — that is, the criticism of Islam.

Speakers included Faith Goldy, Pierre Lemieux, Chris Alexander, Kellie Leitch, Brad Trost, Charles McVety, and Rebel Commander Ezra Levant.

Some of those at the event had been born in the Middle East and were distressed to see de facto blasphemy laws on the verge of coming to their adopted country.

Massive fraud at the core of the man-caused global warming hysteria

 

I have two versions of the story. One is by Matt Ridley, the British science writer, which is more in sorrow than anger. It recounts the tale of the dissident senior NOAA scientist, John Bates, who showed that the study which claimed that there has been no pause in global warming of late, was a piece of contrived rubbish, intended to serve Obama’s climate policy goals in time for a Paris conference.

Dr Bates’s boss, Tom Karl, a close ally of President Obama’s science adviser, John Holdren, published a paper in 2015, deliberately timed to influence the Paris climate jamboree. The paper was widely hailed in the media as disproving the politically inconvenient 18-year pause in global warming, whose existence had been conceded by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) two years earlier.

Dr Bates says Mr Karl based the “pausebuster” paper on a flawed land-surface data set that had not been verified or properly archived; and on a sea-surface set that corrected reliable data from buoys with unreliable data from ship intakes, which resulted in a slightly enhanced warming trend.

The second version is from Laurence Solomon of theFinancial Post, who wrote a blistering history of the many frauds which have backed up the false claims of the IPCC, and of the punishments meted out to those who have produced  studies contradicting the dominant narrative. Solomon writes:

Of course the whistleblowers can be believed, and not just because NOAA repeatedly stonewalled inquiries, even failing to comply with a congressional subpoena. No one paying attention can have any doubt that the governmental global warming enterprise has been a fraud. It’s been lies from the start, starting with the very mandate of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which astonishingly ruled out factors like the sun as being worthy of investigation.

Among those astonished was the Danish delegation to the IPCC. It discovered at one of the IPCC’s early meetings a quarter-century ago that its scientists could not present their study, newly published in the prestigious journal Science, showing a remarkable correlation between global warming and solar activity. To their further astonishment, to squelch dissent the IPCC cabal set out to destroy the reputation of its chief author, falsely accusing him of fabricating data….

In a press release last week, U.S. House Science, Space, and Technology Committee chairman Lamar Smith thanked “Dr. John Bates for courageously stepping forward to tell the truth about NOAA’s senior officials playing fast and loose with the data in order to meet a politically predetermined conclusion.” This week a second press release from the same committee indicated that NOAA will be brought to account.

The blizzard of lies from NOAA and other corrupted agencies will soon be outed in excruciating detail. The greatest scientific fraud of the century will thus be laid bare, along with its craven and corrupt enablers in government, academia, industry and the media.

The topic is covered more intensively here at the Deplorable Climate Science blog.

 

On the subject of Trump’s former national security advisor, Lt. Gen. Flynn, it is Deep State 1, Trump 0.

On the subject of AGW, it is Deep State 0, Trump 1.

 

Wrong White privilege pin colour!

This month the students at Elizabethtown College in US “are wearing white pins in the shape of puzzle pieces to remind them of their white privilege.”

The campaign was launched over the weekend by the Elizabethtown College Democrats, who say it aims to make students at the small and private liberal arts college in Pennsylvania more introspective about issues of race, especially in their predominantly white region of Lancaster County.

“Discussions about race are often perceived as being only open to people of color, but I think it is just as important for white people to partake in conversations about race,” Aileen Ida, president of the College Democrats, told The College Fix via email.

Obviously these students have right to pay $56,200 in tuition and fees to make a fool of themselves but at the very least they should get the colour of the pin consistent with history. The appropriate colour for the pin should be blue for the following reason.

The Pact of Umar, an apocryphal treaty between the Muslims and the Christians, that later gained a canonical status in Islamic jurisprudence states the following.

Obligation to identify non-Muslims as such by clipping the heads’ forelocks and by always dressing in the same manner, wherever they go, with binding the zunar (a kind of belt) around the waists. Christians to wear blue belts or turbans, Jews to wear yellow belts or turbans, Zoroastrians to wear black belts or turbans, and Samaritans to wear red belts or turbans.

Given that most of the White students are Christians, the appropriate colour for the pin should be blue. Using white as the pin colour leaves them aligned with the Ku Klux Klan. Is that really the message these students want to send? Even the Nazis got it right historically, when they specified yellow as the colour for the star that Jews had to wear as a badge.

Of course this left the Taliban in Afghanistan in a quandary, when they specified, during their  rule from 1996 to late 2001, that the Hindus had to wear badges in public to identify themselves. With no precedence for Hindus in the Islamic jurisprudence, they selected yellow as the colour of choice for these badges, thus staying within the confines of the Pact of Umar.

Michael Flynn’s political assassination by the Deep State

US continues its march toward a Banana Republic status with an out of control intelligence community in tow. The Week opines.

The United States is much better off without Michael Flynn serving as national security adviser. But no one should be cheering the way he was brought down.

The whole episode is evidence of the precipitous and ongoing collapse of America’s democratic institutions — not a sign of their resiliency. Flynn’s ouster was a soft coup (or political assassination) engineered by anonymous intelligence community bureaucrats. The results might be salutary, but this isn’t the way a liberal democracy is supposed to function.

Unelected intelligence analysts work for the president, not the other way around. Far too many Trump critics appear not to care that these intelligence agents leaked highly sensitive information to the press — mostly because Trump critics are pleased with the result. “Finally,” they say, “someone took a stand to expose collusion between the Russians and a senior aide to the president!” It is indeed important that someone took such a stand. But it matters greatly who that someone is and how they take their stand. Members of the unelected, unaccountable intelligence community are not the right someone, especially when they target a senior aide to the president by leaking anonymously to newspapers the content of classified phone intercepts, where the unverified, unsubstantiated information can inflict politically fatal damage almost instantaneously.

Bloomberg notes.

There is another component to this story as well — as Trump himself just tweeted. It’s very rare that reporters are ever told about government-monitored communications of U.S. citizens, let alone senior U.S. officials. The last story like this to hit Washington was in 2009 when Jeff Stein, then of CQ, reported on intercepted phone calls between a senior Aipac lobbyist and Jane Harman, who at the time was a Democratic member of Congress.

Normally intercepts of U.S. officials and citizens are some of the most tightly held government secrets. This is for good reason. Selectively disclosing details of private conversations monitored by the FBI or NSA gives the permanent state the power to destroy reputations from the cloak of anonymity. This is what police states do.

In the past it was considered scandalous for senior U.S. officials to even request the identities of U.S. officials incidentally monitored by the government (normally they are redacted from intelligence reports). John Bolton’s nomination to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations was derailed in 2006 after the NSA confirmed he had made 10 such requests when he was Undersecretary of State for Arms Control in George W. Bush’s first term. The fact that the intercepts of Flynn’s conversations with Kislyak appear to have been widely distributed inside the government is a red flag.

All this was not an isolated event as WaPo notes.

Nine current and former officials, who were in senior positions at multiple agencies at the time of the calls, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.

More disturbing is the release of SIGNIT related to this case.

President Trump’s national security adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn, was forced to resign on Monday night as a result of getting caught lying about whether he discussed sanctions in a December telephone call with a Russian diplomat. The only reason the public learned about Flynn’s lie is because someone inside the U.S. government violated the criminal law by leaking the contents of Flynn’s intercepted communications.

In the spectrum of crimes involving the leaking of classified information, publicly revealing the contents of SIGINT — signals intelligence — is one of the most serious felonies. Journalists (and all other nongovernmental citizens) can be prosecuted under federal law for disclosing classified information only under the narrowest circumstances; reflecting how serious SIGINT is considered to be, one of those circumstances includes leaking the contents of intercepted communications, as defined this way by 18 § 798 of the U.S. Code:

The key will be to watch if there is any follow through on this.

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee said Tuesday that the most significant question posed by the resignation of national security adviser Michael Flynn is why intelligence officials eavesdropped on his calls with the Russian ambassador and later leaked information on those calls to the press.

“I expect for the FBI to tell me what is going on, and they better have a good answer,” said Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, which is conducting a review of Russian activities to influence the election. “The big problem I see here is that you have an American citizen who had his phone calls recorded.”

Given Trump’s propensity to never back down from a fight, this angle might lead to interesting results if the investigation proceeds in that direction.

The abrupt resignation Monday evening of White House national security adviser Michael Flynn is the culmination of a secret, months-long campaign by former Obama administration confidantes to handicap President Donald Trump’s national security apparatus and preserve the nuclear deal with Iran, according to multiple sources in and out of the White House who described to the Washington Free Beacon a behind-the-scenes effort by these officials to plant a series of damaging stories about Flynn in the national media.

The effort, said to include former Obama administration adviser Ben Rhodes—the architect of a separate White House effort to create what he described as a pro-Iran echo chamber—included a small task force of Obama loyalists who deluged media outlets with stories aimed at eroding Flynn’s credibility, multiple sources revealed.

Why are Ontario’s provincial conservatives so stupid?

 

It is a reasonable question. They have failed to put forward a contender for power for three or four elections now, and as a result the bad management of the Ontario economy continues. Proceeding directly from a belief in climate catastrophism, Ontario’s Liberal government has been pricing Ontario’s industry out of competition and driving it to resettle in bordering states. Ontario’s energy policy is the kind that produces energy shortages in a land of former abundance. It is to Ontarian industry as Soviet policy was to Soviet agriculture.

And what does the Ontario Conservative leader do when handed this blessing? He resolutely supports carbon taxes.

 

As Joe Oliver writes in the Financial Post:

Wynne’s approval rating is in the mid-teens. Two-thirds of Torontonians want her to resign. But there are no guarantees in politics, as the past three provincial elections dramatically demonstrated. She isn’t yet a dead premier walking.

But when a substantial portion of the province is deeply concerned about something their government is doing, the Opposition party should want to be on the side of the discontented. However, Ontario PC leader Patrick Brown supports a price on carbon, depriving his party of the opportunity to attack the Liberals on an issue of growing vulnerability.

The Leader of the Opposition in Ontario has been handed an opportunity to get out of a policy bind he has created for himself. He could cite the change in US policy on AGW, he could even say he has thought better of his previous support for carbon taxes. Politicians are expected to change policies with changed circumstances, especially as this change will lead with near certainty to electoral victory. As Joe Oliver points out, PC Leader Patrick Brown could offer tax reductions that would prove highly attractive to the stretched Ontario taxpayer.

In times previous, in far-ago decades, I was a riding association president with Ontario PCs and a volunteer. There was something about the sort of people attracted to the Ontario PCs that gave me cause for doubts, not as to their policies, but as to their capacities. To be unfair to many good people of whom I approve, a lot of them seemed dumber than they should be. I have not seen much occasion since then to revise my opinion upward. I hope they can find the talents needed to wrest power from the Liberals. I fear that they will not be able to do so.

I am a liberal, and therefore am a conservative

 

I am linking you to a long and heartfelt article by a former American Democrat who, over the course of 25 years, has become inclined to vote Republican without any change in his political views. How can this be?

I think many people who once voted liberal or for left-wing candidates have experienced the same emotions and the same evolution. They may smoke dope; they may support abortion rights, limited or not; they may even sort their garbage and take global warming seriously, but they have one thing in common with me, George Orwell, and you, dear reader. They can smell the totalitarianism emanating from the political left these days, the “smelly little orthodoxies” as Orwell called them.

In the 1930s these virulent intolerances and dreams of social control were in some fashion channelled by the Communist Party and its near equivalents. After the fall of Soviet Communism, we found that the same human impulses to control and domination were liberated from the discipline, such as it was, of Marxist thought. Thus without the discipline of Marxism and the Party, leftist totalitarian behaviour and thought spread out of its Petri dish to infect wider and wider sectors of society. The impulse to grievance and victimhood remains, even as the theory that gave it a semblance of coherence lies rotting in its grave. Which only demonstrates the truth that Leftism is an urge of the soul and ontologically prior to Marxism, which was a particular economic theory seeking to justify the Leftism.

I quote from Brad Torgerson’s article (the one I recommend you read):

 

A good friend of mine, who also happens to be an outstanding author, once quipped, “If I am forced to choose a side, I choose the side which is not forcing me to choose sides.”

Seldom have I ever encountered phrasing more apt. Because that’s precisely how I feel. I’ve been feeling that way, for years now. It was not a sudden thing. It was a gradual realization. The slow clarity of an underlying sentiment, incrementally surfacing…..

And later in his essay –

And I have been reminded every single day, just how far I’ve been pushed away — by so-called progressives in this country.

Sure, some of that is me walking my talk. I am not exactly the same guy I was 25 years ago. And not because I don’t think some of the idealism of liberal thought is not worthy, or even evocatively beautiful.

It is.

Liberalism — the kind I was attracted to in my teens, and early twenties — mostly focuses on brighter futures with better choices.

Yet at many points over the past quarter century, that shining picture of what the Left supposedly stands for, has been undermined again, and again, and again, and again, by the behavior of self-styled Leftists.

Maybe it all comes down to the fact that I decided Alinsky’s ballyhooed rules are pernicious. Not once do they involve self-reflection, nor questions of higher moral obligation to a power or a need beyond simple political expediency. Like with the 2004 Washington State governors race, the ends justify the means. If you’re a Leftist and you have to lie to get what you want, then lie. If you’re a Leftist and you have to cheat to get what you want, then cheat. If you’re a Leftist and you have to hurt people to get what you want, or if you have to frighten people into not opposing you, then hurt and frighten people.

Never doubt that everything you — the Leftist — says or does, is done justifiably.

Everyone and everything is a fair target. Lash out. Incriminate. Slander. Punish. Make them quake in their boots. They deserve it, the jerks. “If you’re not with us, you’re with the terrorists!” Oops, Leftists excoriated Bush 43 for saying that. Now they themselves live it every day. “If you didn’t vote for Hillary, you’re with the KKK and the Nazis!”

Torgerson’s article speaks for itself. He joins a long list of people disillusioned with Leftist totalitarianism: if you are interested in the 1930s version I recommend “The God that Failed”, written by several important former European communists, and if the 1960s is your thing, you can try David Horowitz’ “Radical Son”.

I would say that, now, more than ever, we need an Orwell,  to remind us once again that patriotism and loyalty to one’s own people trumps (yes, that word) abstract professions of loyalty to the future, the road to which is made of human skulls.

 

My idea of hell

John Lennon’s Imagine is the most perfect description of hell that I can imagine: a bland, featureless, joyless, hateless, unprincipled, undifferentiated state of blobdom. In fact, it is a remarkably accurate picture of the direction of modern society, as hoped for by people of the Left, and as feared by conservatives.

Imagine there’s no Heaven
It’s easy if you try
No Hell below us
Above us only sky

Imagine all the people
Livin’ for today
Aaa haa

Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too

Imagine all the people
Livin’ life in peace
Yoo hoo

You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one

I hope someday you’ll join us

And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions

I wonder if you can

No need for greed or hunger

A brotherhood of man

Imagine all the people

Sharin’ all the world

Yoo hoo

You may say I’m a dreamer

But I’m not the only one

I hope someday you’ll join us

And the world will live as one

This world would be anti-evolutionary, unfree, poor, uninteresting, murderous (more than our own), rife with socially enforced envy, and beset with suicide. Why live? Why strive? Why not tear down the achievements of the strivers, who are anti-social anyway? Why have families, when we will live as undifferentiated masses in dormitories? Why support our children, when the state will do it for us, as the state will insist upon doing it for us?

Nothing to kill or die for means nothing to live for. Hence suicide. Hence anomie. Hence random acts of violence, just to feel something.

And always, always, the unspoken truth behind all the rhetoric of peace and unity, is a Leviathan, a state so powerful it can reduce everyone to the same level because without that state, human differences would take effect. Though we may live in our equally-sized 90 square meter apartments there will be no equality of power. There is always a priesthood enforcing the equality of outcome that such a regime demands.

In this Godless universe, no crime would have meaning, in fact no act would have meaning, because meaning has been drained from it.

I am reminded of the movie Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978), which depicts the world that “Imagine” invites us to dwell in. People without human emotion: no pride of place, of family, of accomplishment, no love, no hate, just watching the ticking clock until they head home after a day of meaningless office work to engage in meaningless interaction with their families. Of course they would soon refuse to breed, and die off from lack of self reproduction.

Kind of like what is happening right now, as birthrates tumble, religious attendance declines, and people get hysterical about any politician trying to defend their own societies from foreign invasions.

The movie ought to have been named “Invasion of the Soul Eaters”, and the title track ought to have been Lennon’s “Imagine”.

________________________________

Today’s instance of Lennonist blobism is found in the Guardian, an unfailing source of foolishness:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/06/utopian-thinking-build-truly-feminist-society