Geert Wilders

Everybody who believes in free speech should read these short essays.

And watch this video.

The ever-popular populism

------------------------------LINDA McCUAIG ------------------------

The lesson for today class is on “populism”.

The idea for this lesson was triggered by an unintentionally funny column in today’s Toronto Star, by leftist writer, Linda McCuaig. She is commenting on the Republican candidate, Scott Brown, taking the late Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat in the state of Massachusetts.

McCuaig says:

It's the notion that he's a populist that sticks in my craw.
It's his alleged populism that led to his dramatic upset win last week in Ted Kennedy's old seat.

Right-wingers like Brown hide the elitism of their agenda by presenting themselves as ordinary working types, as truck-driving, gun-toting folk who may have just slaughtered something with their bare hands in the back shed.

Right-wingers can’t be populists? Where does that come from?

Populism is not the prerogative of either the left or the right. It is an expression, articulated by a leader or would-be leader, of the aspirations of the people.

It works like this. The candidate licks his or her finger and sticks it up in the air to see which way the wind is blowing in politics and then says, “If that is the direction the people are marching, then, by golly, I am going to run to the front of the parade, grab the marshal’s baton, and lead them.”

Certainly, during his election campaign I would have pegged Barack Obama as a populist with all his appeals to hope and change and a New Jerusalem for the United States. But that would be OK for McCuaig, because Obama is clearly a leftie, so he owns the turf, according to her.

She says:

After being elected with a mandate for change, Barack Obama has seemed powerless to change much, continuing the giveaways and deference to Wall Street.
No wonder the people are in revolt.

Stung by Brown's victory, Obama moved last week to recapture some populist ground, announcing previously stalled plans to bring in tough new banking regulations.

Interesting, since the very first thing Obama demonstrated when he nailed the office of President is that he is anything but a populist. He is of the powerful elite class (Columbia, Harvard) and associates himself with other powerful elites. His picks for cabinet posts showed that. And, after all, if you are going to count Warren Buffet as one of your important advisers, how populist can you be?

The Pew Research Center just released its findings on the political concerns of the American people. Here is the chart from that report.


Obama has so far struck out on the economic recovery, which is the top priority of Americans. Ditto for jobs, the second most important concern. He has failed on the terrorism front (Fort Hood, Detroit), the third highest category.

He hasn’t done anything on social security and his education initiatives, whatever they might be, are still in the starting gate. The confusing health care bill appears to be damaging Medicare, or at least, is putting it in some doubt.

Deficit reduction ranks ahead of health care and the military ranks ahead of health insurance. Financial regulation is way down the list and, coming in dead last, is global warming.

So, the President is focused on things like global warming, reforming health care, and financial regulation, and appears to be paying no attention to deficit reduction which ranks as the seventh most important thing on a list of 21 concerns. In fact, on deficits, he seems to be going in the opposite direction, which can only make this issue climb farther up the list of importance.

He is marching in the opposite direction to the people and leading his own parade of elites.

Simply attacking big banks is not going to recapture populist sentiment for Obama when financial regulation ranks so low in order of importance.

Anyway, why does McCuaig think populism is such an important agenda?

About Brown, she says:

Meanwhile, beware of truck-driving centerfolds in sheep's clothing. Underneath that buff populist skin may be just another wily wolf working for Wall Street.

Or, one might add, beware of populists who are working for things other than Wall Street.

Here are four pictures of famous populists. The first two were lefties and the last two were right-wingers. Can you name them? Hints - the last one was a Republican and the second last was a Democrat.




The lesson really is to beware of populism period.

Truth on trial

The Netherlands is littered with the graves of thousands of Canadian soldiers and airman who gave their lives to liberate Holland from the tyranny of the Nazis.

I wonder what those men would think of the Dutch today if they could see the country that was reborn from the ashes of German occupation. Would they think their sacrifice was wasted?

In Amsterdam, in 1944, if you strode into the public square, stood on a bench, and denounced Nazism, you would likely have been murdered on the spot, if any Nazis were present. If they weren’t, chances are, a fellow countryman, likely a government functionary, wishing to appease and curry favour with the occupiers, would have turned you in.

In 2010, if you were to stand in the same spot and say the same things about Islam, you have a pretty good chance of being shot or knifed to death by Islamists, considering the fates of Pim Fortuyn and Theo Van Gogh. You have an equally good chance of being turned on by the government functionaries and driven from the country, as was Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Or put on trial by those same people, as is the fate of our friend, the popular nationalist politician, Geert Wilders.

Wilders goes on trial today for saying rude things about Islam and for wanting to preserve Dutch and European culture in the face of another tyrannical “ism”, Islamism.

Unlike the situation of the last generation when the country was occupied by a foreign invader promulgating a nasty, brutal religion of its own making, this new “ism” is a hostile religion that was invited in by the Dutch and made as comfortable as possible and appeased at every turn in the road, no matter how suicidal its demands are to the historic nature and character of the Dutch nation.

Many commentators talk about how this is a battle over free speech.

In part, it is.

Free speech doesn’t exist in Europe, or in Canada for that matter, and hasn’t for some time. It resulted from a unilateral surrender in an undeclared war long ago.

All the members of the EU have passed anti-speech legislation intended to prevent people from spreading the evil doctrines perpetrated by the Nazis, but these laws have now been used to prevent citizens from discussing another doctrine they find evil; namely, Islam.

In Canada, we can trace the exact date free speech died. It perished in the Supreme Court of Canada on December 13, 1990 when the high court upheld legislated speech-limiting laws, giving the government of Canada the license to prosecute people for speaking their minds even when what they speak is the truth and even when that discourse is of a political and public nature.

But at least we have not yet descended to the scurrilous level of using the court to try to penalize and destroy a legitimate leader of a political party with seats in the legislatures of the Netherlands and the EU for expressing his constituents’ viewpoints, as the Dutch are doing.

This is nothing less than an attack on democracy.

For some time, I have been reading his website, listening to his speeches and watching his interviews, and I have concluded that Wilders is a very principled person. I have not observed that he has said or written one word on this subject that is not truthful

It is truth that is on trial.

How the enemy can hide in plain sight

U.S. Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, is blaming his own department for its attitudes and the military command structure for lapses that allowed Major Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter, to progress through the system. As many as eight officers may be held to account.

The day after the shooting, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, the top military man in the U.S. military structure, went on a media blitz to assure serving Muslims that the military would keep a sharp eye out to make sure there no repercussions against them because of Major Hasan’s attack and that “diversity is our strength, blah, blah, blah, blah.”

Well, which is it Mr. Secretary?

Do you want your officers to implement Political Correctness -- which is the reason why no action had been taken against Hasan -- or do you want them to keep a better weather-eye on Muslim radicals and root them out?

If PC rules the day, these officers should be given medals for respecting diversity, not prosecuted.

In the 86 pages of the Pentagon review of the shooting, not once does it focus on Major Hasan’s motivation as an Islamist, although apparently there is a separate classified report that deals specifically with Hasan.

According to Gates, the problem with the Defense Department is that:

We have not done enough to adapt to the evolving security threat that has emerged over the past decade. The department is burdened by 20th Century attitudes rooted in the Cold War.

He says that as if it were a bad thing.

Let us consider those 20th century attitudes during the Cold War. They could be summarized as follows:

Communism is evil. It is our enemy and we must be diligent in defeating it. We must not allow our military establishment to be infiltrated and undermined by communists.

It seems to me if you simply substitute Islamism for Communism you pretty much have the attitude you need to get rid of the future Major Hasan’s before they become a problem. But you do have to identify the new “ism” first.

Somebody ought to remind Secretary Gates that we won the Cold War with those attitudes. Maybe if the DOD could bring itself to terms with the idea that it is Islamism that is the enemy it would get better handle on how to defeat it.

Helpful advice for Americans going to the Vancouver Olympic Games

Americans arriving to enjoy Vancouver Olympic Games

The U.S. government is at it again. Along with the extremely useless colour-coded warning signs at airports that seem to be permanently stuck on orange (high terrorist alert), the government is now warning U.S. tourists who are attending the Winter Olympic Games in Vancouver next month to be on the alert for terrorists.

"Al-Qaeda's demonstrated capability to carry out sophisticated attacks against sizable structures - such as ships, large office buildings, embassies and hotels - makes it one of the greatest potential threats to the Olympics," the U.S. State Department said in a fact sheet on the Games posted on its website.

No specific credible threats have been identified, the U.S. government said. However, Americans planning to attend Olympic events or participate in large-scale public gatherings during the Winter Games should use caution and be alert to their surroundings, the advisory said.

Americans are advised to be especially alert when outside Olympic venues. "As security increases in and around Olympic venues, terrorists could shift their focus to more unprotected Olympic venues, open spaces, hotels, railway and other transportation systems, churches, restaurants and other sites not associated with the Olympics."

As an aide to potential American visitors, I thought I would add some specificity to the State Department’s unhelpful and completely ass-covering advice.

It is important to note that many people in Vancouver look like terrorists. I don’t know what it is about the west coast, but boy do the weirdoes ever like flock there. For an American, stay on orange alert the whole time you are there.

In case you are wondering what an Al-Qaeda guy looks like, below is typical example. Look closely at his features and his dress.


Also, Al-Qaeda has been known to recruit women, so examine the appearance of this one for clues.

Now here is the most likely person you might meet in Vancouver. He is not Al-Qaeda, he is a Sikh. Note closely the difference between his appearance and Al-Qaeda guy. It should be obvious.

You will find Sikhs predominately driving taxis, so they will be around hotels, restaurants, railways and other transportation sites. It is most unlikely to find them in churches, unlike Al-Qaeda guys who apparently will pray anywhere.

You will find Sikhs in abundance at malls. But why would you be going to malls anyway? The goods are not nearly as worthwhile purchasing as your own American offerings in terms of selection, styles, sizes, etc. and you will be paying big Canadian taxes you would avoid by shopping for the same unnecessary stuff in the U.S.

Why should you distinguish Sikhs from Al-Qaeda? Well, for one thing Sikhs don’t generally subscribe to the view that the only good American is a dead one. The same cannot be said for Al-Qaeda.

Sikhs sometimes wear a ceremonial dagger called a Kirpan. It is legal in Canada, even in schools. Al-Qaeda guys usually sport an AK-47, but as these are illegal in Canada it would be exceptional if you spotted somebody with one of these in Vancouver. However, if you do, leave the area at once.

You don’t want to cause a panic by alerting security personnel to the presence of a terrorist unless you are completely sure the person in question is an Al-Qaeda guy, because the immediate vicinity will be quarantined and you will be held up for hours by police and soldiers and will lose your restaurant reservations.

To avoid this problem, you could employ self-help, the way the passengers on the Detroit-bound plane did recently.

Stroll up to him and engage him in casual chit chat. Ask him how long he is will be in Vancouver. Ask him what he thinks of the city. If he indicates that he is here for the Olympics, ask him what his favourite sport is. Then while he is thinking about his answer, quickly ask him who he thinks is the world’s best cricket bowler. If he doesn’t immediately snap out two or three names that all sound South Asian then you might be dealing with an Al-Qaeda guy who will looked puzzled and simply shrug his shoulders.

If that happens then ask him if he likes the Biathlon. If he is an Al-Qaeda guy he has got to like that one. Anything involving shooting is big turn-on for these folks. You can seal the deal by immediately asking him if he knows the muzzle-velocity for an AK-47. If he quickly responds with 2,300 feet per second, you have pretty much nailed him. A Sikh will only looked puzzled and shrug his shoulders.

Here is a sure fire way to sniff out Al-Qaeda guy. Wait until you are in a crowded elevator or standing in a long line waiting to get into an event or a restaurant. Then shout as loud as you can, "Takbir!" If the suspect shoots up his fist and responds with "Allahu Akbar!" you know he’s the real deal.

I hope this has been more helpful than the advice of Hillary Clinton’s minions and, if you can leave your terror aside for few days, enjoy yourself.

Welcome to Canada.

More Caledonia nonsense from the Toronto Star

Angelo Persichilli had a column in yesterday’s Toronto Star that rhymes with his name; to wit, silly.

He is trying to defend the Commissioner of the Ontario Provincial Police, Julian Fantino, over the OPP’s handling of the Caledonia file. A private citizen has launched a lawsuit that claims Mr. Fantino exceeded his authority by writing to the local municipal council threatening police retaliation if the council endorsed an anti-aboriginal protest march organized by an outsider (a non-resident of Caledonia).

Mr. Persichilli is saying that the OPP cannot police natives because they will not be backed up by the politicians. He says that this means there is no law.

Nonsense.

The law didn’t go away just because the politicians ran and hid under the nearest convenient rock, which we can all agree they did.

This Ontario Liberal government held an expensive public hearing to demonize the former Progressive Conservative government and particularly its former Premier, Mike Harris, in the government’s handling of a similar Indian occupation of a public park in Ipperwash, Ontario.

In that instance, in evicting the occupiers, a trigger-happy OPP officer shot and killed an unarmed Indian. The officer was convicted of a crime and duly sentenced.

But that wasn’t enough for the Liberals. They had to spend $50 million trying to prove that the government (the former Premier specifically) had interfered with police discretion and caused the harm. They failed. The commission exonerated the government from such charges.

Now, with the Caledonia native occupation, the chickens have come home to roost. And that roosting has been expensive. The latest estimate is that it has cost the taxpayers $65 million, not including the cost of the undisclosed settlement of the seven million dollar law suit brought by an Ontario couple against the government and the OPP because they were harassed for two years by the rampaging Indians without police protection.

Mr. Persichilli says:

There was no doubt that without a legal framework to say who was right and who was wrong, the tension in Caledonia would increase, with the real possibility that someone was going to be hurt.

Again, the OPP and its commissioner, Fantino, were asked to enforce the law in a context where the dispute was the law itself. The bottom line was simple: was the occupation legal or not?

Later he asks again:

Was it legal? I don't know, but was it legal to occupy public land? Is it legal to leave citizens without protection?

There is not a shadow of a doubt that the occupation of this land was illegal. It was not public land, like Ipperwash. It was land privately owned by a development company, which may have been subject to an as yet unsubstantiated aboriginal historical claim.

The problem, however, is not so much the fact that the Indians invaded the property and faced down the police in a show of force. Most people would have simply looked the other way and considered it an issue for the development company to sort out with the Indians and federal government.

It is what they did once they were in occupation, starting immediately with the beating of an employee of the development company who was simply trying to retrieve his blueprints and other documents from his on-site development office. He was hospitalized. Here is his picture.

And here are a number of pictures showing the acts carried out during the occupation: burning a railroad trestle, burning an electrical substation, blocking public highways with trash and burning tires, throwing a van from an overpass onto the highway, and tearing up the national flag. One thing to note in all of these pictures: the complete absence of any police presence.









Now here is a series of pictures from the other side of the disputed property – from the town side. A man is detained from waving a Canadian flag by no less than three police officers. A protest organizer is hauled away by three police officers. He was jailed and subsequently released without charge. Note the number of police vehicles present on the town side of the dispute when the town's people gathered to protest the occupation.




It is not that there are no laws to deal with the hooliganism, thuggery, arson and violence perpetrated by the Indians, Mr. Persichilli, it is simply that we lack a police force with the balls to enforce the laws we have.

And the sad thing is that this appeasement in the face of such aggression will only encourage the Indians to adopt such tactics in future land disputes.

Finally, ask yourself this question. If, instead of Mohawks, a band of Hells Angels motorcycle guys rode onto this property and carried on in the same fashion, what would the police response have been?

For readers who are unfamiliar with the Caledonia story, I refer you to this website.

French catch "English disease"

It seems the French may have fallen victim to the “English disease.” No not that disease, not the one the Brits call the “French disease.”

I am writing about bad engineering design. In this case it is the TGV, the fast French train that plies its trade between the U.K. and France through the tunnel.

Just before Christmas the tunnel service was suspended when six trains failed and had to be towed back to France. It happened again yesterday. It seems that the cold weather has caused moisture build-up in the engine compartment and has shorted out the electrics.

This is bad design, because whoever put this together ought to have anticipated the impact of a hot engine on an influx of cold air and should have isolated the electrical components.

In the 1960s, my father, for reasons best known to him, became enthralled with English cars. Some folks today may not realize that the U.K. back then had a large auto industry that exported its products to the world. In fact, it was the largest car exporting nation at that time.

I think my dad took a liking to a nearby garage owner who also happened to have the local dealership for Austin and Vauxhall. Over a period of about 5 years our driveway had two of the larger Austin’s (which were not large at all by North American standards) and one Vauxhall. They were all purchased new.

Collectively, they spent almost as much time in the garage being repaired as they were being driven. They were terrible cars, completely unreliable. You could never count on going out in one of them and returning in the same vehicle.

We used to chalk it up to the fact that British automotive engineers had no idea about winter driving conditions in Canada when they designed them.

That theory ended in one spring when I took an Austin for a spin on a rain-soaked day. There was a nearby town that was located at the bottom of a river valley, with steep grades at either end of the highway that ran through the middle of the town.

I came down one hill, drove to the other side, and started to climb the hill out of town. Halfway up, the motor began to sputter and lose power.

I managed a U-turn and on the down slope the engine came up to full power. When I started up the other hill, the same thing happened, and I again pulled U-turn and used gravity to get the car up to speed. This time I roared through the town, greatly exceeding the speed limit, and tried to assault the hill. No luck, the motor died halfway up. I abandoned the effort and found alternative transportation.

Later we consulted with the dealer who said the problem was that the sparkplugs were all positioned in the front of the motor, just behind the radiator, and the rainwater had shorted them out. When we asked for a solution to the problem, he said the manufacturer provided a pull down blind that could be installed just behind the radiator. However, he cautioned, if you do that, your engine will overheat.

If the automotive engineers in one of the wettest countries in the Northern Hemisphere couldn’t design a car appropriate for their own climate, then it was time to go back to American cars.

And that is just what we did.