Yesterday I spoke to a local business owner, a man who was born in France, and came to the U.S. in the mid-70's. I haven't yet gotten his permission to identify him here, so I'll call him Curtis.
I asked him what was up with the riots in France. Why don't the French just expel those guys from the country?
I don't yet have corroboration for his statements. Take this as the verbal testimony of one man.
Curtis said that over 80% of the French population would like to expel the radical Islamists, but the government refuses to.
He said that government approval is required to build a house of worship - and that 20 mosques are approved for every 1 non-Moslem temple.
He said that in the airport (he may have been referring to the one that serves Paris), there is a mosque - but there is no non-Islamic house of worship.
He said that Moslems reproduce every 17 years, and that they have over four children for every 1.8 non-Moslem children. (I referred him to Mark Steyn's new book on this subject, America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It.)
He said that the Moslem population in France is constantly going to the government asking for help. The government - that is, the French taxpayer - gives them free housing.
I asked how the French can tolerate 100+ cars being burned every day all this year. He said police have no power to break up crowds of Moslems who come and "dance" threateningly in front of homes and businesses. The police are only able to act when they see a crime being committed in front of them. It's illegal to hold a teenager in jail for more than 2 days. If a citizen asks for a teenaged Moslem who is attacking his property to be arrested, in two days the same criminal will return to threaten or harm him again. Store owners are afraid to call the police when a crowd of Moslems "dance" (Curtis used the word repeatedly) threateningly in front of their business, because he knows the result will be that his business will be burnt. Such store owners often let the Moslems steal whatever they want.
Curtis said that with the huge difference in birthrates, France was doomed.
I said, I thought Socialism was responsible for the poor birthrate, because it literally makes life unrewarding - it takes away the rewards for living your life well and achieving things for yourself and those around you. Curtis responded with great interest to this suggestion.
He said that many French people live in small houses he compared to a U.S. trailer home. He said that for many Frenchmen, permits are required from the government if they want to move, and that such permits are so difficult to get that people often don't try. He said that visitors to France often see how good the social life is there, with friends often getting together - "I'll bring the bread, you bring the wine, you bring the cheese" - but that what visitors don't see is that government regulations strangle any attempts at work so much that beyond social life, there is nothing else. The social life is so good because nothing else is permitted.
And if all that wasn't enough, here's the real shocker.
He said that for 30 years, Moslems and non-Moslems worked side-by-side in French factories and businesses. Everyone thought the Moslems had assimilated. But when the Islamic riots started in France last year, these Moslems "flipped in a second" -- they immediately supported the riots. Their non-Moslem friends said to them, "We thought we knew you - this is wrong, what they are doing, burning cars and rioting." But the supposedly-assimilated Moslems supported the rioters.
I hate to say this but the French may have had more freedom had the Germans won World War II. I can't imagine living in a country where a person needed a permit to move, it's like that in communist Cuba also. When France was a Catholic country people had babies and there was no Moslem problem. The French have only themselves to blame....by abandoning Christianity and replacing it with politically correct secularism they have pretty much sealed their nation's fate. A country cannot survive long without religion so if France refuses to be a Christian country then it will surely become a Moslem country. C'est la vie.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Thursday, May 7, 2009
The Un-Fairness Doctrine
I want to make one thing absolutely clear. The enemies of talk radio are firmly in control of the White House and Congress.
Sen. Chuck Schumer and his fellow Demon-crats are promising an all-out attack on talk radio even though President Obama has said that he has no intentions of reinstituting the Fairness Doctrine. Would the President lie? Will we hear him say sometime in the future "What I meant was, that I wouldn't reinstate the old Fairness Doctrine. I never said I wouldn't institute a NEW Fairness Doctrine" as he smiles into the cameras and his left-wing boot-lickers chuckle in the background.
With a new "Fairness Doctrine" backed by an Obama White House, political talk radio, as we know it, will be gone. If these "Forces of Darkness" win, Rush, Lewis, Hannity, Savage, Beck, and dozens of other major hosts will be muzzled by using federal regulations to control free speech. Here's what the problem is; every left-wing liberal talk show in this country has been a miserable failure because most red-blooded Americans don't want to hear their politically correct commie rhetoric. So the only way to get their propaganda out to the public is to piggy-back on the talk shows of the Right but guess what, that hound won't hunt.
Americans are very inventive and they'll find a way around that and internet radio just may be a way to do it since the FCC has no jurisdiction there. If the Socialists using the Federal government try to silence us on the internet then my friends it would be time for a revolution and I'm not speaking euphemistically either.
We're not going to sit by and allow our freedom of speech to be taken away. Once one freedom goes the rest will follow just like a stack of dominoes, we've seen it happen in Cuba, Venezuela and to a lesser extent in Mexico and Canada....we just won't let it happen here, not without a fight.
Sen. Chuck Schumer and his fellow Demon-crats are promising an all-out attack on talk radio even though President Obama has said that he has no intentions of reinstituting the Fairness Doctrine. Would the President lie? Will we hear him say sometime in the future "What I meant was, that I wouldn't reinstate the old Fairness Doctrine. I never said I wouldn't institute a NEW Fairness Doctrine" as he smiles into the cameras and his left-wing boot-lickers chuckle in the background.
With a new "Fairness Doctrine" backed by an Obama White House, political talk radio, as we know it, will be gone. If these "Forces of Darkness" win, Rush, Lewis, Hannity, Savage, Beck, and dozens of other major hosts will be muzzled by using federal regulations to control free speech. Here's what the problem is; every left-wing liberal talk show in this country has been a miserable failure because most red-blooded Americans don't want to hear their politically correct commie rhetoric. So the only way to get their propaganda out to the public is to piggy-back on the talk shows of the Right but guess what, that hound won't hunt.
Americans are very inventive and they'll find a way around that and internet radio just may be a way to do it since the FCC has no jurisdiction there. If the Socialists using the Federal government try to silence us on the internet then my friends it would be time for a revolution and I'm not speaking euphemistically either.
We're not going to sit by and allow our freedom of speech to be taken away. Once one freedom goes the rest will follow just like a stack of dominoes, we've seen it happen in Cuba, Venezuela and to a lesser extent in Mexico and Canada....we just won't let it happen here, not without a fight.
Michael Savage Banned from Britain
Right-wing radio talk show host Michael Savage has been banned in Britain. Savage said that he was shocked to learn the news that he was included in the British government's first-ever list of nearly two dozen people from across the globe who are banned from entering the nation for allegedly fostering extremism or hatred. First, it's pretty presumptuous of Britain to think that Michael or any other American would even want to visit their Jihadists and Leftists infested country to begin with.
Michael, who broadcasts from San Francisco on KNEW reaches between 8 to 10 million listeners on more than 350 stations nationwide, he has made news for calling the Quran, the Moslem holy book, a "book of hate." They took Michael off the local radio station hear in this part of North Carolina so I listen to him on-line at the KFAB website, thank goodness for the internet, right? It's still the world's greatest medium for free speech especially for the little guy.
For years now Britain has fallen deeper and deeper into the abyss of political correctness until it is just short of being a socialist dictatorship. She took away the guns of her law abiding citizens and now only the criminals are armed with home invasions continually on the rise. They said that gun confiscation would lower crime when in fact it has done the opposite. Now they say, and by "they" I mean the politically correct left-wing liberals who run Britain, that by squelching all criticism aimed at the politico-religious cult called Islam that the Moslems will calm down and become model citizens. Well that's a bunch of rubbish. The Moslems want total control of Britain and yes, the rest of Europe also.
Britain shouldn't be banning people like Michael Savage and Geert Wilders both of whom are nothing more than the voices of common reason. What I'd like to know is by what stretch of the imagination does Britain consider itself a free nation when they try to suppress opposing viewpoints yet at the same time allow foaming at the mouth Moslems to demonstrate in their streets screaming for the downfall of Britain and Europe with signs praising Hitler and calling for another holocaust. If this is British idea of freedom I for one want no part of it and I would rather visit a country that was a lot less hypocritical and I'm sure Michael Savage would agree with me.
Michael, who broadcasts from San Francisco on KNEW reaches between 8 to 10 million listeners on more than 350 stations nationwide, he has made news for calling the Quran, the Moslem holy book, a "book of hate." They took Michael off the local radio station hear in this part of North Carolina so I listen to him on-line at the KFAB website, thank goodness for the internet, right? It's still the world's greatest medium for free speech especially for the little guy.
For years now Britain has fallen deeper and deeper into the abyss of political correctness until it is just short of being a socialist dictatorship. She took away the guns of her law abiding citizens and now only the criminals are armed with home invasions continually on the rise. They said that gun confiscation would lower crime when in fact it has done the opposite. Now they say, and by "they" I mean the politically correct left-wing liberals who run Britain, that by squelching all criticism aimed at the politico-religious cult called Islam that the Moslems will calm down and become model citizens. Well that's a bunch of rubbish. The Moslems want total control of Britain and yes, the rest of Europe also.
Britain shouldn't be banning people like Michael Savage and Geert Wilders both of whom are nothing more than the voices of common reason. What I'd like to know is by what stretch of the imagination does Britain consider itself a free nation when they try to suppress opposing viewpoints yet at the same time allow foaming at the mouth Moslems to demonstrate in their streets screaming for the downfall of Britain and Europe with signs praising Hitler and calling for another holocaust. If this is British idea of freedom I for one want no part of it and I would rather visit a country that was a lot less hypocritical and I'm sure Michael Savage would agree with me.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
El Salvador Marks the Rise of Another Leftist in the Americas
El Salvador’s Mauricio Funes, the latest leftist candidate to win election in Latin America, is calling for national reconciliation following a bruising campaign against ARENA a pro-U.S. conservative party that has governed the country for two decades.
Funes, who beat Rodrigo Avila of the business-backed ARENA party by a two-and-a-half point margin in Sunday’s election, was the standard-bearer for the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN).
A telegenic former television anchor, he was recruited to front the presidential campaign of the former Marxist guerilla group, which became a legal political party under a 1992 peace agreement ending a bloody 12-year civil war.
During the campaign, opponents charged that Funes, if successful, would follow orders from Cuba and damage El Salvador’s ties with the United States, where some two million Salvadoran expatriates live and work, sending home crucial foreign currency.
The jury is still out on whether Funes will model himself on Venezuela’s U.S.-baiting Hugo Chavez – as his opponents charged during the campaign – or on Brazil’s
Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, generally viewed a more pragmatic left-winger.
For his part, Funes has emphasized his close ties to and political affinity with Da Silva. Campaigning, he kept Chavez at arm’s length, while comparing his message of “change” to that of President Obama. Shortly after declaring victory he met with an official at the U.S. Embassy.
State Department spokesman Robert Wood on Monday congratulated the people of El Salvador for a “very free, fair, and democratic election” and said the U.S. looked forward to working with the new government.
But while Funes, who did not himself fight in the war, presents a moderate face, other leaders in the party, including his vice-presidential running mate and former guerilla Salvador Sanchez Ceren, are viewed with deep suspicion by critics who believe the FMLN remains communist at heart.
Funes’ victory is the latest in a string of electoral successes by left-wingers in Latin America over the past decade, on the back of campaigns hostile to Western free-market policies.
They range from Chavez and his allies in the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) group including Bolivia, Honduras, Nicaragua and Dominica; to more moderate leftist governments in Brazil, Chile and Argentina, with others like Ecuador and Paraguay somewhere in between.
President Obama is due to meet with these leaders and others when he visits Trinidad and Tobago in a month’s time for a Summit of the Americas, a gathering that brings together heads of government from 34 countries in the hemisphere. ALBA member Cuba alone is not on the invitation list.
The summit, the fifth of its kind, is expected to be dominated by the global financial crisis, along with Obama’s proposed “energy partnership for the Americas,” aimed at helping nations in the region become more energy independent and promoting growth.
‘Red and pink tide’
As left-wing candidates have won over the years, Chavez has sought to draw them into alliances, with varying degrees of success.
The Venezuelan leader, who has been supporting FMLN mayors in El Salvador for several years by providing heavily-discounted oil supplies, was quick to congratulate Funes.
“This victory strengthens the historic wave that, in this first decade of the 21st century, has arisen in all of Latin America and the Caribbean, and opens its doors to other sibling peoples in the challenges they will face,” he said in a statement carried by the official ABN news agency.
Chavez told Funes to remember “that the unity of our peoples is the only path to overcome the crisis unleashed from the heart of capitalism in the North.”
More than 70,000 people died in El Salvador’s brutal civil war, a Cold War-era conflict that saw the Soviet Union and Cuba backing the FMLN while the Reagan administration supported the military government. The country remains politically polarized, and violent crime is rife.
Latin American left-wing causes have long generated passionate support among leftists elsewhere, and communist and socialist media and organizations hailed the FMLN victory.
Interviewed on the left-wing radio show Democracy Now!, New York writer Roberto Lovato, “a child of Salvadoran immigrants,” called the FMLN victory “the defeat of Ronald Reagan, nothing less.”
“This is a continuation of the red and pink tide that’s taken hold in the hemisphere,” he said. “The big difference is that it brings us even closer to the north. It brings us even closer to the border wall.”
A joint report by the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador, the North American Congress on Latin America and Upside Down World, said Funes’ victory “constitutes a dramatic shift for El Salvador – and the region.”
The report noted comments by the candidate eschewing socialism, but said he may simply have been “pandering to moderate swing-votes, or deflecting the possibility of hostility from Washington.”
Hugo Chavez won't be able to help El Salvador too much economically he's already spreading Venezuela's resources too thin by all of the economic help being sent to Cuba, Bolivia, and Nicaragua. With the drop in oil prices and the institution of disastrous socialist policies Chavez' money tank is fast approaching empty. The people of El Salvador will learn as others have that socialism the cancer of liberty just doesn't work....only through aggressive National Capitalism that reaches down to the common man will the people prosper.
Funes, who beat Rodrigo Avila of the business-backed ARENA party by a two-and-a-half point margin in Sunday’s election, was the standard-bearer for the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN).
A telegenic former television anchor, he was recruited to front the presidential campaign of the former Marxist guerilla group, which became a legal political party under a 1992 peace agreement ending a bloody 12-year civil war.
During the campaign, opponents charged that Funes, if successful, would follow orders from Cuba and damage El Salvador’s ties with the United States, where some two million Salvadoran expatriates live and work, sending home crucial foreign currency.
The jury is still out on whether Funes will model himself on Venezuela’s U.S.-baiting Hugo Chavez – as his opponents charged during the campaign – or on Brazil’s
Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, generally viewed a more pragmatic left-winger.
For his part, Funes has emphasized his close ties to and political affinity with Da Silva. Campaigning, he kept Chavez at arm’s length, while comparing his message of “change” to that of President Obama. Shortly after declaring victory he met with an official at the U.S. Embassy.
State Department spokesman Robert Wood on Monday congratulated the people of El Salvador for a “very free, fair, and democratic election” and said the U.S. looked forward to working with the new government.
But while Funes, who did not himself fight in the war, presents a moderate face, other leaders in the party, including his vice-presidential running mate and former guerilla Salvador Sanchez Ceren, are viewed with deep suspicion by critics who believe the FMLN remains communist at heart.
Funes’ victory is the latest in a string of electoral successes by left-wingers in Latin America over the past decade, on the back of campaigns hostile to Western free-market policies.
They range from Chavez and his allies in the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) group including Bolivia, Honduras, Nicaragua and Dominica; to more moderate leftist governments in Brazil, Chile and Argentina, with others like Ecuador and Paraguay somewhere in between.
President Obama is due to meet with these leaders and others when he visits Trinidad and Tobago in a month’s time for a Summit of the Americas, a gathering that brings together heads of government from 34 countries in the hemisphere. ALBA member Cuba alone is not on the invitation list.
The summit, the fifth of its kind, is expected to be dominated by the global financial crisis, along with Obama’s proposed “energy partnership for the Americas,” aimed at helping nations in the region become more energy independent and promoting growth.
‘Red and pink tide’
As left-wing candidates have won over the years, Chavez has sought to draw them into alliances, with varying degrees of success.
The Venezuelan leader, who has been supporting FMLN mayors in El Salvador for several years by providing heavily-discounted oil supplies, was quick to congratulate Funes.
“This victory strengthens the historic wave that, in this first decade of the 21st century, has arisen in all of Latin America and the Caribbean, and opens its doors to other sibling peoples in the challenges they will face,” he said in a statement carried by the official ABN news agency.
Chavez told Funes to remember “that the unity of our peoples is the only path to overcome the crisis unleashed from the heart of capitalism in the North.”
More than 70,000 people died in El Salvador’s brutal civil war, a Cold War-era conflict that saw the Soviet Union and Cuba backing the FMLN while the Reagan administration supported the military government. The country remains politically polarized, and violent crime is rife.
Latin American left-wing causes have long generated passionate support among leftists elsewhere, and communist and socialist media and organizations hailed the FMLN victory.
Interviewed on the left-wing radio show Democracy Now!, New York writer Roberto Lovato, “a child of Salvadoran immigrants,” called the FMLN victory “the defeat of Ronald Reagan, nothing less.”
“This is a continuation of the red and pink tide that’s taken hold in the hemisphere,” he said. “The big difference is that it brings us even closer to the north. It brings us even closer to the border wall.”
A joint report by the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador, the North American Congress on Latin America and Upside Down World, said Funes’ victory “constitutes a dramatic shift for El Salvador – and the region.”
The report noted comments by the candidate eschewing socialism, but said he may simply have been “pandering to moderate swing-votes, or deflecting the possibility of hostility from Washington.”
Hugo Chavez won't be able to help El Salvador too much economically he's already spreading Venezuela's resources too thin by all of the economic help being sent to Cuba, Bolivia, and Nicaragua. With the drop in oil prices and the institution of disastrous socialist policies Chavez' money tank is fast approaching empty. The people of El Salvador will learn as others have that socialism the cancer of liberty just doesn't work....only through aggressive National Capitalism that reaches down to the common man will the people prosper.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
The Road To Dictatorship
Caracas – Venezuelan lawmakers on Wednesday approved a proposed constitutional amendment that would allow President Hugo Chavez to run for re-election indefinitely, the final step before the proposal goes before voters in a referendum.
Allies of Chavez, who hold a strong majority within the 167-seat National Assembly, overwhelmingly voted in favor of lifting term limits for all elected officials. Six lawmakers opposed the measure, while five abstained.
Election officials have yet to set a date for the referendum, but Chavez says it could be held as early as Feb. 15.
Chavez, who was first elected in 1998, is barred under the constitution from seeking re-election in 2012.
The Venezuelan people already voted on this issue back in 2007 and they voted NO to amend the constitution, now he wants another referendum, why? He must feel that he may have enough votes to edge out the opposition or he found a way to fix the vote without getting caught. A great admirer of Fidel Castro whose socialist revolution has wrecked the island of Cuba he is fast on his way to accomplish the same thing for Venezuela. Like Fidel, Hugo Chavez also has a thick skull and does not yet realize that socialism does not work especially in a poor country like his. People just don't produce well under oppression and without liberty. National Capitalism is the best answer this Latin-American nation, this hemisphere does not need another communist dictator and Venezuela does not need Chavez.
Allies of Chavez, who hold a strong majority within the 167-seat National Assembly, overwhelmingly voted in favor of lifting term limits for all elected officials. Six lawmakers opposed the measure, while five abstained.
Election officials have yet to set a date for the referendum, but Chavez says it could be held as early as Feb. 15.
Chavez, who was first elected in 1998, is barred under the constitution from seeking re-election in 2012.
The Venezuelan people already voted on this issue back in 2007 and they voted NO to amend the constitution, now he wants another referendum, why? He must feel that he may have enough votes to edge out the opposition or he found a way to fix the vote without getting caught. A great admirer of Fidel Castro whose socialist revolution has wrecked the island of Cuba he is fast on his way to accomplish the same thing for Venezuela. Like Fidel, Hugo Chavez also has a thick skull and does not yet realize that socialism does not work especially in a poor country like his. People just don't produce well under oppression and without liberty. National Capitalism is the best answer this Latin-American nation, this hemisphere does not need another communist dictator and Venezuela does not need Chavez.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
