Spanish Pundit (II)

mayo 8, 2007

Riots in Paris (part II): the videos

Riots in La Bastille:

From Ironic Surrealism.

Another video, also riots happened in La Bastille:

Another video, this riot happened in Belleville:

A Blog for All reminds that tear gas was needed to disperse the democratic youths. And that the rioters were white-skined… ejem, that was clear from the beginning…

From Red Alerts: Communist leader supports Paris Jihad.

Fausta’s blog: Sarko: What’s next?. She quotes Forbes: “French president-elect Nicolas Sarkozy plans to waste no time pushing through a weighty package of pro-market, anti-crime reforms – but the first battle is winning a majority in parliament in new elections next month“.

NRO on French elections: What Republicans should learn of Sarkozy’s victory -and also Spanish right-centre- h/t El Opinador Compulsivo:

  1. He stuck on ideas. He had specific solutions for specific problems — including some of France’s most intractable — and he stuck by them no matter what. He didn’t allow his ideas to become swamped in sentiment.
  2. He reflected common sense.
  3. Sarkozy simply ignored what the French press assumed the campaign should be about — the enshrinement of the 35-hour week or Le Pen or whatever — and stayed on-topic.
  4. he didn’t give credit to constituency issues that weren’t his own (such as Royal being a woman).
  5. He ignored meaningless issues, for example, Bayrou.
  6. He prohibited cynicism, because he stuck with ideas.
  7. He ran from losers… of his own party (Chirac and the rest of the UMP establishment).
Italian blogger Face the Truth also sees this as an example for Italian right parties.

Remember the I am a woman, vote for me of Ségo? She will be dissapointed h/t O Insurgente:

Nicolas Sarkozy won the women’s vote and fared well among blue-collar workers, even though his rival for the French presidency was a woman and a Socialist.

It was one of the surprising subplots in Sarkozy’s resounding election victory over Segolene Royal – and shows his vision of pro-market reforms and scaling back immigration appeals to a wide audience.

No Pasarán h/t EU Referendum (by the way, read the post I am linking, it has a very good insight):

In Lille, just before 22h00, around 200 anarchists French youths with black flags grouped around the Grand Place and chanted “Fascist Sarko, the people will have your hide”.

Oh, yeah, as Helen, points out, ehem the people have voted and Sarkozy has won. And how many votes anarchists had?

Deustche Welle: More riots on France after Sarkozy wins. Now, Socialist leaders appeal for calm: François Hollande (PS) calls for restraint and adds “Everyone who indulges in these acts of violence only does those people a service who want more order and strictness“. “But we need dialogue and respect instead of violence,” he added…. Too late!

Strata Sphere: Is Europe moving right? Is the democratic left in trouble?

I normally do not link to bad taste images, but you can see how badly Sarko has been treated by some people throughout the campaign, going to this post. I advice you: the image is… of very bad taste.

The New Babylon Times: In Lilles some youths climbed to the Mayor’s office balcony and some of the flags burned. (In Spanish).

Alianza entre Mamones comments: And as ever the leftists take on very well the defeats.

The American Thinker considers that the riots are caused by the spoken frienship between France and US. I really think that they do not consider the right is legitimate enough to govern.

Atlas Shrugs has more on the riots. People are blaming on his foreign origins the reaction people had when he called rioters scum. They consider that, being an immigrant, he should have more respect for immigrants. Oh, yes, but for immigrants that do not riot and work. By the way, I feel that consideration about his origins is somewhat chauvinist: and then, these leftists… blame every people of the world of being racists and segregationists… Hmmm.

Disculpen las Molestias: The important thing is not losing, and most important, not losing the elections to a conservative. Some people can’t stand it.

Stephania fears he is going to be just another right-wing socialist.

Chaim links to an IHT article about the elections. Sakozy is both an outsider and and an insider. We will see, as I have writen before, what happens in legislative elections… next June.

French blog Instict de survie reports that Islamist web Oumma.net has begun its resistance against the national-sarkosysme. They also report that the association “Votez banlieues“, was calling for anti-Sarko vote. But the French Muslim Council is happy about the result as Sarkozy was the one who united “all the French Muslim tendencies“. That, together with his mentions to euthanasia, are the two things I really do not see very clear about him.

By the way, a Catholic Church in Loos has been burned to the ground. Three people were questioned but they had all being released.

Portuguese blogger Franciso Núnes writes:

The French do not bore badly that Nicolas Sarkozy called scum to some sympathetic youths who got some fun burning neighbours’ cars and buses with passengers inside, breaking windows, beating people in the streets, destroying urban equipment

Terrible people, this French.

Je, je, je, there’s nothing better in this world that ironic people… [Uups, I forgot to write that post about Portuguese PM Socrates faking his degree… Changing from Outlook to new Windows Live Mail have those inconvenients…).

And Sarkozy Intifada Continues right now

Related posts: Riots continue after Sarkorzy wins.

Thanks to all the people who send this post to digg!!! (Especially Beth)


Technorati tags:
, , ,

abril 30, 2007

Steyn on Turkey

Filed under: Islamismo,reflexiones,Turquía — Nora @ 9:12 pm
One of the most lucid and to-the-point writers is Mark Steyn. He has a web page called Steyn-on-Line where all of his articles can be read. This is what he writes about Turkey:

For a year or more now, there’s been a steady drip of “Who lost Turkey?” stories. The modern secular Muslim state – a country that gave women the vote before Britain did and was Israel’s best friend in an otherwise hostile region – certainly, that Turkey seems to be being de-boned by the hour: it now has an Islamist government whose Prime Minister has canceled trade deals with Israel, denounced the Iraqi elections, and frosted out the US Ambassador because he was Jewish; a new edition of Mein Kampf is prominently displayed at the airport bookstore. In other words, the Zionist Entity’s best pal is starting to look like just another cookie-cutter death-to-the-Great-Satan stan-of-the-month.
But among all the lamentations only Michel Gurfinkiel’s recent analysis in commentary got to the underlying reality: Since the collapse of the Ottoman
Empire, there have been two Turkeys: the Turks of Rumelia, or European Turkey,
and the Turks of Anatolia, or Asia Minor. Kemal Ataturk was from Rumelia and so
were most of his supporters, and they imposed the modern Turkish Republic on a
somewhat relunctant Anatolia, where Ataturk’s distinction between the state and
Islam was never accepted. In its 80-year history, the population has increased from 14 million in 1923 to 70 million today, but the vast bulk of that population growth has come from Anatolia, whose population has migrated from the rural hinterland to overwhelm the once solidly Kemalist cities. Ataturk’s modern secular Turkey has simply been outbred by fiercely Islamic Turkey. That’s a lesson in demography from an all-Muslim sample: no pasty white blokes were involved. So the fact that Muslim fertility is declining in Tunisia is no consolation: all that will do, as in Turkey, is remove moderate Muslims from the equation too early in the game.

Brief and to the point…
Related posts: Turkey’s fight against Islamism.

abril 12, 2007

What are the armies for?

Filed under: Iran,reflexiones,UK,violencia — Nora @ 11:14 pm
The liberation of the 15 British sailors have made them appear in lots of TV programs and media.


Benedict White, from a Conservative’s blog, has made a great following up of one of the very bad consecuences of this deal: the permission given by the Government to the soldiers to publish their stories to the press. Only three of them are not going to publish anything regarding their forced stay in Iran. You can read:

  1. Captured sailors given exceptional permission to sell their stories.

  2. Iran Hostage Aftermath, the fury grows.

  3. Hostage crisis, stable door bolted after horses have bolted.

  4. For the three who retained their dignity.
  5. Iran Hostage Crisis, who knew about selling stories?
  6. Iran hostage Crisis Des Browne accepts responsibility!

Des Browne is the Defense Secretary. And this attitude has really angered other army soldiers and military people and families:


Families of dead soldiers told Browne: Stay away from ceremony | the Daily Mail [h/t A Tangled Web]

The families of four British soldiers killed in Iraq delivered a humiliating snub to Defence Secretary Des Browne by asking him not to attend a ceremony on the return of the bodies to Britain. The rejection is the latest blow for beleagured Browne who is facing heavy criticism for allowing 15 soldiers captured in Iran to sell their stories. A petition has been set up on the No 10 website asking for heads to role in the cash-for-stories fiasco.

After that Blair has spoken about the deal: BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Navy deal not good idea – Blair

Tony Blair has said “in hindsight” the navy’s decision to allow sailors held captive in Iran to sell their stories to the media was not a “good idea”. The prime minister said he was not involved in the decision, which he said was taken in “good faith” as the freed personnel were “pursued” by the media.

Earlier, Defence Secretary Des Browne said he took full responsibility for allowing the stories to be sold. Mr Blair said that he did not think such stories would be sold in future.

Asked if he had played a part in allowing the freed captives to sell their stories, Mr Blair said: “I didn’t actually know about the decision until after it was taken.

But really that is not the point.

“The navy was trying to deal with a wholly exceptional situation in which the families were being pursued by the media to sell their stories. The navy took the view that it was better to manage the situation rather than let it happen.

“With hindsight was that a good idea? No, precisely because people would then misrepresent that somehow the navy were encouraging people to sell their stories, which they weren’t doing at all.”

Conservative Leader Cameron has called this decission a dreadful one. It certainly is.



Anyway, Browne’s fighting to keep his job!!! (h/t An Englishmen’s Castle, who thinks that this is not the most important error made by the Blair Government, referring to the troops’ lack of funding for protecting the soldiers and other personnel).



Jihad Watch has reported that Iran is going to make movie and book about the UK sailors.



EURSOC reports about “two bishops – one the Army’s top priest – have praised Iran’s “mercy”
and “forgiveness” in releasing the men and one woman last week.



Beer n sandwiches: This decision will, in my opinion, undermine morale in the armed forces
and make our military even less effective than they are now. Sailors in
a similar situation in the future will have yet another variable to
distract them resulting in hesitancy and reduced effectiveness.



Also in Not Proud of Britain.



Pub Philosopher reports:

Although the Navy has now changed its mind and banned any deals with newspapers,
it is probably now too late. Faye Turney’s story is already in print
and other former captives have made arrangements with newspapers to
sell their stories, for which they will be handsomely paid.

Publius Pundit:

The Islamic Republic of Iran announced it produces nuclear fuel on an
industrial level. Reza Aqazadeh, the country’s vice president and head
of its Atomic Energy Organization said that the 3, 000 centrifuges from
Natanz are merely the beginning. “When we say we have entered
industrial scale enrichment, (it means) there is no way back.
Installation of centrifuges will continue steadily to reach a stage
where all the 50,000 centrifuges are launched.” (IRNA)

Woman honor thyself:

Mr. “There was no Holocaust, let’s kill all Jews and
Americans” successfully kidnapped British citizens, subjected them to
brutal psychological tactics, managed to coerce phony confessions out
of them for the media, blackmailed the U.K. for the release of a
high-ranking Iranian terror coordinator in Iraq, and laughed in the
face of the Geneva conventions all in a day’s work.

And not a single shot fired.

Yep. That is.





Comment:

The origin of the modern State lies precisely in the need to defend ordinary people from external (from other countries) and internal menaces. For that mission, at first they employed mercenaries, who played that part only for money, with all the problems that this could bring for the normal people to have defenders who were more interested in the booty than in anything else. The kings of the late Middle Ages, in a process of making a stronger State, began considering this as an unfavorable stand.

As a result, in the Modern Age, they began recruiting by force, considering this a much more reliable for the security of the State-Nation that the previous system, as the people who were the actual fighters were the same ones who were more interested in its own survival.

But in later years, citizens have protested about the burden that this service means for them, and had reclaimed the introduction of a professional system: that is, people trained and paid to defend the countries. Normal people who consider that have vocation and guts enough for the job, enroll and serve in the Army.

But this people are only spoken about the payment, the uniform, the semi-NGO’s work and not much more of what their job is. The real thing here is that, as Manuel Morales do Val writes in Crónicas Bárbaras, “modern Governments, and specially Spanish one, deny any talk about the first mission of the professional soldiers is: to combat, to kill and to die“.

Are Army people knowing really what they are asked for? And what is more important: is society willing to make this sacrifice and for what is it willing to sacrifice its soldiers?

I really think that we do not have these two points clear and I also do not think we are really not prepared neither psycologically nor physically to understand what this means.

These days the film 300 is telling, for the ones who want to hear it, that a king (with some tendency to foul language and bad temper) and his 300 personal guards fought bravely against the numerous Persian soldiers and probably would have won -with very little help of another less than 1500 soldiers of other parts of Greece- if a traitor would not have lead them directly to be killed.

But that is the point: if you are a soldier, that does not mean that you can be assasinated by terrorists, but it means you have to sacrifice even your life, for your country. And that means that probably you are not going to see your families again.

So I insist: are we willing to send our boysto fight for something, knowing they are going to be asked for the supreme sacrifice? And what for?

And that is the point: there are supreme -and real- principles and values, the West should defend. But are we willing to?

I am seeing that, as the time goes by, there is much less auto-critic in these subjects. We -at least some of us- tend to say “Ahmadinejad/Hamas/terrorists…are very bad” -and it’s true-. But,err, what is the West doing?

Military people are slighted as not being normal citizens, they are plainly warmongers, who enrol the Army because “they are the most violent in the school“, a sort of stupid Rambos. And they are slighted by the same people who are being defended by their own sacrifice, by people who are not willing to make that same sacrifice.

I remember a scene from the 2nd part of Lord of the Rings, The Two Towers, in which Eomer is reclaiming attention of the ailing king Theoden, asking him what are they going to do now that the Saruman’s orcs are killing at will through Rohan. And then appears Grima “Wormtongue”, who answers him “Saruman’s a friend and an ally” and after that, he accusses Eomer of being a warmonger.

I really think that a very outstanding portrait of what is happening today: Government’s structures allied with not very recommendable people, “ailing” presidents and a society blind to its own menaces. And an un-understood soldier: he is the bad guy, the one who must be “forsaken for this land“.

But would have the Middle Earth been freed from Sauron’s grasp not being by these supposedly warmongers?

Lastly, I do not have to say what Spain would do in the same occassion, have I? Our lover-of-eternal-peace President… Ahmadinejad and the democratic state of Iran (pfffftttttt)… and the love for the rest of thugs that in the world there are…

And Spanish society? Not very optimistic. The heirs of Guzman El Bueno (that man who, asked to give in the fortress he commanded to the Moors by a Christian traitor who was serving them, to save the life of his own son, throw his own knife for them to kill his own son with it and not to surrender) are not in the mood…

Porca miseria…

NOTE: This does not mean that there are no people who support the Army, but no one can deny me that the feeling towards them have changed for the worse lately.




Technorati Tags: , .




Powered by ScribeFire.

marzo 20, 2007

Why some Westerners hate so much the West?

Filed under: Australia,Europa,Islamismo,reflexiones,UK,Venezuela — Nora @ 5:19 pm

Yes, I have been thinking about this for a long time. Why we are so interested in killing our own way of life? The problem are not the enemies, but the false friends: those people who try to cave into the desires of the worst sort of people, mainly remarked enemies of Western principles and way of life.

Chávez and the Western propaganda:

Investor’s Business Daily chronicled Chavez’s troubles from the Bush tour, first describing Chavez’s early effort to hit Bush with nasty street protests in a bid to direct cameras away from the visiting U.S. president, and ‘seize the message. That didn’t work, so his next move was to launch of a ‘shadow tour’ to his allies, in a further effort to draw attention from Bush. The ‘shadow tour’ didn’t go according to plan and worse yet, made him look ridiculous. Instead of getting spontaneous adoring masses and media coverage, Chavez was repeatedly described – from Argentina to Mexico – as a spurned boyfriend stalking Bush, unable to handle his quiet rejection. After that, Chavez watched as his own allies distanced themselves from him, just as it was getting obvious that success was building in President Bush’s own tour.

[…] In waltzed Walters, possibly ignorant of all this going on (to be charitable), and just thrilled to crow to U.S. viewers about her new interview ‘catch.’ But not only did Walters give Chavez a platform to improve his image – something Chavez had been trying hard to do in the last few days, she piled on the usual claptrap from the Chavez propaganda machine about Chavez’s wonderful generosity to the poor in both Venezuela and the U.S.

[…] As for Venezuela’s battered citizens who have borne the brunt of Chavez’s disastrous dictatorship, Walters had only a brief, terse segment showing three unnamed (why?) young men seated against a hard wall, trying to explain that their future had been robbed, their security was at stake, their democracy had become dictatorship and their only recourse was to flee the country. Only two spoke, and between them, got about two sentences in to Walters’ interviewer. However, the sloppy cutting of the filmed segment showed they had tried to elaborate but were cut off. Walters quickly shot past the few seconds of that segment, never returning to it, to move on to much longer and far more colorful spreads about the wonders of chavismo, calling Venezuela “a land of contrasts.”

Well, the exodus of the ordinary able for exit people has begun and it’s really growing. Read the interview to Gustavo Coronel, ex-President of Venezuelan Oil National Company: “Young people flees from Venezuela because they are searching a society in which they can grow as individuals“.

See also Babalu Blog.

If you want to read more about Chávez, read my posts: Is Venezuela rationing food?, London is going to get foreign aid, Venezuela to Al-Qaeda: do not menace us, we are anti-Imperialists!, AlQaeda in South America.

Britain: A school production of Roald Dahl’s Three Little Pigs has turned the heroes into three little puppies for fear of offending Muslims. Thanks to An Englishman’s Castle, MNM and The Lone Voice. According to latest news, they have already being changed back into piggies again. What surprises me of these kind of decisions, is the lack of understanding and of really being convinced of the higher moral principles Western democracy has. It’s good not to offend but no one has a right not to be offended. I agree totally with this:

Philip Davies, the Conservative MP for Shipley, said: “My view is that the people responsible for this are completely bonkers. It is the type of political correctness which makes people’s blood boil. “As usual it is done in the name of ethnic minorities but it is perpetrated by white, middle class, do-gooders with a guilt complex and far too much time on their hands.”

If you read the link from The Lone Voice, we can see that:

Education chairman Clr Jim Dodds has said: “The decision to ban the pigs was made by well-meaning people – but it was the wrong decision. Let’s stick with the traditions“.

A spokesman for the British Muslim Association said: “It is wrong when people try to decide what Muslims think, without ever asking for their opinions.”

Observe that this spokesman is just conisdering that the rest of the world should ask him for an opinion. That is obviously not correct: Muslims can give their opinions but that doesn’t mean they are going to be obeyed or even taken into consideration.

But, that being clear, what he says points out another malaisse of Western countries, malaisse which can be summed up in the Spanish maxima “Eres más papista que el Papa” or “You are more papist that the Pope himself”.

Again from England, but this time from A Tangled Blog:

The University of Leeds has has cancelled a lecture on “Islamic anti-Semitism” by a German academic. Matthias Köntzel arrived at the university yesterday morning to begin a three-day programme of lectures and seminars, but was told that it had been called off on “security grounds”.

A historical reflection about the birth of multiculturalism in Britain by Pub Philosopher. A MUST READ!

Australia: The American Thinker writes about Mufti Sheikh Taj Aldin al-Hilali:

Al-Hilali outraged Australians last fall by describing women as “uncovered meat,” and in January compounded their furor when he claimed that Muslims had more right to the country than the “Anglo-Saxon” heirs to Australia’s convict ancestors. On March 12, al-Hilali spokesman Keysar Trad brazenly baited politicians to stop using Muslims as a “political football.”

In October 2006, after al-Hilali’s misogynist sermon at west Sydney’s Lakemba mosque, Prime Minister John Howard criticized him and other politicians demanded his dismissal and deportation. Egyptian-born al-Halali has been in that position before, however: after spewing anti-Jewish hatred at the University of Sydney in 1988, deportation proceedings began. But under Muslim pressure, in 1990, Australia granted him citizenship.

[…] Some Muslims rebuked him: Darulfatwa (Australia’s Islamic High Council) called al-Hilali an ill-respected, “divisive figure” and asked the Lebanese Muslim Association (LMA) running the Lakemba mosque to fire him. The Forum on Australia’s Islamic Relations (FAIR) also sought “sending [al-Hilali] out to an early pasture.”

This is a very interesting thing: he had fulfilled every condition to be deported and yet he was not, because of Muslim pressure. The problem is that this kind of pressure is being used now to achieve the same effect:

With the al-Hilali camp’s latest political announcement, Australia’s radical Muslims have also announced their strategy to again leverage multiculturalism and Western guilt for their advantage. This time, they’re fighting Christians along with the politicians: Christian Democratic Party leader, Rev. Fred Nile, called Monday for a 10-year moratorium on Muslim immigration to Australia, in favor of Christians fleeing Islamic persecution–which not incidentally goes largely uncovered, in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Pakistan.

But failing a massive Christian campaign on the issue, Muslim pressure again looks ascendant in Australia, and al-Hilali highly unlikely to be sent packing for good. After all, the country’s parliamentary multicultural affairs minister recently assured the public that a government-sponsored Islamic center will produce moderate imams.

See the problem? The Muslim voices against this Imam, though existent, as the link from The American Thinker show, are not the supported by the own Government and society. So this Imam and his supporters, who only want to change open Western society into a “land of Islam”, where women would be considered as meat, Christians and Jews as pigs and monkeys and so on. So the failing of society -more worrying even than the Government- to confront this kind of attitudes is the key to the question. Remember Sparta was not taken but by a traitor? This is just the same…

An important example of Westerner-who-hates-West is, without doubt, London major, Ken Livingstone. While he receives in audience Yusuf Al-Qaradawi – who has called for the killing of Jews, approves suicide bombings and excuses the Muslim punishments proscribed for homosexuals – and kisses with Chávez, he is a Jewis-hater and a Palestinian-lover…, he has had to acknolwedge that in London, anti-Jewish attacks have risen 30%. But for that, he has waited 3 weeks after the report in which that numbers were published. And, when the London Jewish Forum has invited him to discuss it, he has sent Lee Jasper, Senior Advisor on race relations and policing, John Ross, Director of Economic and Business policy and Simon Fletcher, the Chief of Staff. He has time to see al-Qaradawi but not to see the people who are attacked. More respect and worry for the people who, at least, are menacing than for the menaced and hurt.

Belgium: From Brussels Journal via Blogbis.

Worried immigrants told Ms. Uijt den Bogaard what was happening. On the basis of their accounts and her own experiences she wrote (confidential) reports for the city authorities about the growing radicalization. This brought her into conflict, both with the Islamists and her bosses in the city. The city warned her that her reports were unacceptable, that they read like “Vlaams Belang tracts” (the Vlaams Belang is Antwerp’s anti-immigrant party) and that she had to “change her attitude.” The Islamists sensed that she disapproved of them. They might also have been informed, because there are Muslims working in the city administration. One day, when she was accompanied by her superior, she was attacked by a Muslim youth. Her superior refused to interfere. When she questioned him afterward he said that all the animosity toward her was her own fault.”

In the end she was fired. She is unemployed at the moment and gets turned away whenever she applies for another job as a civil servant. Last week, she learned that city authorities have given the job of integration officer, whose task it is to supervise 25 Antwerp mosques, to one of the radical Salafists. Meanwhile, the latter have threatened her with reprisals if she continues to speak out.”

See? Again it happens the same: some Salafists –with money– arrive and began changing Western way of life. When someone decides to speak the truth, not only the “city” -so the Western authorities- do not support her -even if she is receiving death threats and had been actually attacked-, but they fire her and they employ a Salafist in her job!! But the most important thing is that the people who were worried about the new situation were immigrants, not nationals!!

I think critics of Islamofascists, or even of Islam, are not critisizing the ones who are really the culprits of the Islamofascist invasion: the Trojan horses who hate, even more than the Islamofascists, a very important part of our culture. And it is very important to note that, according to Homer, the 10-year bloody Trojan war ended only because of the Trojan horse. Trojans received it as a gift from the gods, and it was: but from the Greek god Poseidon, not from the Trojan’s.


Technorati : , , , , , ,
Del.icio.us : , , , , , ,
Ice Rocket : , , , , , ,

Powered by Zoundry

marzo 16, 2007

MSN.es bias on Cuba

Filed under: Cuba,Derechos Humanos,medios de comunicación,reflexiones — Nora @ 10:01 pm

I was reading this afternoon the MSN Spanish portal and found this piece of news:

Cuba will celebrate parliamentary elections this end of the year.

It begins:

Cuba will celebrate parlamentarian elections between the end of this year and the beginning of 2008, elections in “exceptional circumstances” which could reelect the convalescent leader Fidel Castro, said on Thursay some parlamentarians.

Cubans renew each 5 years the National Asambly of the Popular Power, the Parliament, which chooses afterwards the President of the Councils of State and of Ministers.

With this description any one can consider that Cuba is a perfect democracy. Of course, the normal random about the “fight against imperialism” is included and is said nothing about the real Cuban situation. But if you read till the end, it says:

In Cuba all citizens who are older than 18 years can vote. The vote is, however not compulsory.

WOW, what a very interesting freedom: it’s not compulsory to vote to the unique party:

The only legal party is the Communist, of which the First Secretary is Castro and the second, his brother Raúl. To be parliamentarian it’s not required to be affiliated to the Communist Part.

The last parliamentary elections were held on 2002.

Looks like Cuba is a model of democracy. And someone wonders after about Spanish pro-Cuban stand?


Technorati : , , ,

Powered by Zoundry

Morocco-Saharan-Spain update

Filed under: Argelia,Marruecos,PP,PSOE,reflexiones,Sáhara Occidental,Spain — Nora @ 3:44 pm

And we go on with the pacifist hypocrites (I am going to add a label for hypocrites):

According to the President of the State Cooperation of the Associations of Solidarity with Sahara (CEAS-SAHARA), José Taboada, the Spanish Government, with its “infamous” support of the Moroccan Autonomy plan, “far from finding a just, pacific and enduring peace, is contributing to the return of war, completely justified”. On the contrary, he asks in an interview, “What is the real cause of selling to the Moroccan kingdom more than 1.200 tanks, and other war weapons, worthy of 200 millions €?. Is giving weapons to a regime which has an open war with the illegal occupied lands, even if there is a truce, and which uses its tanks to break on the minority for, at least, not let them speak, as the Zapatero’s Government wants to achieve peace?“.

Peace, how many crimes are comitted in thy name!!! This is the Government of the absurd “peace processes”.

“So, as the Saharauis of the occupied lands resist to the Moroccan pressure”, says Taboada, ” those who are in exile are facing the desert hostitlity, where at least there lives are not at risk”. There are two Saharas, one occupied and another one, which is free, and now Spain is capitulating to Moroccan blackmail, he laments. This position of the Spanish Government, he continues, “is not ethic, it’s not clever. It’s dangerous as it maintains an status quo that makes the poverty grow when it could just use it’s power to push Sahara into economic development”. So many years of suffering, he goes on, to blush with the Spanish support ti a plan which does not even consider independence, conditio sine qua non for the conflict’s solution, that was considered by James Baker plan, which was accepted in the beginning by all the sides.

But Taboada goes on asking himself: “Why Saharauis cannot have,as any citizen, of the minute of freedom that gives you the election? Does Spain has a debt so important with Morocco?”. According to the coordinator, the answer is yes, and “the price is going to be paid by the saharauis, a change coin, with which Spain is protecting the agreements with Morocco regarding the fish market, the immigration and terrorism, or to prevent any question about Ceuta and Melilla”.

He adds that the Kingdom of Mohammed VIth is also menacing other countries of UE and USA.

He considers the “possibility of Morocco being converted into a Republic under Islamic rule if the Western Sahara is lost“. He denounces, in view of this dangerous considerations, that the Socialist Government prefers to “ally itself with the plans of the Moroccan Kingdom, that are no others than legitimate before the UN its illegal occupation“.

So, let me sum up the facts. Morocco invades ILLEGALLY Spanish Sahara, in the precise moment in which Franco is dying and Spain is not worried but by its own existence.

Since then, Socialists and Communists have been supporting Saharauis. And pointing the blame on center-right people as the ones who “abandoned the Saharauis“, and asking for “freedom for saharauis“.

Aznar wins the elections and, not liking very much the Moroccan King, fights in the UN to maintain the Baker plan which recognises the right of the Saharauis to have a referendum to decide about their future and near the end of his 2nd term, makes a preference agreement with Algeria to import natural gas from there.

In a private conversation, Piqué, then Spanish FM, is menaced by the Moroccan King, telling him that “though Spain has not been the target of Islamist attacks, that does not mean that an Islamist attack couldn’t take place in Spanish soil“. Moratinos, later as FM, says, speaking about that menace, that “we have to maintain good relations with Morocco“. (¡!)

Zapatero goes to Morocco where he is photographed with a map in which Ceuta, Melilla and the Canary Islands are depicted as a part of the Moroccan kingdom.

Zapatero wins the election after the street, MSM and citizen pressure regarding the Iraqi war. And of course, after March 11th bombings, which causes I do not know, but of the people detained -I am not particularly inclined to any supposition: I think all of them are wrong and right. I do not think truth will be ever known …- most of them are Moroccans, who cannot pass as very Jihadi types. Zapatero says, in relation with the Spanish foreign policy, that “he wants to go back to the heart of Europe“.

Zapatero goes in his first trip to Morocco (which as you know is NOT Europe).

Three years later, after having a lot of crisis with Moroccan kingdom [Immigrants, the case of the oranges that some of the Moroccan producers say were invented by them and asked for a compensation -Lo leí en El Mundo, periódico de papel, si alguien tiene un link, me lo deja en comentarios-, the drug dealing…], he recognises the Moroccan autonomy plan, sells tanks and other weapons to Morocco for a total valor of 200 millions of € and agrees to build a train with Morocco under the sea.

Algeria raises the gas prices 20% as a result.

I keep on asking the same question: what has seen our president in this man?

Other related news:

Aznar reveals that Chirac told him to give Ceuta, Melilla and the Canary Islands to Morocco. Chirac denies it (of course, the contrary is a little bit shameful: pressing on the President of an INDEPENDENT State to modify his territory).

So the question is: is Morocco related to the March 11th bombings or they are just playing the card of the Islamoterrorists knowing that so pacifist a Government, the same one who proposed the Civilizations’ Alliance relies precisely in being the opposite to Aznar’s Government? Could Moroccan King ally himself with the Islamists not to leave power, if the moment comes?

[NOTE: the related facts are only that: FACTS. Each one can interpret them as is able or wants to].

________________________________

Related posts:

Argelia raises the gas as Zapatero supports Morocco about Western Sahara.

France-Spain-Morocco-Algeria update.


Technorati : , , , ,
Del.icio.us : , , , ,
Ice Rocket : , , , ,

Powered by Zoundry

febrero 16, 2007

Well, this is respect for… who?

Filed under: libertad religiosa,noticias increíbles,reflexiones,USA — Nora @ 10:09 am

I’m amazed each time I read something like this:

Cross is Offensive BUT sex show is art.

The cross in the Wren Chapel had to go because it offended an unspecified (and undocumented) number of people on the William and Mary Campus. However, on the 12th of February the school hosted the “Sex Workers Art Show.” This from the current issue of the Flat Hat:

The Sex Workers’ Art Show is a cabaret-style production featuring nine performers who also happen to be employees or former employees of the sex industry. The artists present a live art exhibition that includes spoken word, burlesque and multimedia performances.

Sex-related issues and awareness of the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender community are addressed in the show.

Several professors are requiring students in their classes to attend the show. All students enrolled in Introduction to Women’s Studies and in music professor Sophia Serghi’s Performance Art Ensemble are among at least 100 students required to attend the show.

The appeal of the show is that it creates a forum for students to embrace the idea of sexual art forms and dismiss any qualms about the topic. “It’s a sex-positive event – pro-woman, pro-queer – and it brings sex issues to the forefront,” Barker said.

Some Have Hats comments on the subject:

Well, that’s good to know, because when I was in college, no one ever mentioned sex. (Right.) And it’s important to keep sex issues in the “forefront,” otherwise students might get distracted by thoughts of history, philosphy, economics, government or, may the Force forbid it, religion.

I think I do not have to comment this…

You can sign a petition for saving Wren Cross. (image below).

Gateway Pundit has more on the subject.

[It’s another sign that there is no respect for religion in general. When they speak about respect for Islam -example, Mohammed cartoons-, there is nothing but fear of being beheaded by some foolish Islamists].

This affair reminds me something I read over at Fausta’s blog when commenting the Vagina Monologues.

The Monologues defines healthy sexuality as the selfish pursuit of sexual pleasure and encourages audiences to become connoisseurs and voyeurs of all manner of sexual experience. In doing so, the play champions the very commodification of sex that endangers women – including those trapped in a sex trade driven by our culture’s insatiable appetite for unlimited and instant sexual gratification. Ensler may have intended to extol the best virtues of women, but she wound up imitating the worse vices of men.

That is, prêt-a-porter sex, just as Kleenex or clothes or shoes… It is a good reflection for post-St. Valentine’s day (in Egypt, Prophet Muhammad’s Day, Eurabians should be considering that change in the calendar, after the clothes’ change 😉 ).

Traducción: En un campus americano, William and Mary campus, quitaron una cruz porque ofendía a una serie de personas (sin decir qué personas o qué número de personas), pero después están obligando invitando a los alumnos a acudir a un evento en el que empleados o antiguos empleados de la industria del sexo realizarán representaciones de cualquier tipo de acto sexual. Incluso habrá proyecciones multimedia. Dicen que es un evento pro-mujer y pro-diversión.

Me quedo a cuadros… A mí no me parece nada pro-mujer. A mí me parece más pro-industria del sexo… Otro evento muy desinteresado, por lo que veo. Es un signo más de que frente al Islam no existe respeto, existe miedo frente al degüello.


Technorati : ,

febrero 15, 2007

Unbelievable news from Britain

Filed under: noticias increíbles,reflexiones,terrorismo,terroristas — Nora @ 3:16 pm

Firstly, I read that Ken Livingstone “modest” trip to Cuba has costed London’s taxpayers £20,000, including £16,991 in flight tickets. Ken Livingstone also had plans to go to Venezuela to see his friend Chávez -that now wants to nationalize food stores-, but the Major did not go, while his 4 assistants did it at a cost of nearly £16,000, including £12,948 on flights.

Result: 20 plus 16 thousand equals 36 thousand pounds, that is, if 1 British pound = 1.49757636 Euro, €53,912. I really think that is a terrible expenditure for a Major’s trip.

The London Major said that he was going to make an oil deal. I wonder who he was doing that oil deal for, Londoners or he himself.

And then I read this:

Four Britons detained in Somalia on terrorism charges have been been returned to the UK today, but could be back on the streets within hours.

[…]

The spokeswoman said the men were detained by the Kenyan authorities after crossing the border from Somalia.

Somalia is currently in the grip of a violent power struggle between Islamic extremists and government forces, who are backed by Ethiopian troops.

Last month, there were reports Britons had been fighting alongside the Islamic forces with some killed, injured or captured in the fighting. Somalia’s deputy prime minister also claimed some financial support for the Islamic militant movement in his country was coming from the UK.

What is happening with terrorism in Europe? Why on earth violent people are held with such respect while the normal innocent civilian is mistreated once and again?

I really think that the problem is not the people who come here who want to hurt our countries and freedoms, but the insiders, those people, that living here and being nationals -for example, the “modest” London Major-, are working against those same objectives. I do not think that violence is the solution, but, if things continue the same way, more people will cave into violence as the only respected ones are the violent. And that is a pity.

Because people are not really respecting each other, but fearing being hurt and killed. And Democracy, as the empire of Law and Justice, cannot fear anything. If people who believe in Democracy are fearful of the ones who doesn’t, then the powerful ones are the latter, and so Democracy has ended before normal peaceful citizen has taken that into account…

So some people are speaking for a Christian Jihad… No, they are not supporting killing anyone, but:

We should draw a line in the sand – defining our unique national cultures, while resisting the encroachment of unbending, imperialistic Muslims.

That would be excellent, although I would extent that to any other violent and imperialistic group. So, who is going to begin doing that?

__________

And then I see this photo:

The new burka-ish fashion appearing just in the block next to you….

[More photos on IBA]

I am not going to wear that even if all people are using it. GRRRRRRRRRRR!!! Can’t Europeans be more idiot? I do not think so. After so many years to free women of all the veils and unconfortable garments (unluckily, heels are existing yet, but, luckily, they are optional…), now they are considering them fashionable. My goodness….

__________

And here comes the burkini-fashion!!!! -very used by Australian Muslim women-:

The questions here are: do they know about the benefits of the Sun in the skin? And where is the bikini here? I personally prefer swimming-suit, not bikini, but this is somewhat exaggerated…

[Yes, I know Australia is not Britain, but it is also the fashion on your next block]

Read on Taking Aim, The Lone Voice and Right Truth 1 and 2. Also in Nuevo Digital.


Technorati : , , ,
Del.icio.us : , , ,
Ice Rocket : , , ,

febrero 10, 2007

The importance of ideologues

Filed under: ETA,reflexiones,Spain,terrorismo — Nora @ 3:40 pm
I remember when I was in school, and was convinced that History has been done by kings and knights, by armies and soldiers.
That was before one of my favorites teachers in school, began explaining us the French Revoluction. She told us: “it is true that the inmediate cause of the Revolution was the raise of the bread’s price. At that time, bread was the basic element of the meal of any French man. But the French Revolution would never have taken place if ideas had not make its path through the French society. French thinkers were convinced that the bad situation of peasants and in general, every one who belonged to the lower parts of society, was not going to change if the Ancient Regime did not disappear. So what at first only seemed a normal unrest over the bread’s price, turned to be a total change of the basis of society and ideas which, together with American Revolution -with a similar ideological situation-, was going to change the reality of the West forever”.
But ideas can also impell society in a bad direction: take for example, the Mein Kampf. Hitler wrote it and its content really changed the direction of Germany in the worst way possible. The results of his thought are well known: destruction of democracy, dictatorship, the Shoah, assasination of dissidents…
Looks like the evolution of my teacher’s thinking has not reached some of the leftist intelectuals in my country.
The other day -one of the few that I am able to- I was watching Telemadrid, the TV from Madrid’s Autonomous Community. In the evenings there is a program called “Night Diary”, in which basically a summary of the news from that day is being done. Lately, a new director, Fernando Sánchez Dragó, has begun his leadership over this program, a really very interesting one.
Well, as I was saying the other day he invited a leftist intelectual, called Benjamin Prado, and a right-wing one, Luis Alberto de Cuenca, to speak about terrorism. Mr Prado begun saying that anyone in Spain thinks the same about De Juana Chaos -well, except Mr Zapatero,who has called him a “man of peace”, and in favor of the peace process-, but that he did “not want to punish anyone for writing an article”.
Of course, someone who writes defending the independence of any part of a country -in this case, Spain-, has my respect, even if I think that not a bright thought in a world each day more interconnected and in which the economic competitiveness is going to be held between growing groups of countries.
Police experts call a serial killer someone who kills a lot of people, but with no political reason. They kill just because they need/like to kill, normally after producing an enormous amount of pain in the victim. Jack the Ripper was a serial killer. But he did not have a ideological basis for his acts, he did not have any moral justification for it and also his acts can be explained because of mental problems. So everyone -except other very few serial killers- has rejected even having a little likeness to him.
The problem with terrorism is that serial killers HAVE ideological basis and moral justification, inducing the peaceful people of a country, the world, etc. to think that their lives are at stake if their demands are not fulfilled. The blackmail to society is deepened by the characteristic of peaceful that can be applied to our modern society. Yes, violence exists but the majority of the people are not violent, they just want to live in peace.
So here, the majority of the people, who are peaceful and who have renounced to violence in favor of justice, are made to think that political negotiation -the basis of the violence- is going to end every known problem regarding terrorism.
WRONG: if US Government would have negotiated with Al Capone -who also had some kind of justification: people wanted to drink alcohol and he wanted to live very well- and gave him all that he wanted, more and more Mafia personalities would have appear, just as happened in Italy after Mussolini. You know, that is a very interesting thing: Mob have been nearly ended by Mussolini -a bastard by the away, don’t be confused-, and US Armies thought that Mob was going then to be a very good force against fascism. So they helped Mob and nearly 50 years later, we all know what happened with Judge Falcone and Sicily and Naples.
If democracy wants to overcome terrorism, the only solution is to ensure that the Law is applied over all the people who kill, maim, and kidnap -wonderful the interview with Ortega Lara, 532 days kidnapped by ETA-, but also to people who finance -very important, we would have to consider who is “earning” money because of ETA terrorism- and ideologically justify those terrible acts.
So now someone would ask me: and what about freedom of expression? What about the Mohammed cartoons? Well, the difference is obvious: the cartoons WERE NOT calling anyone to kill, maim, etc, etc. They were just a non-Muslim vision of the figure of Prophet Mohammed. But afterwards, foolish imams and reknown personalities all over the Muslim world called Muslims to behead the cartoonists, the paper responsibles, … So there is the “moral” justification for acts who are totally oposite to any human value of respect to another’s views and ideas.
This is the reason why I went yesterday -with nearly over 1.5 Million Spanish- to a demonstration in Madrid held to oppose ETA negotiation and to remember the 2 Ecuador nationals who were killed on Dec 30th in Madrid-Barajas Airport 4th Terminal. We did not have the kisses of the “intelectuals”*, such as Almodóvar, Bardem, Penélope Cruz, etc, etc, some of them went to another one in which only 200.000 people supported Zapatero’s policy. Argentinian actor Federico Lippi said “we have to build a healthy barrier to stop this prehistoric, even gothic right” -I guess he is not referring to gothic music, even when I know several right-wingers who like Evanescence, for example me-. Well, I have some respect for this old man, having to make such a role, because he did not underlined how on earth that healthy barrier was going to be made. Stars in right-winger’s vests perhaps? Ghettos to anyone who do not think like him?
Ortega Lara said, when asked why he did not go to the intelectual’s demonstration, “I agree with the slogan For peace and against terrorism, but I am going farther than that. I am also against any sort of political negotiation”. I agree with him. The violation of other people’s rights can’t have any kind of retribution in a democracy. If not, we are living under a Terror dictatorship. And that is something no one wants. Or are there some Robespierres nowadays living among us?
* One of the curious things of this time in History is what society considers an intelectual. In past centuries, only very few people were given that kind of consideration: Galileo, Kepler, Copernico, Cervantes, Shakespeare, St. Thomas of Aquinas, da Vinci, Durero, Einstein, Madame Curie and her husband, Newton, Descartes, Hobbes, Voltaire, etc. You know, people whose ideas, inventions or discoveries were so important they had influenced reality and made it completely different. You know, what we could consider as “heroes of the mind”, who acheived that kind of consideration after long years -sometimes a life- of study and reflection.
Nowadays, anyone who has played a role in a film and has appeared twice in a “coure” newspaper, even if he/she can barely write or has never been a good student, considers that his/her duty is to influence society. And of course, they take that as seriously as they can take the rest of their lifes. That is: very few are really fighting for ideas, they are doing that because it is modern or because American people are less inteligent that Europeans… and, afterwards, doing whatever they need to obtain an Oscar and to begin working in Hollywood. In most cases, they are nothing but hypocrites, who would be praising any other Government, whatever the ideological position it would have, if their money or job would be at stake.
In Spain, cinema regulation stipulates that State should give money for interesting projects. Of course, interesting is not a very clear word. Spanish films are not very succesful and each year fewer people are going to see them, because they are basically the same: Civil War, whores, homosexuals, drug addicts, etc -with very few exceptions-. But they keep on making that crap, and saying they are doing “social realism”. Of course, the culprits are the Americans… without taking into account that French made an even more restrictive regulation over foreign films and they are also losing people.
We can say that here the Catholic hypocrite -that man/woman who went to Church to be given communion, so everyone could see he was a very good man- had been replaced by the leftist-intelectual hypocrite: you are nobody if you do not consider US and Israel the basic culprits of everything bad under the sun, if Ché Guevara or Ho-Chi-Minh are not your idols and you have not gone to any “NO to Iraqi war” demonstration.
Err, yes, before you ask, for that people I am nobody. And I am very proud of that.
(I wrote this on Sunday. After that, there is a political storm here over some photos of bloody ETA terrorist -son of a bitch, with all the letters- showing how emaciated he is after his hunger strike all over the British press. I do not know why this political storm. If a serial killer or a multiple rapist begins a hunger strike if his freedom is not granted after being condemned, ehhh, what would the answer of British political correct people would be? Instead of worrying so much about someone who is using his freedom this way, one would suppose British readers would be more interested to learn what is going on inside their mosques -or in the future ones-. But of course, it’s much interesting to speak about a bloody Spanish -hey, that is terrific, he is not Basque, even if I am tempted to call him that- TERRORIST).
Related posts:

Photos:

You have some here. Socialists have argued that Spanish flag and hymn should not have been used in the demonstration… because we were stealing them from all the Spanish people. This is as one party in US, France, Great Britain, etc. tells the other: do not use the flag, you are stealing it from all the people of this country… This is remarkable in Spain even more because they are not using Spanish symbols as they think they are too…. Spanish…

Crea un blog o un sitio web gratuitos con WordPress.com.