Home Friday Afternoon Roundup - Put Some Teeth In It
Home Friday Afternoon Roundup - Put Some Teeth In It

Friday Afternoon Roundup - Put Some Teeth In It


Forget all the worrying and fussing over Muslim immigration and terrorism. The future looks bright for Britain. We’re probably only days away from the first female Imam and drive through abortion clinics in local mosques. Mecca is going to host its first swimsuit competition on its black rock and Ramadan will unite with Gay Pride Day for a parade that no one will ever be able to forget.

At least that's Islam according to Tony Blair

“Good women are obedient,” says the Koran. “They guard their unseen parts.” Which in the Muslim world often includes their faces, their voices and themselves, until the whole woman becomes one unseen part. “As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them.”

The liberal Britain which long since disavowed, “A woman, a dog and a walnut tree; the harder they are beaten, the better they be”, has welcomed it back in as, “A woman, a dog and a palm tree.” 

But there's good sound reasons for all that

Jews and Christians tended to court their wives, rather than abduct them and rape them in front of their husbands.

When your wedding canopy is a knife at her throat, and your “meet-cute” was burning her village, there’s good reason to fear her disobedience. And when your relationship is based on being the first man to grab her as she made a run for it, there is good reason to keep her inside or cover her from head to toe.
You may be her first rapist, but your cousins and friends will have no objection to being her second and third. When rape is legal, and every adult male around you is a potential rapist, then purdah and headbags are a natural way for fathers and husbands to protect their investment.

There is nothing spiritual about Muslim modesty. It is, as Blair said, “Practical”. In a society of rapists...

Read the rest of it in my Front Page Magazine article, "Don't Worry, Be Muslim".


It's shocking and outrageous that Bachmann could confuse a Democrat like John Wayne Gacy with a Republican like John Wayne.

In other gaffe news, Bachmann was unable to fully recite the periodic table, had trouble naming all the dogs who played Lassie and once accepted a tax refund from the government. How can anyone possibly say she's qualified?

Meanwhile Obama will be headed off to his 57th state to continue his crusade against ATM's.


Venezuela's Chavez says surgery removed small cancerous tumor, larger cancerous tumor to return to work ruling Venezuela.


Remember when Ari Fleischer criticizing Maher's comments about the 9/11 terrorists was trumpeted as a horrible violation of human freedom by a ruthless administration?

New York Times bemoaned the presidential assault on free speech and the thuggish attacks on the freedom of public figures to say what they wanted.

And then Mark Halperin accurately called Obama a dick on MSNBC and Jay Carney, Obama's Fleischer, called MSNBC to denounce it and now Halperin is indefinitely suspended.

Where's the outrage from Paul Krugman and Frank Rich? Absent.

Endorsing the ruthless thuggish suppression of any criticism by the administration was Media Matters

MSNBC rightly placed its senior political analyst Mark Halperin on indefinite suspension Thursday after the Time editor-at-large inexcusably called President Obama a "dick." This is how responsible news organizations behave.

While Halperin has apologized for his comments, it is simply unacceptable to call the president of the United States -- or any president -- a dick.

I bet that sounded even better in the original Russian.

Freedom of Speech? That was something we had under the old regime. You know the one with George W. Bush. Under the new regime, Limbaugh and FOX News were targeted by the administration, and a political analyst who accurately described Obama's obnoxious behavior gets sent to the media Gulag... with the eager endorsement of an organization that claims to analyze the media, but actually suppresses criticism of The One.

The media responses have not been altogether approving of the Media Matters Pravda line. Jonathan Chait at the New Republic said it best

Halperin acknowledged in his apology that he was 'disrespectful." Since when do political commentators owe the president respect? He works for the American people, not vice versa. This is not a monarchy, and we aren't supposed to speak of the president as if he's the national father. If Halperin thinks Obama is a dick, he should go ahead and say so.

Put another way: Would Halperin be apologizing and facing suspension if he called, say, Donald Trump a dick? If not -- and I'm pretty sure he would not

Obviously not. Then he'd be daring. If he called Bush a dick, he'd get a book deal. But call Obama a dick and you commit Lèse majesté. Which is another reason why the Obama era can never be allowed to happen again. This is not a monarchy and we are not the cult of some lazy political hack with a teleprompter and a tan enough skin to appropriate the sufferings of African-Americans for his own political benefit.

The 4th of July is coming up. The worst way to celebrate it is with obeisance to a new monarchy.


The New York Daily News cover proclaims "Le Perv May Walk Free". Why because the accuser loses credibility. But their source for calling Kahn "Le Perv" is that same accuser. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that The Daily News loses credibility?

But of course the media never loses credibility. Just their targets. Their target may now shift from Dominique Kahn to the Muslim maid, who shockingly appears to be part of some drug ring and a compulsive liar, but they will never admit fault.

The Bronx chambermaid's credibility crumbled as investigators linked her to a network of crooks and found that she had multiple bank accounts stuffed with a total of almost $100,000 in dirty cash, sources said Thursday night.

Prosecutors now believe there was little truth in anything the native of Guinea native told them since the NYPD yanked the one-time contender for the French presidency off a plane at Kennedy Airport on May 14, the sources said.

It's too early to make any definitive statements yet, but if the case against Kahn does fall apart, then the French criticisms of an American justice system where the accused are gleefully lynched in the press need to be addressed.

If this had been done to an American presidential candidate in France, we would certainly expect it.

The French are not immune to asking some serious questions about their system as well. In the months leading up to the campaign, Kahn reportedly feared being set up in a rape charge. If the case falls apart, then some questions should be asked of whether that actually did happen.


In the happy multicultural paradise of BrooklynTown, a dispute between neighbors over noisy kids transformed immediately into ISLAMOPHOBIA (evil laugh).

Islamophobia, as we know, has killed more people than Gingivitis, Snoopy and Rice Cakes combined. And we must all be vigilant to hunt after it, and beat it to death mercilessly whenever possible. Or perhaps the next suicide bomber will feel unwelcome in our country.

This week's tale of horrifying Islamophobia was trumpeted on the front page of the Daily News as 'HATE GROWS IN BROOKLYN'. Growth implies a progression of something, but don't ask liberal tabloids for headlines that make sense.

The official story was that Simchon Schwartz, a Hassidic Jew had poured beer on a Muslim neighbor and called her an Arab terrorist. This actually isn't even Islamophobia, as even in his neighbor's allegation, he never mentioned Muslims. But again when you're making up crimes, then factual inaccuracies don't matter.

Anti-Arab statements are now also treated as Islamophobia. Even when the neighbor is actually a Turk.

The actual story? The police responded to an altercation between two neighbors, both of whom claimed the other had struck first and made racist comments about them. The police chose to believe one side. The Muslim side. The newspapers chose to believe one side. The Muslim side.

It was widely and apparently inaccurately reported that Simchon Schwartz was a Hassidic Jew, which added spice to the story. Then his daughter came forward, looking like a Jersey Shore reject, to state that she was dating a Muslim and that her father never had a problem with that.

That makes it blatantly obvious that the Hassidic Jew part is also untrue. And it makes the whole thing look even more ridiculous.

No one involved seems to know the difference between Turks, Arabs and Muslims. The infinitely extensible doctrine of Islamophobia now says it's a hate crime to call a Turk, an "Arab Terrorist". Simchon Schwartz is likely an Israeli expat with a troubled family who lives around a Hassidic neighborhood. Crown Heights has no shortage of them.

A Turk living next door got into an argument with him. There was alcohol involved. One or the other man struck first. Schwartz clearly hit harder. This is a common enough dispute in New York City and around the country. And around the world. The result would normally be an arrest and a fine. But the media and the Islamophobia Scam has turned this into a major story.

Much like when a 12 year old Muslim boy, Osman Darawy pulled off the headbag of a Muslim girl, the media shrieked ISLAMOPHOBIA and spent days denouncing him, while refusing to report that he is from a Muslim family.

Yesterday it was Osman Darawy. Today it's Simchon Schwartz. Tomorrow it will be some other Joe dragged into a political and media firestorm by the enablers of Islamic thuggery, who are always on the lookout for new cases of ISLAMOPHOBIA that they can use to bolster their scam.


When Gaddafi might possibly kill people, we went into an illegal war. When Assad is killing people, we're urging negotiations (via Dan Friedman).

So who does Assad have pictures of Obama with anyway? A children's choir, a cheeseburger, a goat?


It would be kind of like this. Soros Forging a Closer Alliance with Muslim Brotherhood.

What's next? A Hitler-Stalin pact.


Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan addressed a local crowd in Diyarbakır, saying that: “We are the grandchildren of Saladin Ayyubi’s army that conquered Jerusalem.”

Funny, Saladin was a Kurd and Erdogan is busy stealing Kurdish seats in parliament. If Saladin were around today, he'd be at war with Erdogan or in one of his prisons.


A few days earlier, Mr Erdoğan, this time in Trabzon, reminded his party’s supporters that on May 29 “We proudly celebrated the 558th anniversary of the conquest of Istanbul.”

Compare and contrast this with Sydney, where bowing to pressure from people who claim to be aborigines, but probably barely rank up an aborigine grandmother somewhere, is describing the settlement of Australia as an "invasion".

The Turks are proud of what they have, the Australian government is ashamed. Which type of people have more staying power, shamed conquerors or proud ones?


Edward Cline, the author of the Sparrowhawk novels and occasional commenter at this blog, has an interview up at Capitalism Magazine.

There’s humor in every one of my novels, but humor must have a purpose, and not be there just for the sake of humor. Comic relief, it’s called. Comic relief can be used to underscore the good, or to undermine it.  Shakespeare used it in all but a few of his dramas and tragedies, and so have other playwrights and novelists. Humor must fit into a plot and be consistent with a plot-theme. Otherwise it’s extraneous and there just to get a laugh. Much humor is inserted into otherwise good stories as a cowardly apology. It has no purpose but to assure readers that the author doesn’t really mean what he says

See the entire interview at Cap Mag


Beck leaves FOX, a victory for the left, which was not able to drive out Limbaugh, but did succeed here. The difference is that Limbaugh was not dependent on a single company or a single man.

Replacing Beck is a panel discussion. One of those things everyone loves and can't get enough of. Especially when they include Juan Williams. I predict a huge uptick in ratings as the entire country rushes to tune in eager to hear a bunch of people talking to each other... on camera.


At View From the Right, Lawrence Auster credits Bloomberg's support for immigration to his Jewish ethnicity.

Bloombrain's nation-saving immigration reform consists essentially of legalizing illegal aliens. Thus Bloombrain apparently believes that legalizing 11 million sub-literate Mexicans is going to add to America's entrepreneurial and technological creativity. And he believes it so much that he says it with a straight face to the august Council on Foreign Relations.

My theory: Bloombrain represents a florid extreme of the collective liberal Jewish narcissism I have spoken of previously. Such narcissists see every issue through the filter of Jewish experience and sensibililty. Since Jewish immigrants to America and their offspring became successful entrepreneurs and professionals, the same must be equally true of all immigrants, even Mexicans with 90 IQs. 

If Auster has discovered a Jewish sensibility in Bloomberg, that's right up there with finding a cure for polio. Bloomberg is the least Jewish of the city's three Jewish mayors. And he avoids the topic except around election time, when he dusts off his Yiddish and visits Israel. Something that quite a few politicians do in between a photo op at a deli and a black church. If Beame and Koch were Bagels, Bloomberg is an English Muffin with a Kosher stamp somewhere on the bottom.

Bloomberg's rhetoric is virtually the same as Arnold Schwarzenegger. And of personalities ranging from John McCain to Rupert Murdoch. It's virtually the same consensus in parts of Europe that have hardly any Jews in them.

Blind support for unlimited immigration is less racial, than it is political. The progressive narrative says that a nation's identity is external, the product of nurture by the state. Bring any group of people, run them through the system and they will come out Dutchmen, Englishmen, Norwegians, etc. It is not people who define the state, it is the state that defines the people. The idea long predates the current immigration debates. And it has survived even in the age of multiculturalism. 

Auster makes the mistake of treating the liberal politics of many Jews as anti-Christian neurosis. Which would hold up better if the average Latino immigrant were not a devout Catholic. And if Jewish liberals did not equally despise Jewish and Christian conservatives. The interpretation of Jewish liberalism as some quirk from the ghetto, rather than a common failing by many of the best educated and wealthiest Jews and non-Jews in the Western world, is not only outmoded, it hides the real scope of the problem.

And it's ridiculous when discussing younger generations whose ghetto experience comes from 15 minutes of the Fiddler on the Roof movie that they caught on TV. Who have no religion, let alone any sense of religious persecution, and who are likely to get married in an interfaith ceremony with a pastor and a rabbi. Who are not afraid of Christians, but are afraid of "religious extremists" of all denominations, except Muslims. Religious extremists being people who take religion of the non-Oprah variety seriously.

The time when any Jews felt the need to justify immigration as self-justification is long past. The average liberal American Jew from New York was born here, and immigration to him is a distant bit of family lore, not relevant to his identity. He certainly feels no shame or uncertainty over it. He does treat that background as universal, but in this he is no different than his Irish and Italian counterparts. The universalization of experience has become a cultural mandate. Part of the state as primary nurturer of citizens.

Steve Sailer at VDare jumps in with the following...

Instead, it’s largely the outcome of various stereotypical Jewish tendencies, such as neurotic anxiety, persecution complexes, and a weakness for he-who-says-A-must-say-B verbal logic, famously compiled in comedies such as Woody Allen’s Annie Hall and Philip Roth’s Portnoy’s Complaint.

This is a little like using W.C. Fields and Benny Hill as representative.

These excerpts sum up the problem with trying to find a uniquely Jewish take on liberalism. There isn't one. Jews are statistically more likely to be liberals, but their liberalism is not particularly unique.

Bloomberg's support for immigration is no different than that of Arnold Schwarzenegger and John McCain. It's pro-business sentiments mixed with political pandering, diluted with an idealistic view of immigration. It's marked by a refusal to consider the consequences, because there isn't political room to accept them.

Jewish liberals will pay lip service to Jewish immigration, but they rarely know anything about it. Similarly Irish-American Democrats will push the relevant emotional buttons. And WASP's will mention the Mayflower. These are mere placeholders, not really rooted in anything deeper than the need to hang their dubious politics on a convenient symbol.

The issue has never been immigration, it is destructive immigration. And that is a discussion that is very difficult to have-- as Wilders has demonstrated. Not because it threatens anyone's ethnic identity,  but because it threatens their politics. Their faith in the ability of the state to uplift and transform the people under its control.


Olivia de Havilland turns 95.

Mickey Kuhn, who, in Gone With the Wind, played de Havilland's character's son Beau Wilkes as a seven-year-old, has been communicating with de Havilland in recent years via letters and notes. He offers this assessment of her: "She's a lovely lady. She's just the epitome of class. And she's a delight to talk to."

Kuhn also notes de Havilland's concern about Stalinist atrocities and her resistance to efforts of the international Communist movement to infiltrate Hollywood. He states: "It's nice to know that she was one of those in Hollywood who saw through the Communist plot."


Religious Jews in Jerusalem were unable to unite around a candidate and so they got Nir Barkat, and now Barkat brought in Meretz, a radical left wing anti-Israel party.

The Chairman of the East Jerusalem Public Complaints Bureau, Aryeh King, affiliated with the National Union-National Religious Party, castigated the decision of Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat to appoint left-wing Meretz party council member Meir Margalit to handle the ultra-sensitive East Jerusalem file in the municipality.

“He leads the Committee against the Demolishing of Homes, an organization that supports a boycott of Israel, and rebuilds East Jerusalem court-order demolished homes. He will be in a position to approve or deny demolishing in East Jerusalem, and this is a severe conflict of interests. From now on, the municipality representative on any possible forum will be a Meretz man in favor of the division of the city. He has been defaming the State of Israel for years, and will now decide on East Jerusalem projects. The Mayor has made a ‘left turn’, and the public should relate to him accordingly.”

The Meretz left-wing party that Dr. Meir Margalit belongs to, supports a Palestinian state, the dismantling of most of the Jewish towns in Judea and Samaria, and the division of Jerusalem.

Why even bother appointing Margalit, when Barkat could just appoint Abbas?

The real question is will anyone who let this happen last time around learn from their mistake so that Barkat doesn't get to be the second coming of Teddy Kollek for another term.


a NEWSWEEK investigation of Pentagon contracting practices in Abu Dhabi, Kuwait, and Bahrain has uncovered more than $14 billion paid mostly in sole-source contracts to companies controlled by ruling families across the Persian Gulf.

You didn't think we had bases there out of the goodness of their hearts and ours.

Ruling families hosting other U.S. bases in the Gulf seem to be profiting in the same way. Consider Kuwait, where Arifjan, the major U.S. base, serves as the chief military supply route to Iraq. Like the Al Nahyan family in Abu Dhabi, the al-Sabah clan runs Kuwait, as well as its national oil concern, Kuwait Petroleum Co., which has received some $4 billion in Pentagon contracts since 2005, much of it in sole-source contracts. The DLA explains, “Contracts providing fuel destined for Iraq are sole source due to Kuwaiti restrictions.”

Yet, according to contract documents, that money has bypassed the competitive bidding process that is supposed to accompany any -purchase—of firearms, flak jackets, or fuel—by the Pentagon.

Oh they're competitive. Anyone who competes with them dies.


  1. Anonymous1/7/11

    regarding dsk's hotel maid, we may never know whether she raped dsk or not, but one thing we do know -- she was not a very good cleaner. the hotel room itself was filthy. that much is not in dispute
    -- spanky

  2. it's new york

    if a hotel room isn't on fire, it's considered clean

  3. Slight error in your piece about Beck. He was not forced out; Beck has repeatedly said he wanted to expand and change the way he presents his ideas. He has been hiring people like S.E. Cupp to do conservative outreach programming for college kids, besides working on documentaries, an August event in Israel, etc. His new GBTV venture is the umbrella for all of this stuff.

  4. @Charlie

    There's a big difference between disapproving of who your daughter is dating and killing said daughter for doing so.

    In most Muslim states it's against the law for a Muslim woman to date or marry a non-Muslim. But in Muslim states like Pakistan I doubt the women are worried so much about the law as they are at being murdered by members of their own family.

  5. With regard to the bit on immigration, why is it that the legality of the immigrant is brushed under the carpet?
    Can nothing be legally transacted in America anymore?

    For Charlie.
    If you have to ask what the difference is between Islam and Judaism then no thinking Jew would accept you as a son in law.

  6. Anonymous2/7/11


    I followed the link to your article "Don't Worry, Be Muslim." I'm still laughing about the idea that Islam was an attempt to return Judaism and Christianity to their origins. That is not the first time I've heard that outrageous idea and it seems to be a recurring theme these days. We're always hearing how all 3 of the great faiths revere Abraham as the father of their faith. As if that's supposed to reassure us that the Islamic religion is just as mainstream as the other two.
    I chanced upon the website of a Dr. Pascha, a Muslim apologist of sorts. I read about how the Christian world (including the U.S., the Anglican Church and the U.N.) ought to issue communiques, resolutions, etc. to acknowledge the Muslim world's role in bringing to the forefront the belief that Jesus's mother, Mary was indeed a virgin. Poor Mary's reputation suffered for 700 years until the Muslims came along and affirmed the belief in her purity. The Christian world owes them big time. (I'm not real sure how the Jews are supposed to feel about that). We Christians sure are supposed to breathe a huge sigh of relief, because doggonit - the Muslims believe in Jesus too. I'm wondering if this is what Tony Blair had in mind when he said that the Koran is a progressive book etc. We needed Islam to return Christianity to the belief in Mary's virginity.

    Concerning the treatment of women in Islam I found this in the good doctor's writing: That is how it was that over fourteen centuries ago Islam forever nailed the three interrelated concepts of Gender Neutrality, Gender Respect and Gender Inclusiveness in all forms of human communication.

    Well, there you have it. Any concerns about the treatment of women under Islam have been laid to rest. Daniel, I trust you won't be writing about that issue any more. (For those of you with trouble detecting irony I hope you will recognize that suggestion for what it is).


  7. Linda Rivera2/7/11

    Re. Don't Worry Be Muslim

    Because of British leaders love and ADORATION (worship?) of Islam, Britain (once Great Britain) has become a very dangerous place for indigenous, non-Muslim female children and ALL non-Muslim females. Remember the phrases, "The sun never sets on the British empire" and "Brittania rules the waves"? Now ISLAM rules in Britain. All by invitation of Britain's Labor Party who brought in huge numbers of Muslims in a DELIBERATE act to change British society to a multi-cultural society - although multi-cultural is incorrect. The term should be changed to Muslim-cultural.

    It is open-season for Muslim males on non-Muslim females in Britain and all over Europe as has been reported in articles over the last few years and in the last few days. What are UK and European leaders doing about this great tragedy? They are importing more Muslims.

    British Schoolgirl's Testimony - Muslims Threaten Children With Violence & Rape Outside School Daily http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24cg_pnpZJE

    A nation's leadership that refuses to protect its own children is a nation that cannot survive.

    Muslims are ALLOWED by Western leaders to do absolutely anything they want. No act is restricted for top favorite Muslims - nothing is off limits.

  8. Richard,

    it would seem acc to Ailes that he was.


    I wouldn't waste my time on a known troll.


    the more laws are passed, the less law there is.


    it lets them claim that Islam is paradoxically the original religion, even though it's actually last on line

  9. Anonymous2/7/11

    Good point Daniel


  10. Ailes gave a "I don't care how you put it" comment to NY Mag, and the rest of the "Beck was fired" comments I've seen are from the usual factually-challenged hategoons on the left.

  11. "The official story was that Simchon Schwartz, a Hassidic Jew had poured beer on a Muslim neighbor and called her an Arab terrorist. This actually isn't even Islamophobia, as even in his neighbor's allegation, he never mentioned Muslims. But again when you're making up crimes, then factual inaccuracies don't matter."

    Why would they report the actual news when fiction is more compelling that a simple neighor dispute?

  12. Really, just because Muhammad stated his was an "Abrahamic" faith does that make it so? After all, I don't think the Muslims hold the NT, Tanak or Torah holy at all -- because all of them have been superseded (in whole or in part) by the Quran and Hadeeths and are inferior to it.

  13. they don't even claim they superseded, they claim all the other scriptures are fakes or tampered with


Post a Comment

You May Also Like