No 845 “En mi
opinión”
Enero 10, 2015
“IN GOD WE TRUST” Lázaro R González Miño EDITOR
Social
Media Campaign Asks American Women To Walk Naked Outdoors To Mark 13th
Anniversary Of 9/11 & Weed Out Neighbourhood Terrorists
Mike Murray, through a Facebook post on Thursday, is proposing that American women
walk naked in their block. He explained, "As you may already know, it is a
sin for a Muslim male to see any woman other than his wife naked and if he
does, he must commit suicide.
So on September 11th, at 10:00 A.M.
Eastern Time, all American women are asked to walk out of their house
completely naked to help weed out any neighborhood terrorists."
Hew recommended the unclothed females to circle their block for one hour
as their contribution to the anti-terrorist effort. For their part, patriotic
American men are asked to position themselves in lawn chairs in front of their
houses to demonstrate their support for the women and to prove that they are
not Muslim terrorist sympathizers.
"Since Islam also does not approve of alcohol, a cold 6-pack at
your side is further proof of your patriotism," he added.
Murray asked social media users who have read the campaign to share it
on their Facebook, Twitter, Instagram,
Tumblr, Reddit and other social media accounts as proof that they are not
sympathisers of Islamic terrorists.
Outside Murray's unique campaign, Thursday celebrations include honouring
in Washington DC and Virginia the victims of 9/11, Moments of Silence, memorial
walks, rally at the National Mall, community service as part of National Day of
Service, Pentagon Memorial Service, Flags Across Arlington and Heroes Run.
Murray's suggestion would surely anger Islamic extremist and there could
even be a call for his beheading by Islamic State jihadists, Like Murray's
suggestion, the following video of a woman dressed in Muslim attire and stripping
naked while verses from the Qu'ran are being read would also likely spark anger
from Muslims.
Meanwhile, al-Qaeda, the author of 9/11, is no longer the question now
but the IS, as observers ask is will ISIS attack on the anniversary.
ANTI-MUSLIM:
‘Walk Naked for America Day’
An email message gone
viral has the subject line MUSLIMS with nothing appearing inside except
the attachment. When opened, the attachment reveals a picture of four topless
women under the heading “Walk Naked for America Day.”
Twin Cities It
goes on to encourage “American hotties” to walk out of their houses naked at 1
p.m. eastern time next Saturday because “it is a sin for a Muslim male to see any
woman other than his wife or daughter naked.” The effort will “help weed
out any neighborhood Muslim terrorists,” according to the email.
A Maplewood City Council member forwarded an email this week with a
subject line “Muslim’s” that contained pictures of topless women and a call for
women to “Walk Naked for America Day.”
reporter at 9:34 p.m. Thursday, April 27. Bob Cardinal, the most recent
addition to the Maplewood City Council and former mayor, said he inadvertently
included the reporter on the list when he forwarded the message, which he
called “shocking,” from a personal email to a few guys on his softball team
Thursday night. Cardinal said he disagreed with the email content.
“I couldn’t believe it,” Cardinal said of the message. “I don’t know how
that even got on the Internet.”
It closes by encouraging all “patriotic men” to gather on their lawns to
watch. (You can sure all the American-hating Muslim
men will be watching behind their camera phones)
Cardinal said that he received the email from a constituent he
occasionally corresponds with and that he disagreed with its contents. He
forwarded it on, he said, only because he found it so shocking.
“I couldn’t believe what I saw,” he said.
Cardinal beat former council member John Nephew in the November
election. He campaigned against Maplewood’s decision to organize its
trash-hauling system. He served as mayor for six years in Maplewood before
losing to Diana Longrie in 2005.
¿A que fecha y hora las mujeres desnudas van a desfilar
por la calle ocho desde el Down Town hasta Crown Ave? “Los musulmanes que vean
eso se tienen que suicidar…Porque los que lo vean y no se suiciden no son
musulmanes…
Amenper: Con los Francois Francamente
los Franceses Fracasarán
Tuvimos a Francois Miterrand de
amargo recuerdo, ahora tenemos a Francois Hollande. Los franceces
parece que comieron mucho quiche y se indigestaron cuando eligieron de
presidente al secretario general del partido socialista francés, Francois
Hollande, o quizás sea por la alta votación de los diseñadores de
modas y delicados artistas que son parte abundante de su población y comparten
sus ideas con respecto al matrimonio homosexual.
Pero el resultado es que no
creo que sea una casualidad que con las medidas socialistas de Hollande Francia
se encuentre en la agitación social con los ataques musulmanes, y el desastre
económico en que se encuentra..
Hasta el momento sus medidas
han traído a la sociedad francesa esta suavidad son la reducción de la
proporción de electricidad generada por la energía nuclear de un 75% a un 50% a
favor de las fuentes de energía renovables costosas e inoperantes. El aumento
de los impuestos sobre la renta y de la Contribución social general (CSG)
creando un impuesto para los que tienen un ingreso adicional de 150,000 euros,
y en una alocución muy parecida a nuestro presidente Obama, declarando una
guerra de solidaridad contra los ricos. Todo esto en lo económico, con las
usuales medidas socialistas que nos hablan de "tolerancia" con todas
las razas y religiones, no importa que ellos nos estén destruyendo.
Hoy Hollande, como cuando nos
ocurre a nosotros hace nuestro presidente Obama, el presidente de Francia hizo
una "enérgica" denuncia de los hechos, pero esta energía bucal, y
papel de inodoro es lo mismo para los musulmanes, y si no hay algo más
substancial, estamos todos muy jodidos.
Creo que hoy después de los
acontecimientos los franceses deben de acordar a Nicolás Sarkozy como nosotros recordamos a Batista.
Sarkozy no era lo ideal, ni siquiera como conservador, pero nunca un socialista
como Hollande es bueno para ninguna nación, y el tiempo lo hace evidente.
Francia
necesita alguien que lo proteja de la amenaza islámica. Los
musulmanes en Francia son la mayor comunidad de su clase en Europa, y como
vimos en el caso del semanario satírico Charlie Hebdo, esta revista es de
inclinación izquierdista, así que los ataques son a la sociedad occidental no a
una tendencia política, el objetivo es el sueño del profeta, el Califato
Mundial, de la que todas las naciones tendrán que ser parte.
Tanto en
Francia, como en los Estados Unidos y el resto del mundo, el peligro islámico
no admite la suavidad del queso Brie, tenemos que atacarlos con el duro queso
manchego, si seguimos eligiendo a presidentes socialistas, los ratones
musulmanes nos comerán todo el queso.
National Review: Romney Open to Challenging Jeb in 2016
Mitt Romney, the 2012 GOP presidential nominee, is more open to a third
presidential bid than ever before, according to the National Review.
"The governor is preserving his options — that's the message I've gotten from Boston," Robert O'Brien, a Los Angeles attorney and former Romney foreign policy adviser, told National Review.
"The governor is preserving his options — that's the message I've gotten from Boston," Robert O'Brien, a Los Angeles attorney and former Romney foreign policy adviser, told National Review.
A number of key donors are sending messages to Romney encouraging him to
mount a bid, raising speculation that he could be a direct challenge to former
Florida Gov. Jeb Bush as an establishment candidate.
"Bush and Romney, both former Republican governors, would occupy the same space in a Republican primary and compete for many of the same donors," the National Review said.
Sources close to Romney dismissed concerns that Bush would take Romney's top donors, and a top Romney bundler said that, regardless, Romney could run a credible campaign with "a fifth of the core group that we had before."
The National Review noted that Bush on Wednesday attended a fundraiser in Greenwich, Conn. organized by cousin Debbie Walker Stapleton.
"Bush and Romney, both former Republican governors, would occupy the same space in a Republican primary and compete for many of the same donors," the National Review said.
Sources close to Romney dismissed concerns that Bush would take Romney's top donors, and a top Romney bundler said that, regardless, Romney could run a credible campaign with "a fifth of the core group that we had before."
The National Review noted that Bush on Wednesday attended a fundraiser in Greenwich, Conn. organized by cousin Debbie Walker Stapleton.
"Donors and political strategists alike were buzzing about the
optics of sending Bush to Greenwich, a haven for wealthy New York City
financiers and a city where the Bush family has long had ties; the governor's
grandfather, the late Connecticut senator Prescott Bush, was born in Greenwich,"
the National Review said.
The National Review said that the buzz surrounding a possible Romney bid escalated this week after a report in The Washington Post indicated that Romney was dining in California Wednesday with a handful of advisers to his 2012 campaign.
However, two sources close to Romney told the National Review that the dinner was not a 2016 strategy session.
"Is Mitt telling anybody he's going to run? No," the Romney bundler told the National Review. "Are the people around him suggesting that he's open to it? Absolutely. They would just love it."
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.Newsmax.com/Politics/Mitt-Romney-Jeb-Bush/2015/01/09/id/617540/#ixzz3OMHTMg00
The National Review said that the buzz surrounding a possible Romney bid escalated this week after a report in The Washington Post indicated that Romney was dining in California Wednesday with a handful of advisers to his 2012 campaign.
However, two sources close to Romney told the National Review that the dinner was not a 2016 strategy session.
"Is Mitt telling anybody he's going to run? No," the Romney bundler told the National Review. "Are the people around him suggesting that he's open to it? Absolutely. They would just love it."
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.Newsmax.com/Politics/Mitt-Romney-Jeb-Bush/2015/01/09/id/617540/#ixzz3OMHTMg00
“EMO”
Creo que estamos viendo discutir al raton con
la jutia. No me monto en el tren con ninguno de los dos si tengo otra
alternativa. LRGM
Amenper: El Legalismo
rígido puede causar la muerte…
Este
título que parece uno de esas advertencias que aparecen en las cajas de
cigarros, es un pensamiento que tengo incrustado en la mente por la experiencia
vivida en mis largos años.
Por eso
siempre me han gustado los Estados Unidos.
El
sistema legal americano, es flexible y pragmático, no brutalmente legalista.
Por lo
menos así fueron por siglos. Desafortunadamente estamos siendo testigos de un
"Cambio".
Las leyes
en los tribunales se ajustaban por precedentes de casos anteriores, la
constitución se enmienda constantemente.
Las
enmiendas se ajustaban por el momento, el entorno y las
características de ciertas situaciones. Se estudiaban por
las cámaras legislativas, antes de adoptarse la enmienda, no es un legalismo
rígido, o sea que en América habían solucionado el problema que presentaba el
dicho español de que “El que hace la ley hizo la trampa”. Cuando se
detectaba la trampa se enmendaba la ley.
Pero
últimamente tenemos instituciones legalistas que se han creado para
implantar una aplicación rígida de las leyes, con la anuencia del inquilino de
la Casa Blanca.
Los
vemos, tanto desde el punto de la contaminación medio ambiente, como de la
asociación entre las clases raciales, sociales y económicas, y la libertad de
religión, sin mirar el punto pragmático, sin mirar la variación de los hechos
según el momento y la realidad.
Vemos los
llamados defensores de los derechos civiles que quieren aplicar la ley de la
libertad de religión sin enmendar la variación de una religión que no es tal,
que fue una invención de un hombre llamado Mahoma que creó un ejército
conquistador dándole la forma de religión para usar doctrinas (leyes) en que
las personas perdieran el miedo a morir por ilusorios premios en otro mundo si
destruían al enemigo.
Y que no
nos saquen el hecho de las cruzadas para decir que el cristianismo es lo mismo,
porque Cristo sólo predicó la paz, el cristianismo es la sumisión ante Dios, el
sacrificio en la cruz, no la guerra, el nuevo testamento y el Corán son polos
opuestos, no hay peligro en la doctrina cristiana, sólo en los que la mal
interpretan como en el caso de la inquisición, pero lo opuesto es el Islam, porque
los que asesinan están interpretando correctamente lo que enseña el Corán cuyo
objetivo es la conquista del mundo por la fuerza para la implantación de la ley
Sharía.
La ley de
los derechos de una persona a adorar a Dios a su manera o de no creer en Dios,
es una buena ley, pero el que hace la ley hace la trampa, y la trampa en este
caso es el Islam, y hay que crear un precedente de que si una religión se usa
para la guerra, si una religión incita al crimen, hay que enmendar la ley para
que en ciertos casos específicos como este no se aplique la ley de la libertad
de religión.
Porque si
no lo hacemos, esta ley nos puede causar la muerte.
Uno tiene
que conocer cómo piensa el enemigo.
Igual que
uno tiene que estudiar la Biblia para saber de que de trata el cristianismo,
uno tiene que estudiar el Manifiesto Comunista y El Capital de Marx si quiere
saber de qué se trata el comunismo, y uno tiene que estudiar el Corán si quiere
saber de qué se trata el Islam.
No dejar
que nos saquen de contexto algunos capítulos escogidos tanto del cristianismo,
tanto del comunismo como del Islam, para hablarnos de paz y no nos hablen
de las atrocidades que enseñan los otros capítulos.
Los que
nos dicen que el Islam es una religión de paz, insultan nuestra inteligencia, o
no han leído el Corán.
El Corán
es un libro de guerra, tiene que ser un libro de guerra porque ese era el
objetivo definido de Mahoma.
Por eso
los que nos dicen que los terroristas son un grupo militante minoritario,
no lo son, están muy lejos de la realidad. Los militantes son los
verdaderos creyentes del Islam, y todo el que practique realmente el Islam es
un peligro para nuestra vida, es un terrorista.
Puede ser
que haya practicantes nominales del Islam, que lo practiquen por tradición,
como hay cristianos nominales que lo son por tradición, esos no son peligrosos,
pero realmente son los menos, porque no son verdaderos seguidores del Islam.
Mientras
no volvamos a lo que hizo a esta nación la mejor quizás en la historia de la
humanidad, que fue su pragmatismo, y en vez de estar orgullosos de este
excepcionalismo, queramos ser legalistas rígidos como los otros, peligra
nuestra vida y peligra nuestra nación.
Breaking:
House Votes To Approve Keystone XL Pipeline
Obama despises this bill so much that he's already threatened to veto
it...B. CHRISTOPHER AGEE
According
to sources, the U.S. House of Representatives
voted Friday to approve the construction of the controversial Keystone XL
pipeline. On the strength of a new Republican majority and with the support of
28 Democrats, the legislation passed with a vote of 266 to 153.
When
it reaches the new Senate next week, the Republican majority will need the
support of just six Democrats to pass it.
Proponents
of the international oil pipeline cite its potential for extensive job creation
and increased energy independence for Americans. Many on the left have opposed construction, however; and Barack
Obama has indicated he would veto any such legislation.
Despite
a recent Nebraska Supreme Court ruling that addressed concerns about the
pipeline extending through the state and House Speaker John Boehner’s assertion
that Obama “is now out of excuses” in his opposition, a White House source
indicated the proposal will still die upon landing on the president’s desk.
Deputy
White House Press Secretary Eric Schultz said that “the House bill still
conflicts with longstanding executive branch procedures regarding the authority
of the president and prevents the thorough consideration of complex issues that
could bear on U.S. national interests and, if presented to the president, he
will veto the bill.”
The
House bill did not attract enough ‘yes’ votes to overturn a presidential veto,
though many see its passage as a positive sign for the pipeline’s eventual
completion. h/t: The Blaze Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/breaking-house-votes-approve-keystone-xl-pipeline/#6VjeK9uRcy4Xmy1f.99
En
Espanol: Breaking: Casa votos para aprobar oleoducto Keystone XL
Obama
desprecia a este proyecto de ley tanto que ya ha amenazado con vetarla ... B.
CHRISTOPHER AGEE -
Según las
fuentes, la Cámara de Representantes votó el viernes para aprobar la
construcción del oleoducto Keystone XL controversial. En la fuerza de una nueva
mayoría republicana y con el apoyo de 28 demócratas, la legislación fue
aprobada con un voto de 266 a 153.
Cuando
llega el nuevo Senado la próxima semana, la mayoría republicana necesitará el
apoyo de sólo seis demócratas para aprobar la misma.
Los
defensores del oleoducto internacional citan su potencial para la extensa
creación de empleo y el aumento de la independencia energética para los
estadounidenses. Muchos en la izquierda se han opuesto a la construcción, sin
embargo; y Barack Obama ha indicado que vetaría cualquier legislación.
A pesar
de un reciente fallo de la Corte Suprema de Nebraska que abordó las
preocupaciones acerca de la tubería que se extiende a través del Estado y de la
afirmación de la Cámara de Representantes John Boehner que Obama "está
ahora fuera de excusas" en su oposición, una fuente de la Casa Blanca
indicó que la propuesta todavía va a morir en el aterrizaje en el escritorio
del presidente.
Adjunto
la Casa Blanca, Eric Schultz dijo que "el proyecto de la Cámara sigue en
conflicto con los procedimientos del poder ejecutivo de larga data con respecto
a la autoridad del presidente y evita que el examen a fondo de las cuestiones
complejas que los podía sostener en los intereses nacionales y, de ser
presentado al presidente, vetará el proyecto de ley ".
El
proyecto de la Cámara no atrajo votos suficientes "sí" para anular un
veto presidencial, aunque muchos ven su paso como un signo positivo para la
terminación final de la tubería.
Obama Once Scolded Charlie Hebdo for Mocking
the Prophet Muhammad
In this May
30, 2014, file photo, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney listens to a
question during the White House daily briefing. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Friday, 09 Jan 2015 09:50 AM
By Nick Sanchez
The Obama administration once condemned French
magazine Charlie Hebdo after it published cartoons satirizing Islam in 2012.
"Well, we are aware that a French magazine published cartoons featuring a figure resembling the Prophet Muhammad, and obviously, we have questions about the judgment of publishing something like this. We know that these images will be deeply offensive to many and have the potential to be inflammatory," then-White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told the press pool.
After denouncing Charlie Hebdo, Carney hedged, noting the importance of free speech.
"Well, we are aware that a French magazine published cartoons featuring a figure resembling the Prophet Muhammad, and obviously, we have questions about the judgment of publishing something like this. We know that these images will be deeply offensive to many and have the potential to be inflammatory," then-White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told the press pool.
After denouncing Charlie Hebdo, Carney hedged, noting the importance of free speech.
"But we've spoken repeatedly about the importance of upholding the freedom of expression that is enshrined in our Constitution. In other words, we don’t question the right of something like this to be published; we just question the judgment behind the decision to publish it."
A year prior to Carney's comments, Charlie Hebdo's
offices had been firebombed in the fall of 2011, "after it published a
spoof issue 'guest edited' by the Prophet Muhammad," The New York Times reported. The magazine
and its editors had long been under the gun of jihadists, having earned the ire
of al-Qaida in 2006 for re-printing political cartoons by Danish artist Kurt
Westergaard that satirized Islam.
After the bombing — which destroyed property but did not result in any deaths — the publication got back to business, publishing its regular style of cartoons, which lampooned many major religions, politicians, the military, and more.
That eventually led to the 2012 controversy, which earned the denunciation by the White House and prompted the French government to temporarily close their embassies and schools in several Muslim countries.
After the bombing — which destroyed property but did not result in any deaths — the publication got back to business, publishing its regular style of cartoons, which lampooned many major religions, politicians, the military, and more.
That eventually led to the 2012 controversy, which earned the denunciation by the White House and prompted the French government to temporarily close their embassies and schools in several Muslim countries.
This week, more than three years after the firebombing, jihadists, resulting in 12 deaths, including the death of a police officer assigned to protect the threatened editors, attacked Charlie Hebdo’s offices again.
In its initial statement in response to the terrorist attack, the White House condemned the attacks, but did not make any judgment calls on the content of the magazine, as it had done in the past. As Reason.com pointed out, it also did not mention free speech.
"I strongly condemn the horrific shooting at the offices of Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris that has reportedly killed 12 people," President Barack Obama said in a prepared statement.
"Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims of this terrorist attack and the people of France at this difficult time. France is America’s oldest ally, and has stood shoulder to shoulder with the United States in the fight against terrorists who threaten our shared security and the world. Time and again, the French people have stood up for the universal values that generations of our people have defended. France, and the great city of Paris where this outrageous attack took place, offer the world a timeless example that will endure well beyond the hateful vision of these killers. We are in touch with French officials and I have directed my Administration to provide any assistance needed to help bring these terrorists to justice."
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.Newsmax.com/TheWire/obama-charlie-hebdo-mock-prophet-muhammad/2015/01/09/id/617516/#ixzz3OR240Rkz
Jorge
Alberto Villalón Y.
MI5 Head Warns al-Qaida Plans 'Mass-Casualty
Attacks Against the West'
Al-Qaida militants in Syria are
plotting attacks to inflict mass casualties in the West, possibly against
transport systems or "iconic targets," the head of Britain's MI5
Security Service said on Thursday.
Speaking after gunmen killed 12 people
in an assault on a French satirical newspaper, MI5 boss Andrew Parker warned
that a strike on the United Kingdom was highly likely.
"A group of core al-Qaida
terrorists in Syria is planning mass-casualty attacks against the West,"
Director General Parker said in a rare public speech at MI5 headquarters in
London. His last public speech was in October 2013.
In the speech, planned before the
killings in Paris, Parker said seasoned al-Qaida militants in Syria aimed to
"cause large-scale loss of life, often by attacking transport systems or
iconic targets" in the West.
Al-Qaida killed nearly 3,000 people by
attacking the United States with hijacked passenger planes on Sept. 11, 2001.
Militants inspired by the group killed 52 commuters in London on July 7, 2005,
with suicide bombs.
Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden was
killed by U.S. special forces in 2011, and the threat posed by the network to
the West seemed to recede in recent years.
But spies in Europe and the United
States have been troubled that al-Qaida militants from Pakistan have appeared
in war-torn Syria in what some intelligence analysts say could be part of a
plot to mount a major attack against the West.
Thursday's stark warning from one of
the West's most influential spymasters mirrors a growing concern among Western
political leaders and their Arab allies about the threat from the cauldron of
militant groups in Syria and Iraq.
Parker said that about 600 British
extremists had traveled to Syria, many joining the militant group that calls
itself Islamic State (ISIS) and has taken control of swathes of Iraq and Syria.
The group, an offshoot of al-Qaida,
has beheaded two U.S. journalists and an American and two British aid workers
in an effort to put pressure on a U.S.-led international coalition bombing its
fighters in Syria.
ISIS militants in Syria are plotting
attacks on Britain and making sophisticated use of social media to incite
British nationals to carry out violence, Parker said.
MI5, established in 1909 to counter
German espionage ahead of World War I, stopped three potentially deadly
"terrorist plots" against the U.K in recent months, he said.
"We face a very serious level of
threat that is complex to combat and unlikely to abate significantly for some
time," said Parker, who has argued strongly for more surveillance powers
to spy on militant communications on the Internet.
He said security services need to have
access to such communications.
"My sharpest concern as director
general of MI5 is the growing gap between the increasingly challenging threat
and the decreasing availability of capabilities to address it," he said.
Twitter and Facebook are so important
to militants that technology giants should give security services greater
access to their networks, the head of Britain's GCHQ eavesdropping agency said
last year.
"The dark places from where those
who wish us harm can plot and plan are increasing," Parker said. "We
need to be able to access communications and obtain relevant data on those
people when we have good reason."
¡JUGADA
MAESTRA DEL DICTADOR! Cuba prevé un destino FATAL para los herederos de Chávez
No es casualidad, tres
meses antes había fallecido Chávez y dos meses antes Capriles estuvo a un paso
de ganarle a Maduro. Cuba sacó sus cuentas. La
derrota embrionaria que sufrió el chavismo en abril más la muerte del caudillo
la obligaban a armar un Plan B. Y para remate, luego se desploma el
mercado petrolero.
No fue la caída de los
precios del petróleo lo que hizo que Cuba comenzara a coquetear con los Estados
Unidos, aunque, sin duda, el derrumbe de la cotización del barril fue un
catalizador para que Raúl Castro finalmente terminara arrojado en brazos del
denostado Tío Sam.
Pero veamos las cosas en
perspectiva: hay un dato que no puede pasar por debajo de la mesa. Un dato que
a cualquier sabueso llamaría la atención. ¿Cuándo se produjo la primera reunión
de altísimo nivel entre los funcionarios cubanos y los norteamericanos? El
diario español El País lo reveló apenas se supo la noticia de la caída del muro
caribeño: fue en junio de 2013. ¿Y qué ocurrió en Venezuela ese año? Nada más y
nada menos que la muerte de un titán llamado Hugo Chávez y nada más y nada
menos que el chavismo estuvo a un paso de perder el poder en las elecciones del
14 de abril. ¿Qué lectura le dieron los cubanos a esos dos hechos? Que sin el
caudillo Chávez, el proyecto político ideado por él se vendría a pique.
Y era lo que decían los
números sin margen de dudas: Henrique Capriles, a pesar de un ventajismo oficial
obsceno, sin recursos económicos, sin la petro-chequera, vetado en los medios,
boicoteada su campaña, obtuvo 7 millones 363 mil 980 votos contra los 7
millones 587 mil 579 votos que logró un Maduro al que Chávez, casi en estado de
rigor mortis, le levantó la mano. Pese a que Chávez ungió a su delfín, la
diferencia fue de un pírrico 1,49 por ciento. Es lo que se llama un empate
técnico. Un final de fotografía. Y Raúl Castro, que si de algo sabe es de
escenarios políticos, debe haber interpretado el match como una derrota
embrionaria para el chavismo. La cuenta que sacó Cuba es que el chavismo estaba
condenado a muerte, más allá de que pudiera apelar a maniobras electorales y a
la represión para intentar preservar el poder. “Esto
no pinta bien”, debe hacer sido la inferencia que sacaron Raúl Castro y
su Estado Mayor. Y recurrieron a su Plan B, que ahora pareciera ser el Plan A.
Jugaron en dos tableros a la vez. En
el de su flirteo con Estados Unidos y en el de una Venezuela cuyo gobierno
llevaba plomo en el ala.
Por supuesto que después
vinieron las municipales del 8 de diciembre de 2013 y el chavismo se
reivindicó: conquistó 240 de las 337 alcaldías. Fueron 5 millones 216 mil 522
votos para el oficialismo (48,69 por ciento) contra 4 millones 373 mil 910 (39,34
por ciento) para la MUD. La diferencia fue holgada a favor del PSUV. No era el
final de fotografía de antes. Y seguro Raúl Castro se preguntó: “¿Qué pasa
aquí?”. Pero el embrión de la derrota, aun así, no estaba del todo desechado
por el jerarca cubano. Primero, porque una cosa son las disputas municipales,
que tienen su grado de complejidad, y otra diferente son las presidenciales,
especialmente si Chávez ya no juega. Y segundo, porque en Venezuela se mueve
una corriente subterránea de malestar que afloró con todas sus fuerzas a partir
de las protestas de febrero pasado. Y
entonces Raúl Castro debe haber pensado: “Lo sabía. Esto no pinta bien”. La
conclusión de Cuba seguro fue: poner todos nuestros huevos en una cesta llamada
Venezuela es muy arriesgado. Allí puede pasar cualquier cosa, aunque la gente
crea que no pasa nada.
Y que conste: cuando los
cubanos hicieron sus cálculos políticos todavía no se había producido el
descalabro del mercado petrolero. Estamos hablando de 2013, cuando el barril pasaba
de los cien dólares. Hablamos de una Venezuela aparentemente boyante. Pero es
que los cubanos, que sí conocen las cifras que el BCV no publica, que saben a
cuánto asciende nuestro endeudamiento (era de poco más de treinta mil millones
de dólares cuando Chávez se montó en el poder y ahora pasaría de 200 mil
millones de dólares), que conocen el verdadero estado de salud de las finanzas
venezolanas, que saben que el aparato productivo está postrado, que manejan
información de inteligencia sobre el descontento social, pensaron lo elemental:
un maná petrolero administrado por unos herederos tan manirrotos como el padre
no es garantía de nada. El maná termina convertido en un barril sin fondo. En
un despeñadero.
Y, como para satisfacer
el ego de Raúl Castro, como para ratificarle que su olfato es mejor que el de
Jean Baptiste Grenouille, el protagonista de la novela El perfume, ocurre luego
la debacle de los precios del crudo. Entonces eso se convirtió en un acelerador
para el Plan B, que termina siendo el Plan A. Un Obama y un Castro en plan de
reconciliación. Un David y un Goliat moviéndose en el terreno de la diplomacia.
Y no sólo es la debacle petrolera lo que cuenta, hecho que, sin duda, es un
factor de muchísimo peso.
Es
que al mismo tiempo que cae el barril de petróleo, cae también la popularidad
de Maduro. Eso lo dicen todas las encuestas. Y los cubanos lo saben. Así
que, dicho en una sola línea, el restablecimiento de las relaciones políticas y
comerciales entre Cuba y los Estados Unidos ha de interpretarse como que los
cubanos no tienen muy buenos augurios sobre el destino del chavismo, cuya
subvención a la isla alcanzaba los cien mil barriles diarios de petróleo, pero
que ahora, con la crisis que arropa a Venezuela, está en entredicho.
Y Cuba necesita abrirse
al capital extranjero o muere de inanición. Pensemos nada más lo que
significará el pacto Obama- Castro en términos de envío de remesas. Antes del
armisticio, sólo podían enviarse desde Estados Unidos hacia Cuba 500 dólares
por persona cuatrimestralmente. Ahora serán dos mil dólares. La isla, según The
Havana Consulting Group (THCG), recibió en 2013 más de 2 mil 700 millones de
dólares en remesas provenientes de todas partes del mundo, y nada más de los
Estados Unidos el monto fue de casi 2 mil 500 millones de dólares. Las remesas
constituyen un motor para la actividad económica. El Banco Mundial, que calcula
que para 2014 los migrantes de los países en desarrollo enviarán a sus
respectivas naciones 436 mil millones de dólares, refiere que en Uganda, por
ejemplo, las remesas duplican los ingresos que se obtienen por concepto del
principal producto de exportación, que es el café. Lo mismo ocurre en Nepal:
las remesas equivalen a más del doble de las exportaciones. En Sri Lanka,
también. Así que Cuba, que ya se beneficiaba de este mecanismo antes del
armisticio, ahora verá incrementar notablemente sus ingresos por esta vía.
Ya se sabe por qué Cuba
decide capitular ante Estados Unidos: por una razón utilitaria. Y ya se sabe
por qué negocia actualmente (y desde abril pasado) con la Unión Europea:
también por razones utilitarias. Cuba
quiere insertarse en la economía global porque el parasitismo no da dividendos. A
lo mejor Raúl Castro desea pasar a la historia como el gran reformador, casi
como el Gorbachov del Caribe. Ya se sabe, también, por qué le ha puesto los
cuernos al chavismo: porque olfatea un destino fatal para los herederos de
Chávez y porque, para remate, el mercado petrolero ha entrado en crisis. La
pregunta ahora es: ¿Y cómo incidirá este nuevo ajedrez político que ahora juega
Cuba en la Venezuela actual y en la del futuro próximo? ¿Qué impacto tendrá eso
en el chavismo? ¿Qué hará ahora el Gobierno visto que su propio mentor, Cuba,
le ha despojado de su principal bandera política: los Estados Unidos como el
enemigo externo, David contra Goliat? ¿Será que ahora Venezuela pasará a ser la
nueva Cuba de América Latina, un quijote que lucha contra los molinos de viento
gringos? ¿Un quijote utilizado por Cuba, que jugaría en dos tableros? ¿O será que
la bandera que se izará ahora será solamente la del enemigo interno, la de la
ultraderecha apátrida y terrorista? Lo clave es qué pasará ahora que a
Venezuela le han quitado su piso ideológico.
El beso que se han dado
Washington y La Habana ha ejercido un impacto psicológico tremendo de cara al
destino del chavismo. Y ese impacto aumenta cuando se revisa la trayectoria de
los hermanos Castro, movidos siempre por el vil pragmatismo. ¿O no traicionaron
a Carlos Andrés Pérez después de que Fidel Castro le rendía pleitesía y hasta
vino a su coronación, en febrero de 1989? Y lo peor del caso es que este
matrimonio por conveniencia de Cuba con los Estados Unidos le viene al chavismo
justo cuando Venezuela experimenta una aguda crisis económica, que tendrá graves
repercusiones sociales y políticas. ¿Qué hará entonces el Gobierno, ya de por
sí con un problemón encima? ¿Aprovechará la conversión al libre mercado que
poco a poco van experimentando los cubanos para adelantar reformas en
Venezuela? ¿Podrán soportar, en ese caso, el costo político que implican esas
reformas? ¿Están en condiciones de poner en práctica esas reformas? ¿Las
quieren hacer? ¿Las tendrán que hacer? ¿Le conviene a Cuba impulsar reformas en
Venezuela a riesgo de que el chavismo caiga por el costo que ello supone?
Hay más preguntas que
respuestas. Lo que está claro es que ya Cuba no puede constituir un paradigma
para los chavistas porque Cuba está a punto de ingresar al Consenso de
Washington. Y esto cambia radicalmente las cosas. ¿No suena como extemporáneo
ahora hablar desde el chavismo de expropiaciones y de estado comunal y de
bloqueo financiero internacional cuando Raúl Castro se ha convertido en partner
de Barack Obama y está a punto de serlo de la Unión Europea? Si antes del
armisticio ya el discurso del chavismo lucía desfasado, autárquico, anclado en
el pleistoceno, fuera de foco (dada la imponente presencia de la
globalización), ¿qué quedará ahora que Cuba se ha abierto al imperio y ha
puesto sus ojos en Europa?.
Por supuesto que los
chavistas siempre encontrarán argumentos que justifiquen la vocación que tienen
por la economía rupestre. Podrían decir, por ejemplo, que en Cuba ya se
consolidó el socialismo y que lo de Raúl Castro no es una claudicación sino una
victoria porque le levantarán el embargo a la isla después de medio siglo. Y
podrían agregar que en Venezuela, en cambio, se está construyendo el socialismo
y que, por su carácter de país energético, a Estados Unidos eso no le conviene
y quiere ponerle las garras. Cualquier excusa puede ser fabricada. Pero no será
tan creíble, tan verosímil, ahora que Cuba ha pactado con Washington. Si
Venezuela adopta esa postura, la de convertirse en la nueva Cuba que enfrentará
al gigante del Norte, lucirá cada vez más sola. Ya nadie da un centavo por el
socialismo radical. El mundo es cada vez más la aldea global que se imaginó
Marshall McLuhan. Una aldea en la que el comercio está primero que la
ideología.
Definitivamente, el
olfato de Raúl Castro es como el de Jean Baptiste Grenouille. Que Cuba haya
capitulado ante el imperio (atención: ya había aprobado una Ley de Inversión
Extranjera muy importante este año) implica una sentencia de muerte para el
chavismo. Lo que ocurre es que a veces las sentencias tardan en ejecutarse.
¿Quién fue el que dijo que siempre se
puede estar peor?
No olvide dejar sus
comentarios.
Jorge
Alberto Villalón Y.
SEAL Vet Lawmaker: Obama’s Foreign Policy
Incites Terrorists
Pretty
bold for a freshman, gotta love it….
Check it out:
Check it out:
Freshman
Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-MT), a former Navy commander and Congress’ only SEAL
veteran, said Obama’s foreign policy fueled the terrorist attack on the Paris
offices of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo that left 12 people dead on
Wednesday. “When
America doesn’t lead–and this administration is not leading–then it fuels and
it gives hope to Islamic fundamentalists,” Former Navy Commander Rep. Zinke
told Breitbart News.
“Yes,
it is appropriate to say Islamic fundamentalist, Islamic radicals because
that’s what they are,” he continued, adding that by denying to characterize
Islamic terrorists for what they are, Obama is further fueling the jihadist
movement.
Read more at http://cowboybyte.com/35999/seal-vet-lawmaker-obamas-foreign-policy-incites-terrorists/
Read more at http://cowboybyte.com/35999/seal-vet-lawmaker-obamas-foreign-policy-incites-terrorists/
Republican
Traitors Already Ready to Tax Us More
— We get one bit of relief in this fake
“recovery” and Republican traitors want to punish us for it.
Senate Republicans are signaling that they want to
reward us for giving them the Senate by raising our taxes. No good deed goes
unpunished!
According
to The Hill: “Momentum builds in Congress for raising the federal gas tax.”
Record-low gas prices across
the U.S. have given rise to fresh talk in Washington of raising the federal gas
tax for the first time in over 20 years, with leading Republicans now saying a
hike must not be ruled out.
The GOP has long resisted calls from business leaders and others to boost the 18.4
cent-per-gallon tax as a way to pay for upgrades to the nation’s crumbling
roads and bridges.
Yet in recent days, senior
Senate Republicans have said they want to keep options open and that “nothing
is off the table” when weighing the best mechanisms to pay to finance
infrastructure projects.
“I just think that option is
there, it’s clearly one of the options,” said Sen. Inhofe (R-Okla.), new
chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Senate Finance Chairman Orrin
Hatch (R-Utah) and Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the third-ranking Senate
Republican, also said they were open to the possibility of raising the tax.
Democratic leaders in both
chambers of Congress, meanwhile, declared this week that “now is the time” for
an increase.
While major obstacles stand in
the way — namely the House of Representatives —business groups believe
there is a real chance to raise the tax in the final two years of the Obama
administration.
So amid all the hardships of this fake “recovery,”
we get one bit of relief no thanks to politicians but due to the power of
markets and the hand of providence… and politicians want to punish us for it.
Why do you think business leaders are lobbying for
a tax increase on gasoline? Obviously, they will have to pay the tax, but they
already pass off the cost of transportation to the consumer. As consumers,
business leaders will be hurt by a tax increase on gasoline. But if their
business thrives because of the tax, they will personally benefit more than the
tax will cost them. So, ultimately, they are lobbying to have every Joe and
Jane Taxpayer subsidize a business expense. Yes, you and I use the highways,
but we don’t wear them down nearly as fast as people using the roads to
haul goods.
“Comments this week from Sens.
Inhofe, Hatch and Thune signal a growing recognition that the gas tax is a fair
and consistent way to fund our infrastructure needs,” Association of Equipment
Manufacturers spokesman Michael O’Brien said in an interview on Thursday.
Doubtful. How does this organization calculate what
is fair and consistent about a gas tax?
Remember,
we are talking about a permanent tax hike. Do you think these Senators
or anyone else will be beating the drums to lower the gas tax if the price goes
up again?
“I remind my conservative
friends, and people who ask the question about maybe as a part of a package
having to increase the user fees, that this is what we are supposed to be
doing,” Inhofe told The Hill in a brief interview.
“The user fee is very, very
popular. The evidence of that is a lot of states are doing that on their own
because ‘well if the federal government won’t do it we’ve got to do something about
the roads,'” Inhofe said.
How is it a user’s fee when I have to pay a tax for
the highways when I mow my lawn?
And since when do we assume that the Federal
government should be doing something that the states are perfectly capable of
taking care of? Why not simply eliminate the Federal gas tax and give the
responsibilities to the states? Then they can decide how much they need to tax
gas in their state, but we won’t have to be double taxed.
“People who use the highways
ought to pay for them,”[Senator Orrin] Hatch added. “That’s a small price to
pay to have the best highway system in the world. And that may be where we’re
going to have to go.”
But how is such a price accurately set? Why do we
even need the best highway system in the world? Could we get our gas taxes cut
if we settled for second best? Why should poor people have to pay more for gas
just because business leaders want them to do so?
Don’t fall for the claim that we are going to get a
tax cut to “make up” for the tax increase. These people are totally
untrustworthy. If they give us the tax relief first then they can talk about a
higher gas tax.
If the
highways need to be funded (probably because the money was wasted on cronies), let the Senate reduce the weapons being given to terrorist
overseas or close a
military base somewhere on the planet.
Read more at http://politicaloutcast.com/2015/01/republican-traitors-already-ready-tax-us/#lkMmJbOSyAPQD5cJ.99
Obama’s Keystone
amnesia: President ignores GOP pipeline push
How embarrassed will Obama be when his
veto is overridden?
Check it out:
Check it out:
President Obama on Saturday
talked about higher education, affordable housing, the resurgence of the auto
industry, health-care reform, growth in the manufacturing sector and a variety
of other issues — virtually everything except the Keystone XL oil pipeline,
which is at the top of Republicans’ agenda now that they have full control of
Congress.
In his weekly address, Mr.
Obama touted positive economic trends and his recent plan to offer two years of
free community college to all Americans. He also said that the U.S. economy now
is in “calmer waters” following the recession of 2008 and is poised to take
off, thanks in large part to the work of his administration.
“It has been six years since
the crisis. Those years have demanded hard work and sacrifice on everybody’s
part. So as a country, we have every right to be proud of what we’ve got to
show for it. America’s resurgence is real. And now that we’ve got some calmer
waters, if we all do our part, if we all pitch in, we can make sure that tide
starts lifting all boats again,” the president said, casting his comments as a
preview of his looming State of the Union Address. “We can make sure that the
middle class is the engine that powers America’s prosperity for decades to
come.”
Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2015/01/obamas-keystone-amnesia-president-ignores-gop-pipeline-push/
Obama Once Scolded Charlie Hebdo for
Mocking the Prophet Muhammad
In this May
30, 2014, file photo, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney listens to a
question during the White House daily briefing. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Friday, 09 Jan 2015 09:50 AM
By Nick Sanchez
The Obama administration once condemned French
magazine Charlie Hebdo after it published cartoons satirizing Islam in 2012.
"Well, we are aware that a French magazine published cartoons featuring a figure resembling the Prophet Muhammad, and obviously, we have questions about the judgment of publishing something like this. We know that these images will be deeply offensive to many and have the potential to be inflammatory," then-White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told the press pool.
After denouncing Charlie Hebdo, Carney hedged, noting the importance of free speech.
"Well, we are aware that a French magazine published cartoons featuring a figure resembling the Prophet Muhammad, and obviously, we have questions about the judgment of publishing something like this. We know that these images will be deeply offensive to many and have the potential to be inflammatory," then-White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told the press pool.
After denouncing Charlie Hebdo, Carney hedged, noting the importance of free speech.
"But we've spoken repeatedly about the importance of upholding the freedom of expression that is enshrined in our Constitution. In other words, we don’t question the right of something like this to be published; we just question the judgment behind the decision to publish it."
A year prior to Carney's comments, Charlie Hebdo's
offices had been firebombed in the fall of 2011, "after it published a
spoof issue 'guest edited' by the Prophet Muhammad," The New York Times reported. The magazine and its editors had long been under the
gun of jihadists, having earned the ire of al-Qaida in 2006 for re-printing
political cartoons by Danish artist Kurt Westergaard that satirized Islam.
After the bombing — which destroyed property but did not result in any deaths — the publication got back to business, publishing its regular style of cartoons, which lampooned many major religions, politicians, the military, and more.
That eventually led to the 2012 controversy, which earned the denunciation by the White House and prompted the French government to temporarily close their embassies and schools in several Muslim countries.
After the bombing — which destroyed property but did not result in any deaths — the publication got back to business, publishing its regular style of cartoons, which lampooned many major religions, politicians, the military, and more.
That eventually led to the 2012 controversy, which earned the denunciation by the White House and prompted the French government to temporarily close their embassies and schools in several Muslim countries.
This week, more than three years after the firebombing, jihadists, resulting in 12 deaths, including the death of a police officer assigned to protect the threatened editors, attacked Charlie Hebdo’s offices again.
In its initial statement in response to the terrorist attack, the White House condemned the attacks, but did not make any judgment calls on the content of the magazine, as it had done in the past. As Reason.com pointed out, it also did not mention free speech.
"I strongly condemn the horrific shooting at the offices of Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris that has reportedly killed 12 people," President Barack Obama said in a prepared statement.
"Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims of this terrorist attack and the people of France at this difficult time. France is America’s oldest ally, and has stood shoulder to shoulder with the United States in the fight against terrorists who threaten our shared security and the world. Time and again, the French people have stood up for the universal values that generations of our people have defended. France, and the great city of Paris where this outrageous attack took place, offer the world a timeless example that will endure well beyond the hateful vision of these killers. We are in touch with French officials and I have directed my Administration to provide any assistance needed to help bring these terrorists to justice."
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.Newsmax.com/TheWire/obama-charlie-hebdo-mock-prophet-muhammad/2015/01/09/id/617516/#ixzz3OR240Rkz
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!
Jorge Alberto
Villalón Y.
With the Paris Attack the European
Civil War Just Began
John
Zmirak
John Zmirak received his B.A. from Yale University in
1986, then his M.F.A. in screenwriting and fiction and his Ph.D. in English in
1996 from Louisiana State University. John Zmirak is author, most recently, of
the upcoming book The Race to Save Our Century (with Jason Jones). His columns
are archived at www.badcatholics.com.
The colonization of
Europe by tens of millions of Muslims is on a scale unmatched in human
history—except by the colonization of North America by Europeans.
Most countries in Western Europe today face a large,
angry, separatist population in their midstcommitted to
outfacing, outbreeding, and finally outvoting their foolishly generous hosts.
Will Europe in 100 years be like New England, a place
fully inhabited by a radically new population, with places that bear trace
names of vanished tribes like the Abenakis, the Pequots, the English,
the French?
Will young residents of the Islamic
Republic based in Paris read romance novels about the exotic aborigines who
first built those gothic mosques for use as churches? Will they visit them on
reservations?
France’s Kenza Drider wears a niqab ,
as she reads a magazine in a shop, in Avignon, southern France, Monday, Sept.
13, 2010. (AP Photo/Claude Paris)
We will soon find out. The blatant attack in
broad daylight on a major magazine by masked men carrying Kalashnikovs in the
middle of Paris is not an act of terrorism.
It is an act of civil war. If France does not respond to
this attack by ultranationalist, Jew-hating militarists with all the fervor of
its heroic Resistance fighters
in 1944, it will lose its freedom instantly. There will be de facto Sharia censorship
over the press all through France—and all through Europe.
The game will be over—Europeans might as well go ahead and convert to
Islam already, and save themselves the pain.
Will the French see that ugly fact
for what it is? I cannot blame them for wanting to wish it away. Civil wars are
hideous, cruel, and unrelenting struggles that claim countless innocent lives.
But Europeans have stopped listening to
the masochists.
Nor will this war be as “tidy” as the
American Civil War, with uniformed armies blasting away at each other on broad,
open battlefields.
Crushing the Islamic insurgency across
Europe will entail mass infiltration of mosques and madrasas, mass arrests of
clerics who incite hatred of Jews and Christians, and finally the mass removal
of millions of Muslims from the continent.
People gather near candles lit to commemorate the victims
of a deadly attack at the Paris offices of French satirical newspaper Charlie
Hebdo, in Lyon, central France, Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2015. Masked gunmen stormed
the Paris offices of a weekly newspaper that caricatured the Prophet Muhammad,
killing at least 12 people, including the editor, before escaping in a car. It
was France’s deadliest postwar terrorist attack. (AP Photo/Laurent Cipriani)
Ideally, that would be accomplished by first expelling all
illegal residents, then offering financial incentives to
the rest to move back to Muslim countries. I pray God that this will be enough
to diminish the threat. It might not be. The whole of Europe might soon resemble Bosnia in
the 1990s—as the sole, stark alternative to a totalitarian Eurabia.
My hope is that, as usual, Muslims have overplayed their
hand. Just as they launched attacks on Israel full of hubris that ended in
disaster, I suspect that the chest-thumping bearded radical clerics of Europe
have overestimated their own strength, and Europe’s weakness. When the French
vote for their next president, they will remember Charlie Hebdo, and elect the National Front.
Had the Islamists waited 30 years—or
if we give them another 30 years—when the native population of Europe had
shrunk still further, and the last survivors of Nazi occupation had all passed
away, I think that the Islamic takeover of Europe would have proved
unstoppable.
The young, confident, and fanatical would have overwhelmed
the middle-aged, tentative, and guilt-ridden remnants of Christian Europe—with
the help of collaborationists, of course: themulticulturalist professors
still obsessed with the threat of intolerant Christianity (circa 1648),
the self-aggrandizing bishops and moralists who preen about
their cosmopolitan sympathies, while digging their church’s and their culture’s
grave.
But Europeans have stopped listening to the masochists.
They are marching in Germany’sstreets, in rank defiance of their
government.
Thousands of people gather for a moment of silence
to pay their respects to the victims of the deadly attack at the Paris offices
of French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo, in Lyon, central France,
Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2015. Masked gunmen stormed the Paris offices of a weekly
newspaper that caricatured the Prophet Muhammad, killing at least 12 people,
including the editor, before escaping in a car. It was France’s deadliest
postwar terrorist attack. (AP Photo/Laurent Cipriani)
They are planning to vote for genuinely patriotic parties—flawed
parties, to be sure, with some ugly baggage from Europe’s intolerant past. But
nothing proposed by the most radical anti-immigrant party in Europe, however
heated, remotely approaches the program that jihadists openly promote in
thousands of mosques, and are moving rapidly to implement across Europe: an intolerant,
misogynist, anti-Semitic and anti-Christian theocracy.
That is not some recondite ideology: It is the
political program of orthodox Islam, as fundamental to that religion as the Ten
Commandments are to Jews and the Resurrection is to Christians.
Islam is an intrinsically political religion, as nationalist and
expansionist as Japanese Shinto, circa
1941. The hope that if we accept a few more million of their immigrants and put
them on generous Western welfare benefits, a kind of Unitarian Islam will
emerge which renounces political power and blandly accepts Western pluralism is
a cowardly fantasy.
And now, in time of civil war, the option of
cowardice falls from the table. There is only resistance, or treason.
Anti-Islamic
Feeling in Europe is Rationality, not Racism!
So one of the interesting features of
the Islamic killings in Paris, is the reaction of German Prime Minister Angela
Merkel.
She
was in Britain recently, and the Daily Mail reported on
her public response to the Charlie Hebdo attacks:
Chancellor
Merkel said: ‘What has happened in Paris today is indeed a barbarous attack
against all of the values we share.
‘All
of us that live in Europe strongly condemn these attacks and our thoughts go
out to the French people and particularly to those who have lost loved one in
this horrendous attack.
‘This
is an attack against the values we all hold dear, values by which we stand,
values of freedom of the press, freedom in general and the dignity of
man.
‘And
again our thoughts are with the French people with all of those who have lost
loved one in this horrific attack and everything we can do to help the French
we will certainly do.’
Of
course, it was only a few days ago that
Angela Merkel was sermonizing to her fellow German citizens that all
anti-Islamic feeling in Germany was due to ugliness on the part of the
leadership of the anti-Islamization protests.
They all have “prejudice, coldness, even hatred in their hearts,” according to
Merkel’s preaching on German TV.
Well, I’m not sure how bad it is in
Germany yet. But, even if it is not as bad as France, it would be easy to see
why the Germans would want to do something now before it gets that bad.
How
has Islamization affected France? The Washington Times recently addressed the
situation under the headline, “Muslims segregated from French society in growing Islamist
mini-states.”
“The
situation is out of control, and it is not reversible,” said Soeren Kern, an
analyst at the Gatestone Institute and author of annual reports on the
“Islamization of France.”
“Islam
is a permanent part of France now. It is not going away,” Mr. Kern said. “I think
the future looks very bleak. The problem is a lot of these younger-generation
Muslims are not integrating into French society. Although they are French
citizens, they don’t really have a future in French society. They feel very
alienated from France. This is why radical Islam is so attractive because it
gives them a sense of meaning in their life.”
While
not a complete safe-haven for al Qaeda-type operatives, Paris and other French
cities have become more fertile places for Muslim extremists in the past
decade. City leaders have allowed virtual Islamic mini-states to thrive as
Muslims gain power to govern in their own way.
“There
are no-go areas not just in Paris, but all over France, where they are
effectively in control,” said Robert Spencer, who directs JihadWatch.org, a
nonprofit that monitors Muslim extremists.
|
“They’re operating with impunity,
apparently secure in the knowledge that authorities cannot or will not act
decisively to stop them,” he said. “And with the universal denial and
obfuscation of the clear motive for the Charlie Hebdo attack, they have good
reason to think that.” So anyone who
opposes such things must be “cold,” Angela? Such people must have “hatred in
their hearts”? Some might disagree. They might think that anyone who would allow
such an outcome must have hatred in their hearts for Europe, for France, and
for Germany. One might even wonder if you don’t hate those values you claim
we all “hold dear.” You certainly don’t like anyone who wants to preserve
those values from the threats you have brought into the country.
Read more at http://politicaloutcast.com/2015/01/anti-islamic-feeling-europe-rationality-not-racism/#Avr0DSiqghrYQo75.99 |
||||||
|
||||||
“En mi opinión”
No 845 Enero 10, 2015
“IN GOD WE TRUST”
Lázaro R González Miño EDITOR
No comments:
Post a Comment