North Vietnamese blow-job

Oh god, what a load of turd was published today in Göteborgs-Posten about the fall of Saigon. You know it is going to be bad when it begins with

President Richard Nixon ville hindra kommunismens utbredning i Sydostasien...

President Richard Nixon wanted to hinder the spread of communism in South East Asia.

Fucking what??? It was KENNEDY who started it you moron! It was Nixon that began the Vietnamisation process and American withdrawal.

But then it goes on in the usual vein, the NV struggling to "reunify" the country, struggling for years to build up the country that had been decimated like no other (er, post war Germany seems to be doing just fine and South Korea is chugging along just fine). Mind you, they do get a botty-lick in on Seymour Hirsch without mentioning mass-murder after the fall of Sth VIetnam or the thousands upon thousands of boat people desperate to escape. Inconvenient facts I suppose.

There is a link in the article to a handy "Vietnam chronology". Judge for yourself:

1885 - Vietnam becomes a French protectorate like Cambdia and Laos.
1930 - Indochinese communist party founded by, among others, Ho Chi Minh.
1945 - Ho Chi Minh announces the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. War with France.
1950 - USA sends first military advisors to Vietnam.
1954 - French surrender at Dien Bien Phu. Vietnam divided.
1960 - Opposition movement FNL takes up arms in South Vietnam.
1963 - South Vietnamese president Ngo Dinh Diem murdered.
1964 - Tonkin incident opens way for American involvement in the war.
1965 - USA begins terror bombing of North Vietnam.
1968 - FNL and North Vietnam launch the Tet offensive. American army massacre in Song My, South Vietnam.
1969 - Sweden becomes the first Western land to recognise North Vietnam.
1972 - North Vietnam's capital Hanoi and Haiphong bombed during christmas. North Vietnams capital Hanoi and Haiphong bombed during Christmas.
1973 - Peace agreement signed in Paris - but the war continues. USA's last troops leave Vietnam.
1975, 30 april - South Vietmamese regime falls and the war ends.
1976 - North and South Vietnam reunited under a communist regime, The Socialist Republic of Vitnam formed.

Don't mention the thousands of Russian "advisors" and massive amount of Chinese war material flooded into North Vietnam, must maintain the pretense that it was the big bad USA fighting the poor peasants armed only with farm tools and the communist spirit. The USA "terror bombed" North Vietnam, uh huh whatever you say. Hanoi was bombed during Christmas! Shock horror for all those little Christian kids in the Asian Communist state awaiting Santa Claus and worshipping Jesus. Or not. Tet offensive launched, but no mention of the NV being smashed and thrown back by numerically inferior US forces. Isolated incident of Song My to balance this. No mention of regular NV atrocities. Peace agreement signed but war continues, not mentioned that it was of course the NV that were continuing as the US was already withdrawing by then. But don't worry! Sweden was the first to recognise the mass-murdering communist bastards.

Original:
1885 - Hela Vietnam blir franskt protektorat liksom tidigare Kambodja och litet senare Laos.
1930 - Indokinas kommunistparti grundas av bland andra Ho Chi Minh.
1945 - Ho Chi Minh utropar Demokratiska republiken Vietnam. Krig med Frankrike.
1950 - USA sänder sina första militära rådgivare till Vietnam.
1954 - Franskt nederlag vid militärbasen Dien Bien Phu. Vietnam delas.
1960 - Motståndsrörelsen FNL (Nationella befrielsefronten) griper till vapen i södra Vietnam.
1963 - Sydvietnams president Ngo Dinh Diem mördas.
1964 - "Tonkin-intermezzot" röjer väg för amerikansk inmarsch i kriget.
1965 - USA börjar terrorbomba Nordvietnam.
1968 - FNL och Nordvietnam genomför "tet-offensiven". Amerikansk armémassaker i Song My, Sydvietnam.
1969 - Sverige blir första västland att erkänna Nordvietnam.
1972 - Nordvietnams huvudstad Hanoi och Haiphong bombas under julhelgen.
1973 - Fredsavtal undertecknat i Paris - men kriget fortsätter. USA:s sista trupper lämnar Vietnam.
1975, 30 april - Sydvietnams regim faller och Vietnamkriget tar slut.
1976 - Nord- och Sydvietnam återförenas under kommunistisk regim, Socialistiska republiken Vietnam bildas.

Wusses

OK fellow countrymen, you are a bunch of wet rags...

On the eve of Anzac Day, a Sunday Star-Times/BRC poll has found 24 per cent of New Zealanders would not take up arms - assuming they were fit and able to do so - even if another country was invading. Seventy-two per cent said they would.

More surprisingly...

The pacifist instinct extends evenly across the age groups, with only 3 per cent more people aged 60 and over prepared to go into battle than those aged 18 to 59.

Why are the oldies more prepared to do it??? Probably because they didn't have a limp-arse education.

An even 50 per cent would fight if New Zealand's vital economic interests were threatened or to help restore democracy in a country important to our interests.

Of course, if you aren't going to fight for yourself, you sure as hell aren't going to go and fight for a friend are you?

Spin spin sugar...

From NZ headlines...

No proof Iraq hid weapons in Syria

But the contents are slightly different:

President George W Bush and other US officials cited a grave threat posed by Iraq's chemical and biological weapons and Baghdad's efforts to acquire a nuclear arms capability as a justification for war. No such weapons were found but US officials said it was possible Saddam sent them to Syria for safekeeping.

The usual twist of the truth, but it is from Reuters afterall.

The new report posted on the CIA Web site said: "Based on evidence available. . . it is unlikely that an official transfer of WMD material from Iraq to Syria took place. However ISG was unable to rule out unofficial movement of limited WMD-related materials."

Sounds somewhat more conditional than the blanket headline statement! After all, what exactly constitutes official transfers?

It said investigators "found no senior policy, program or intelligence officials who admitted any direct knowledge of such movement of WMD."

No shit, really???

"Indeed, they uniformly denied any knowledge of residual WMD that have been secreted to Syria," the report said.

Backside. Covering of, perhaps?

Meanwhile, in a Swedish paper, the same news is presented under an editorial item.

Inga vapen förda från Irak till Syrien - No weapons sent to Syria from Iraq

After this headline the reader must plow through quite a lot of unrelated material about Allawi, nation building, Rice and Cheney. Then one comes to the material one expects. However, it is even more misleading. It has a brief statement saying the ISG found no evidence of the regime moving material (fast att det inte finns bevis för att regimen i Irak flyttade vapen till Syrien före invasionen), but no mention of the "unofficial" movement. Rather, they have the usual Swedish-press wet-dream about Hans Blix (I cannot for the life of me understand why they hold that man in such high regard). Basically stating that Duelfer has come to "approximately the same" conclusion as Blix did (ISG:s chef Charles Duelfer kommer i sin rapport - utlagd på CIA:s webbsida - fram till ungefär samma slutsats som FN:s utkastade vapeninspektör gjorde under svensken Hans Blix chefskap), although I haven't read the 90+ page report I somehow doubt very much that Duelfer is of such an opinion (that the sanctions worked and the weapons technologists were peacefully moved to civilian companies).

OK so I went and read it. Here is the relevant paragraphs from which the quotes have been cherry-picked. Needless to say, it is not at all as decisive as the new reports make out. Surprise surprise.

ISG formed a working group to investigate the possibility
of the evacuation of WMD-related material
from Iraq prior to the 2003 war. This group spent
several months examining documents, interviewing
former Iraqi offi cials, examining previous intelligence
reports, and conducting some site investigations. The
declining security situation limited and finally halted
this investigation. The results remain inconclusive,
but further investigation may be undertaken when
circumstances on the ground improve.
The investigation centered on the possibility that
WMD materials were moved to Syria. As is obvious
from other sections of the Comprehensive Report,
Syria was involved in transactions and shipments of
military and other material to Iraq in contravention
of the UN sanctions. This indicated a flexibility with
respect to international law and a strong willingness
to work with Iraq—at least when there was considerable
profi t for those involved. Whether Syria received
military items from Iraq for safekeeping or other
reasons has yet to be determined. There was evidence
of a discussion of possible WMD collaboration initiated
by a Syrian security officer, and ISG received
information about movement of material out of Iraq,
including the possibility that WMD was involved. In
the judgment of the working group, these reports were
sufficiently credible to merit further investigation.
ISG was unable to complete its investigation and
is unable to rule out the possibility that WMD was
evacuated to Syria before the war. It should be
noted that no information from debriefing of Iraqis
in custody supports this possibility. ISG found no
senior policy, program, or intelligence officials who
admitted any direct knowledge of such movement of
WMD. Indeed, they uniformly denied any knowledge
of residual WMD that could have been secreted to
Syria.
Nevertheless, given the insular and compartmented
nature of the Regime, ISG analysts believed there
was enough evidence to merit further investigation.
It is worth noting that even if ISG had been able to
fully examine all the leads it possessed, it is unlikely
that conclusive information would have been found.
At best, barring discovery of original documentary
evidence of the transfer, reports or sources may have
been substantiated or negated, but firm conclusions on
actual WMD movements may not be possible.
Based on the evidence available at present, ISG
judged that it was unlikely that an offi cial transfer of
WMD material from Iraq to Syria took place. However,
ISG was unable to rule out unofficial movement
of limited WMD-related materials.

Now, go Google "iraq syria sudan chemical weapons" and ask yourself what may really be the case beyond a single quote pulled from an official government report.

Civil unions

So civil unions are underway in NZ.

What an unfortunate photo caption however:

'OLD BUGGERS TYING THE KNOT'

Top 10 reasons Nandor Tanczos got demoted - St Molesworth

You need to know the NZ Greens fairly well and that one of their leading MPs was dropped down the list rankings to get this...

Top 10 reasons Nandor Tanczos got demoted - St Molesworth

But it is very funny:

5. Green's parliamentary snack bill doubled due to "munchies".

6. Got on the wrong side of Jeanette Fitzsimons by purchasing a flush toilet for his house.

8. Recent writings deemed to be excessively pompous even by Rod Donald's standards.

9. Youth leaders pointed out that a guy who earns $120k a year plus perks isn't really "one of us".

Absoutely insane

Sometimes you are completely gob-smacked by the ludicrous, unchallenged crap that gets written in newspapers. Take this review of a film about North Korea...

United States President George W Bush famously called North Korea part of an "axis of evil," but director Daniel Gordon's film A State of Mind, currently touring New Zealand as part of the World Cinema Showcase, shows a different side of the country. He shows a mother cooking, children playing and families picnicking.

If people go about life cooking and with kids playing then the government simply can't be evil. Don't you see it is all made up by Bush? The families are picnicing for god's sake, how could the country be anything other than peaceful and fun loving? They probably fly kites too!

For Americans who see North Korea simply as a dictatorship and a possible nuclear threat a little normality may be shocking, Gordon said in New York, where the film had its North American premiere last week at the Tribeca Film Festival.

For Jews who see Nazi Germany simply as a dictatorship and a possible nuclear threat a little normality may be shocking.

No, I didn't think so.

In the capital Pyongyang, even well-off families deal with food rationing and the chance of daily blackouts.

So everyone is equally fucked, the great socialist ideal?

The collapse of the Soviet Union and Pyongyang's Communist allies in eastern Europe, natural disasters and bad harvests unleashed widespread famine from the mid-1990s that aid experts say killed more than 1 million people. North Korea also blames US economic sanctions for a time it refers to as the Arduous March.

Everything under the sun, including America of course, except gross mismanagement by megalomaniac lunatics running the place.

"They just see us as making honest films, and the films always remain non-judgmental," Gordon said in response to criticism about North Korea's motives in sanctioning the film.

Remaining non-judgemental is the utmost importance of course, because showing torture chambers, starving masses, death squads, an army poised to invade South Korea etc etc would not be balanced. See kite flying kids above.

Gordon said the government provided him with official guides and translators, but did not censor his work.

Potemkin anyone??? Does no one read history anymore???

The film also shows signs of capitalism emerging - Gordon said people were able to buy recordings of popular songs with titles such as Son of Bean Paste and Sea of Blood.

"Son of Bean Paste" ??? "Sea of Blood" ??? What the buggary-bollocks are they about? Written by the nephew of the beloved leader maybe? I'd be slightly more impressed by Brittney Spears. Hint to fuckwits: Being able to buy something doesn't show signs of capitalism.

Gordon said he hoped audiences could see beyond politics and make a connection with the North Korean people. "Strip away the politics, you have exactly the same people," he said.

Living under threat of starvation, torture and death. Everday of their lives. How on earth does it help to "strip away the politics"? No one considers the poor sods to be evil, it is the fricking government loons who are evil you morons!

ANZAC day

Obviously you won't here anything about it here in Sweden. Luckily for me I had no ancestors on the beaches at Gallipoli, by luck of timing for them. But my grandfather and his brother were pilots during the WWII, with the later spending time in a German POW camp. Fortunately they both lived to tell the tales. What would the world be like without a generation that was prepared to do this, to stand up to madmen bent on murdering millions? War is hell, sometimes it is necessary, the outcomes are unpredictable and costly. But the alternatives are, in many cases, a whole lot worse. I have no time for blanket statements of peace at all costs, it is either a statement of deliberate ignorance or a thinly disguised desire for "someone else" to win regardless of the nature of that someone else.

Fortunately people at large do seem to recognise the sacrifices that were made by their elders...
Record attendances for Anzac parades

With many a Kiwi taking in the services in Turkey...
"It's important to see what our forefathers gave up," said Anna.

Of course, ANZAC day isn't solely for rememberance of the failed Gallipoli campaign, but for all veterans and those involved from former conflicts. The lessons of unpreparedness are lost on some these days, as they have been at all times, or maybe they are really not at all interested in peace...
Peace Action Wellington: War mongers at Te Papa [Museum].

And, naturally, never let a significant day go by without the opportunity to score political points...
Howard puts beach barbecue before NZ

The barbecue is for the Australian commemoration, how odd the Australian PM would choose to attend!

Then get in some cultural grandstanding...
Turks under fire for bid to ban haka at Gallipoli

Errr, the Turk's are organising. I think it is up to them to say what goes. It reminds me of Athens olympics when some dopey NZ woman (Moana I think) got all huffy because her Maori group wasn't allowed to do some particular ceremony or performance at some ancient Greek site. The hilarity was provided by her deriding the Greeks for cultural insensitivity in not recognising "indigenous" cultures, while demanding to disrespect the wishes of an ancient culture in its homeland at a site that is thousands of years old. Really, grow the hell up.

Earth day 2030

Extremely amusing, probably about right too with an estimated time of about 30 years for global warming panic to swing back to 70's global cooling panic. Hold on to those carbon credits!

From the invisible hand to the heavy hand

God what a week. Anyway...

Seems the greenie frogblog didn't much like my dislike of party blogs. Oh well, each to their own. But I do notice they are trying to cast themselves as innovative marketers...

The [Economist] editorial seeks to compare and contrast the “mandate, regulate, litigate” approach of the traditional environmental movement and the market-based approaches offered by innovative environmental thinkers. Whereas the traditional green thinker would say “you can’t do things which hurt the planet and the Government will punish you if you do”, the innovative green thinker would say “you can do things which hurt the planet, but so long as you’re willing to pay for the environmental consequences of your actions”.

However, the idea that government regulation and market-based solutions are somehow polar opposites is quite misleading.

Of course government and markets can go together, there is no doubting that. What the Economist would be espousing is "free" markets as opposed to mercantilism or highly regulated markets which devlove into crony-capitalism or worse.

Greenies can never quite come as close to free marketing as they would like to pretend:

Markets only work because they have rules governing them. The sharemarket only functions because there are piles of statute books regulating what you are and aren’t allowed to do. And the environmental trading of which the Economist speaks - such as tradable fishing quotas or carbon emissions trading - are only possible if someone (i.e. government) sets the rules of the game.

Markets generally require rules, even free markets, but the only "required" ones are more issues of trust. If you can't trust the chap you are dealing with to deliver the goods, pay up or not to kill you for the goodies then it isn't really a market anyway now is it? The piles of statute books for the sharemarket? Well, if you stripped away tax regulations and all the other government imposed fluff then the market would still work. Insider trading could be dealt with internally if it is considered to be a problem. There is no need at all for a *government* to be setting the rules. Likewise for quotas and carbon trading, although the latter is a fools games dealing in nothing and a perfect example of how such well-designed markets will fail. The total output of carbon remains the same, unless people buy emission rights they won't use which seems unlikely. Rich countries buy emission rights from poor countries to sustain their diversified and energetic economies. Poor countries get some cash but cannot develop because they can't utilise polluting or sink resources (sold their ability) or increase their economies which would increase emissions they no longer have a right to. So the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, great progressive idea that. Wait a few years and watch how this wonderful market will disappear.

The rest goes on with dubious examples about emissions trading on vehicles to encourage fuel efficiency/low pollution, somehow missing the point that a fuel efficient car is desirable and the price will relect that. No need for an extra vaporous market that serves only to distort pricing of what people want. The cynic would say the extra market is necessary for social engineering, the cynic would be right.

Finally there is a dubious discussion about goods everyone wants but are in no-one's interest to provide. The examples are clean air and water. The perfectly obvious answer is that if someone, particularly *everyone*, wants it then someone will provide it. What they mean of course is that they don't want to pay for it, except via taxes, because it is a "public" good and therefore must be concentrated in the hands of the government. Rather curious that the worst pollution occurs in highly statist countries, that the most economical cars are run in the richest countries and the cleanest air is not found where the government has a heavy hand.

Closing paragraph is, bluntly, crap:

The great worry is that, without this government involvement, we’ll be left with a pile of dollar bills but no clean water to drink. I, for one, would like people to have both.

If you have a pile of dollar bills (and not useless credits for your next Trabant purchase) and a desire for something then some enterprising type will deliver you clean water. It happens already. What you won't have in the highly regulated economy is both the water and the money, just look at health and education where money is hideously wasted and service is shocking.

Even better, if the control isn't concentrated in the hands of a few people we must absolutely trust not to wield water (or air or whatever) as a weapon as they have done time and again throughout history but in the hands of a diverse group who make their livelihoods providing what is needed, then we'll all be better off. But then no one would be "in control", which is the overriding urge of nearly all leftist thinking, and people would have to be responsible for themselves as well as others.

After a century of state controlled death and destruction beyond anything previously imagined you'd think people would be a bit more wary of vesting ever greater control in the hands of the state. Particularly when some of the worst perpetrators have had virutally identical ideals to justify the acquisition of that control. Still, hopefully, the new century will move us away from progressive maniacs knowing what must be done to save the future.

Party blogs

Looking ahead to the election, the NZ Greens have started a blog. It is called "Frogblog". No idea what the frog thing is about, the green colour maybe.

In their own words they have a blog now because

“This is the latest initiative in our strategy to communicate directly with voters, building on our fantastic, award-winning website and email newsletters tailored to readers’ interests.”
...
“Our highest support comes from 18-25-year-olds, but these young New Zealanders get their information in different ways from older voters. Morning daily papers and Morning Report are out, news websites and blogs are in. Our challenge, therefore, is to find ways of talking to them which are relevant to their lifestyles.”

I'm not sold on the idea of official party blogs. They are clearly never written by a single person with total control unto themselves, quite reasonably they can never be that. Unlike a regular blog where an individual is spouting their own opinion and linking what interests them with not too much regard what anyone thinks, the party blogs tend to be a watery effort at the same thing. Worse, they tend to act as an echo-chamber for the faithful or a magnet for loonies, no more meaningful debate is achieved beyond that which is found in the other party organs (eg the NZ Greens have their own forum on their party website). I think what I am getting at was demonstrated in the US elections, with the Dean wing convincing themselves of victory around the mobilisation of the youth through the magnificent new medium despite an eventual crash and burn to Kerry. They also have to be kept well up-to-date otherwise the whole thing is just lame, this new one seems to have started out with a bunch of ready posts dumped on the first day but it remains to be seen how it is maintained and if it rises past sophisitical and snide posts like this one.

Mind you, it is probably one of those advertising things. Being seen not doing it is worse than doing it badly.

Jimmy of Mayberry

Way too funny by half is Ned Rice's article at NRO about the Pope and the President...

Yes, what better way to remember the Holy Father's life of selfless humility than to throw a hissy-fit like a starlet turned away by a nightclub bouncer.
...
Even better, a liberal blogger wrote last week that Condoleezza Rice should have given her seat on Air Force One to Carter. The Democrats wisely passed on this chance to return to their original position on civil rights: that black women using mass transit be required to give up their seats to white men.
...
With all the moral authority of a prison snitch scamming extra rations by ratting out his fellow convicts, Jimmy set out on his legacy-rebuilding project.
...
Unlike Jimmy Carter, Pope John Paul II never won a Nobel Peace Prize.

The Guardian = The Onion, or should do.

I was going to write something about the total piece of shit article in the Guardian about the top 10 threats to the world. But lots of other people have already done it.

Needless to say, if it is in the Guardian then it is a load of arse.

Racist icecreams, or would you grow up already!

Oh good grief...

The Center Against Racism in Sweden has complained about an icecream. The ice cream is called "Nogger Black". It is called black, because, well, it has licorice in it and is very black.

The 'Nogger' series of ice cream has apparently been produced since the 70s.

Now, why is it racist? Take a look at the advertisement. See how the product name has been written in a sort of graffiti style? See how Nogger looks a lot like Nigger? That is why. Graffiti style => graffiti only done by blacks (of course) => Nogger looks a lot like Nigger => racist. According to some twat by the name of Stig Wallin at this Center Against Sanity. I shit you not. What does the company say?

"We take criticism seriously, even if it appears to be a little bit of a stretch" says Petronella Warg of GB (very dimplomatically to say the least.)

Now. Nigger is not Swedish, the closest term is "neger" which means black. I have no idea what Nogger means, but a root word like "nog" or whatever has absolutely nothing to do with colour (nog usually means "enough" or "adequate" etc). So a rather outdated English term is supposedly being used to subtly suggest racism in Sweden for the purpose of selling an ice cream. One has to ask... why the hell would a company use racism to sell ice cream? I mean, how on earth would it work in any way, shape or form?

Who pays these people???

When safety nets crumble

When safety nets crumble - Institute for Liberal Values: "... What horrifies me is that the West has not learned the lessons that are so cruelly taught in the former Soviet block nations. They believe that a slower form of creeping socialism won't have the effects of full-fledged socialism. They believe that some socialism can work provided you don't let it get out of hand. But they forget that the incentives created by the system they establish is why their socialism gets out of hand. They reward need and punish ability and then wonder why need increases in spite of their plans, programs and policies ... "

Going down to Southpark...

Since everyone and his dog is doing it, so will I:



Do your own.

Parade of the Moonbats, NZ (non)style

Via Poll Dancer, here is a series of photos taken during a demonstration against the NZ National Front. Apparently someone left the asylum door unlocked, resulting in a bunch of crazy leftists yelling at another bunch of crazy leftists while marching around Parliament. The author seems it strange that the neo-Nazis are getting all class-struggle and hopes noone tells them Marx was Jewish... seemingly unaware that Hitler was of course something of a Marxist theorist himself. Anyway, the best pics are...

The bogan front, what do you mean "not very classy"? Of course we have no class, we're socialists just like those guys!

Apparently Nazi chicks are just as stylistically challenged as communist chicks.

Leftist spotters guide: Anarchists et al are found of covering their faces, Nazis apparently aren't. We recommend they all cover up, the whole ugly bunch. And stay home. Out of sight.

Hello Mr. Anderson

Obligatory drum, and what on earth is on that sign?

Diversity Yes! Except the bits we don't like!

"Fascism is so last century" next to "Socialist Worker"? Oh the ironing!

It's OK to bash him, he's only a Nazi.

My god socialists are ugly!

How many Palestinian tea-towels are there at this parade? And just what does it have to do with NZ? Oh wait, Hamas et al are ideologically fascist, so it is cunningly ironic to wear these things at a protest against neo-Nazis.

Is this a school project? Seriously, why do these knuckles always have one regulation school-backpack each at these events? I guess Mum was kind enough to pack them all playlunches.

White sheets? No idea sorry.



Is there a Protest Warrior chapter in NZ yet?

No restaurants in Sweden?

Possibly the most useless restaurant finder?

FoodEU.com for Sweden

Go on, try to find a restaurant in Göteborg, Stockholm or Malmö.

Ouch

Odd...

Hunter breaks arm and back undressing

A burly hunter spent six miserable nights in the Kaimanawa Range after he broke his back and shoulder pulling off his Swanndri...

Swedish woman confesses to terror-aid

Last summer a Swedish woman was arrested in England on terrorist charges of some sort when she was caught carrying 148 passports through Stansted airport after landing from Göteborg, Sweden. At the time she claimed innocence, that she was trusting friends and carrying the bag for them, the article said she did it for a non-Swedish man who was known to police. There must have been something going on as both British and Swedish security services raided her abode near Göteborg. The police were waiting for her at the airport in England. Well now she has confessed, or at least pleaded guilty at the hearing...

Svenska erkände terroristbrott
Swede admits terrorist crime

... Hon visste att de falska dokumenten och de 148 passen låg i hennes väska den 14 juli. Syftet var att någon annan olagligen skulle använda dem. Det har misstänkts att de var avsedda för islamistiska grupper i Storbritannien...

... She knew that the false documents and the 148 passports were in her bag on the 14th of July. The were intended fir the illegal use by someone else. It is suspected that they were intended for Islamic groups in Great Britain...

The only mention of the purpose of so many illegal passports is that passing mention about Islamic groups. There has been no reference to who the woman is, e.g. indications of her motives, as is common in Swedish reporting... no mention of ethnicity, religion, politics etc. But what is not mentioned is usually more enlightening than what is said in these articles.

Her lawyer is hoping for a light sentence, hopefully around two years, maybe three, and not the maximum 10 years available to the judge. That's OK, because the terrorists probably wouldn't have used fake passports in any attempt to kill anyone of course.

Easy as taking candy from a baby? Nope.

Who do you believe? Why would an old bloke nick a lolly? Why would a little girl claim it? Who the hell knows???

Lolly theft from girl 'a pack of lies'

A man accused of grabbing a child to steal her lollies outside a dairy has told a judge that it is a "pack of lies".

Peter Milton Hayes, 73, of Hastings, was arrested on Monday and charged with assaulting a nine-year-old girl.

He is alleged to have grabbed the girl's hand as she walked out of the Windsor Park Store in Windsor Ave, Hastings, to get a lolly. The girl had a bag of lollies in her hand.

Hayes appeared in Hastings District Court yesterday, representing himself, after refusing to talk to a lawyer to get some legal advice. He told Judge Richard Watson that he did not trust
solicitors as he had had bad experiences with them in the past. He said he would rather stand on his own two feet.

"I spoke to one (a lawyer) outside the court and she wanted me to lie, and I don't lie," Hayes said.

When asked by Judge Watson what he wanted to do, Hayes said he trusted the judge and wanted the matter dealt with in the district court.

Hayes pleaded not guilty to the assault charge, saying "it's a pack of lies".

The charge carries a maximum sentence of two years' prison.

Police sought conditions be imposed that Hayes reside at his Hastings flat, and have no contact with the victim.

He was also not to go within 100 metres of the Windsor Park Store, to which he replied: "I don't want to go there – I will go to another shop."

Judge Watson remanded Hayes on bail till May 11 for a defended hearing.

Amateurs...

I have no idea what the government is doing in the music biz in the first place...

Country star blames Govt for low profile

...

He said taking the country music record of the year award out of the New Zealand Music Awards two years ago and putting it in the "amateur" awards in Gore was a slap in the face to professional country performers.
"What's wrong with the industry, that they don't recognise what the public does? This (sell-out tour) is the proof of what really is happening," Bartlett said.

Isn't it obvious? Country music lovers are, by definition, redneck hicks. They all vote Republican and carry guns, even in countries that don't have a Republican party and can't carry guns.

Bowling a maiden over, or the definition of PC

From David Farrar in NZ:

Those who rail against political correctness are often asked to give a definition of what is political correctness. And it can be hard to do, because it is a bit like spam. Bloody difficult to define exactly what qualifies, but we always know it when we see it.

Now I thank new Labour MP Lesley Soper for giving the perfect example of political correctness when people ask for examples.

In her maiden speech, she said supported the need for a more appropriate, gender-neutral term for the occasion of her first speech and that "Inaugural speech would better suit the privilege of introduction to office".

Now that is what we mean, when we say we are sick of political correctness.

Multi-Memo Sweden-New Zealand synchronicity

The Stockholm Spectator has an amusing piece about Dagens Nyheter not quiet managing to separate Terri Schiavo and Patti Scialfa in an article about the former.

Now, we’re not sure how “Terri” became “Patti” but we have theory (bear with us). Ever since he joined the MoveOn PAC’s Vote For Change Tour, Bruce Springsteen has been the darling of Dagens Nyheter’s arts and leisure pages. Indeed, Sweden’s paper of record has taken every opportunity to report on Bruce and Co.’s attempts to influence the outcome of the 2004 U.S. presidential elections (e.g., here, here, here and here).

This segues neatly in another fashion. The Schiavo case became sidetracked by a memo from a Republican staffer while the 2004 election was attempted to be sidetracked by a memo from a loon. Powerline has been accused of not retracting their accusations about the former, while those in New Zealand tittering over Powerline once pondered on the latter, buying the fake-but-accurate meme but never mentioning it again even after it was plainly discredited by Little Green Footballs, all after citing Daily "Screw Them" Kos as useful a source on Iraq. And was that an actual non-satirical reference to Scrappleface???

Life is great.

Update...

A comment on the original Spectator article links to this 2002 letter from Mona Sahlin, then Minister for "democracy, integration and equality". It is only in Swedish, but is a "love letter" to The Boss, with excerpts:

I grew up with the Vietnam movement. "Crush, crush USA imperialism!" Have you heard that? No, probably not. But the USA was something I hated - and at the same time was so fascinated by. Black USA, Woodstock but also Nixon, Watergate and morality.

But I think that for us Swedes you stand for that we inside want to be. A real rebel, an individualist, [here she left out mad communist idiot] one who shows happiness and sorrow without shame. After September 11 our love for you grew. The world became so different after the deaths in New York and then in Afghanistan. But the USA also changed. The arrogance came back. The super-power idiocy too. And I almost wanted to go out on the streets and shout "Crush, crush USA imperialism!" again.

The rest is just as nutty. How, oh how, does a Minister get away with writing steaming piles of crap like that? It isn't hard to see what state European politics is in when such tripes pervades the halls of power. By the way, Ms Sahlin is still a Minister.

Feminist Initiatives

Well the new Swedish political party is underway, the Feminist Initiative. From Göteborgs Posten, not a conservative paper by any stretch of the imagination, we get an idea of the general feeling...

Jag och många andra borgerliga feminister hellre skulle låta oss representeras av - nästan - vilken liberal gubbe som helst än av Schyman och hennes hangarounds i Feministiskt initiativ, skriver GP:s Malin Lernfelt i sin krönika.

I and many other liberal feminists would rather be represented by - almost - any liberal bloke at all than by Schyman and her hangers-pn in the Feminist Initiative, writes Malin Lernfelt in her column.

As well as, in a column provocatively titled "If you have a dick, you are wrong"...

Huruvida Gudrun Schyman går en ny vår till mötes låter jag vara osagt. Däremot kan man utgå från att hennes nybildade parti, Feministiskt initiativ, precis som alla vänsterpartier, kommer att erbjuda både sol och vår, skriver Peter Hjörne i sin krönika.

Whether Gudrun Schyman brings a new spring to the meeting I won't comment on. On the other hand, one can assume that her newly built party, Feminist Initiative, just like all other leftist parties, will offer both sun and spring, writes Peter Hjörne in his column.

Gudrun Schyman is the ex-leader of the Left Party (formerly the communists), who has in the past proposed blanket taxes on men for violence against women while conducting her own financial affairs in a less than socialist manner (cough, tax evasion, cough).

Luckily, all this is going to damage one of the leftist parties...

Fight for leftist voters

...Bara en sak är säker. Feministiskt initiativ är en genuin vänsterrörelse, fastän den försöker luras och framställa sig som tvärpolitisk...

... Only one thing is certain. The Feminist Initiative is a genuine leftist movement, despite attempts to deceive and present themselves as politically "many-sided" ...

According to a survey last week, the new party had 3% of voters being very certain of voting for them and a further 10% thinking it quite likely. Fortunately, 36% of these votes come from the Left Party and 30% from the Environment Party, both of which are part of the governing coalition lead by the Social Democrats. Very few come from the liberal parties, so it is possible that the fracturing occuring on the left could destroy one or two of the minor parties and possibly allow a liberal victory next year. All to be taken with a grain of salt of course, I very much doubt that the new party would actually receive 13% of the vote, but hopefully the fracturing will go on!

Some commentators are not that happy about how one member of the new party has been financing her campaigning...

Susanne Linde är en annan av kvinnorna i ledningen för Feministiskt initiativ. Hon har varit sjukskriven i flera år för utbrändhet - utmattningsdepression. Mer utmattad har hon inte varit än att hon orkat resa runt i landet och kämpa för feminismen. Ekonomiskt har det inte varit några problem. Vi har alla som skattebetalare bidragit till hennes sjukersättning.

Susanne Linde is another of the women in the Feminist Initiative leadership. She has been on sick-leave for many years due to burnout - "fatigue depression". She hasn't been more fatigued than now by travelling round the country fighting for the feminists. Economically it hasn't been any problem. We have all contributed as tax payers to her sick-leave.

Sick-leave allowances are very generous in Sweden, particularly it seems if you are starting up a new party!

If you are interested, the manifesto of the party can be read at their website. The juiciest piece is (from the English version)...

Swedish gender politics have hitherto been based on a view of equality as a non-zero sum game, meaning that women’s conditions can improve without affecting those of men. Feminist Initiative builds its politics upon an analysis, which makes it clear that women’s subordination results from the privileging of men. Therefore, men must agree to relinquish their privileges.

So there you go. You see men must be punished in order to advance women. Pure and simple, at least according to the analysis from which they have built their policies.

Oh and they address the sick-leave business in their FAQ. Apparently it is all according to the rules, so there.

A Miller

Via Amritas (via Moorelies, via ...), I find that my philosopher is Mill...

"Liberty is the most important pleasure"

1. John Stuart Mill (100%) Click here for info
2. Kant (71%) Click here for info
3. Jeremy Bentham (69%) Click here for info
4. Ayn Rand (68%) Click here for info
5. Epicureans (62%) Click here for info
6. Aquinas (59%) Click here for info
7. Aristotle (59%) Click here for info
8. Jean-Paul Sartre (58%) Click here for info
9. Prescriptivism (56%) Click here for info
10. Stoics (40%) Click here for info
11. Spinoza (38%) Click here for info
12. Plato (37%) Click here for info
13. Nel Noddings (37%) Click here for info
14. David Hume (33%) Click here for info
15. Thomas Hobbes (33%) Click here for info
16. Ockham (29%) Click here for info
17. St. Augustine (27%) Click here for info
18. Nietzsche (27%) Click here for info
19. Cynics (24%) Click here for info

Now, how on Earth can I get Sartre off the list? But it seems anything below about 75% on this test is quite an iffy correlation with varying mileage-per-philosopher.

Glen Reynolds perfectly vile to Pope? Not quite...

What happens when some dopey lefty gets all knicker twisted about eulogies to the Pope on the occasion of his death? Why, take misguided potshots at some other blogger of course.

To wit, Hardon News:

Instapundit, for one, has been very nicey-nicey about the Pope. But, as Justin Raimondo points out in a lovely bit of Google site:searching, Instapundit's Glenn Reynolds has a long record of being perfectly vile about the same beloved religious leader. Surely some mistake?

Now, it seems at first glance to be somewhat fishy as any perusal of Instapundit rarely turns up anything 'vile' written by Reynolds towards others.

Take the first "nicey nicey" link... it is hardly Reynolds fawning over the pontiff. It is in fact a collection of links to other regulars who have essayed on the topic.

The second? Well, the URL of the site (antiwar...) begins to suggest something. Reading the page linked to would incline you to think that Reynolds was truly hating John Paul II. However, follow the links to the relevant Instapundit archives and you find a much different story. Reynolds disagrees with the vatican on the war, but is hardly scathing. He discusses the issues the church has with child abuse, antisemitism and various other topics. However, in all the links there is absolutely no entry that shows evidence of being "perfectly vile about the religious leader".

In other words, as per usual, the linked to antiwar site is a convenient twisting of various disassociated posts about the *church*, not the pope. This is in turn used by Hardon News to twist a set of links discussing the life of the pontiff into some hypocritical pandering by a frothing-at-the-mouth right wing nutter. The Instapundit, post-pope-death, links to articles critical about the pope are strangely omitted (oh yes, a "lovely" google site search will turn them up).

It is difficult to see the relevance of the attack on Reynolds, there must be easier targets out there in the camp of actual "conservative christian republicans we love to hate" who have actually, you know, been vile to the pope on occasion.

"Surely some mistake" indeed. I doubt the plonker at Hardon News even followed the links all the way to Instapundit.

In the fevered imaginings of the paranoid it seems impossible to contemplate the ability of a person to respect someone for their achievements while having disagreed with them on various points during their life. Life is hard.

What is the difference between a duck?

Mr Tanczos, steadfast member of the NZ Green party, has a website where he posts various mutterings. A few days ago he put up one on the ubiquitous "terrorism" topic. It begins, somewhat tautologically...

Any discussion about terrorism immediately begs the question: What is a terrorist?

This is followed by a rather sophistical paragraph.

There is a distinction between alleged Al Qaeda operatives flying a jet-liner into a building and the US Army flying cruise missiles into a city's suburbs; between a suicide bomber immolating themselves along with their target, and a helicopter gunship rocketing a car of militants on a crowded Palestinian street; between beheading a mercenary or soldier in a back room and shooting a journalist or travelling family at an army checkpoint. The real distinction is the monopoly that nation-states reserve for themselves over the legitimate use of violence.

There is a distinction, yes, but not that of the "monopolisation of legitimate violence by nation-states". The distinctions he fails to draw are, blindingly obvious to most readers, those of the respective targets of violence. Airliner into building => thousands of dead workers. Cruise missile into "city suburbs" => destruction of command, control and coordination located in those suburbs. Suicide bomber (presumably Palestinian from the comparison) => commuter busses full of workers, school children etc. Helicopter missile into car of militants => the murderous organisers of suicide attacks. The final comparison is bogus, beheading a mercenary or soldier but no mention of journalists or Nepalese workers or Iraqi election officials, in addition to being a deliberate acts, deliberately filmed whereas the shooting at a journalist (travelling erratically and secretly towards checkpoint perhaps?) and families (?) are not deliberate attempts to kill innocents.

Then play the Mandela card...

Of course, it is not always as simple as that. I don't condone terrorism, although I was a supporter of the ANC and its armed struggle against apartheid. I cheered when Nelson Mandela, offered a release from prison on the condition that he renounced violence, refused, saying that he would renounce violence if the regime did likewise. I have always been a little suspicious of the view that opponents of state terror must remain pacifist if they want our sympathy and support. I am opposed to the use of violence in general.

"I am opposed to the use of violence in general." But...

When a young man or woman blows themselves up with a nail bomb in a crowded bus or shopping centre, they are not doing it for a laugh. Such extreme measures tell us that these are desperate people, who see no other way of making their voice heard. I think it unlikely that more repression, causing more desperation, will ever bring an end to this kind of terrorism.

Again, what were the targets of Nelson Mandela? Did he seek to murder busloads of everyday people? No. Targetting the regime was the order of the day. Why? Because Mandela at least knew that afterwards he would have to live with the everyday people once the regime was gone. "Such extreme measures tell us", in fact, that the "desperate people" are not interested in peace or making their voices heard. They are interested only in death and violence with no bound, they are part of a cult of death. Associating more principled seekers of freedom with such soulless murderers is nothing more than political opportunism at the cost of the struggles the likes of Mandela went through. More than that, it means that any thug with a divine call to death is legitimised in his actions.

Curiously he ascribes repression as the cause of terrorism. Repression causes civil unrest and revolution, to be sure. But terrorism? That is a very long bow to draw. How has bin Laden been repressed in his life of luxury, or his relatively comfortable western-educated accomplices who carried out the deeds? Why are North Koreans, arguably the most repressed people, not blowing each other up left, right and center? Why not discuss these? Because they don't fit the cookie-cutter response of the intellectual Marxist.

But never fear! We come directly to the purpose of the conflation of ways and means and of the use of such sophistry...

My fear is that ending terrorism is not actually the main objective of those who hold power in the USA and its closest allies. By launching a 'permanent war' against 'terrorism and rogue states', within the context of a new crusade, the USA has solved what seemed like an intractable problem.

Ah yes. "Those who hold power in the USA" are the root cause. What is this intractable problem?

The end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet empire was hailed as proof of the superiority of capitalism over other forms of economic organisation, yet it appeared as an enormous blow to the power of the military industrial complex. If the sweet run that it was enjoying was to be preserved, it had to find a new threat. Intelligence agencies started focussing on internal surveillance of 'economic saboteurs' (e.g. unions, anti free-trade activists, animal rights activists, indigenous rights activists) but that was never going to legitimise spending billions of dollars on war toys.

Well, the end of the Cold War hailed freedom over tyranny despite those who wished to negotiate and coexist with those who made life on earth a living hell for untold millions of people for decades and slaughtered millions more. The conspiracy theorist wet-dreams over intelligence agencies and the mighty military-industrial complex, both so quickly rundown at the end of the cold war to the detriment of all, are little more than you'd expect from Mr Tanczos who is mired in his worn Marxist ideoligies of class struggle and oppression. If all your only tools are a hammer and sickle, then every problem looks like a class enemy who needs his legs sliced off and his skull bashed in.

So-called Islamic terrorists offered a solution. They formed a highly decentralised global network, justifying intrusive domestic and international intelligence and policing powers, with links to nations with significant military presence. Although, as during the Cold War, the actual fighting need only be done with militarily-weakened nations such as Iraq. Best of all, it played into psychologically powerful mythologies about the Crusades.

So-called Islamic terrorists indeed. After all, everyone overlooks those Baptists and Shintoists who boarded the planes on 9-11. It never ceases to amaze how someone can turn a situation completely backwards to contort reality into the shape of their ideology.

You see, despite the fact that Mr bin Laden (who is really just this decade's Mandela) has the stated intent of destroying the West, re-establishing the Caliphate that almost destroyed the West and conquered large swathes of Africa, Europe and the East, it is actually American imperialism that is the problem. Construction of empires by colored people is just natural, they should be left alone to get on with it, gas their populations etc etc. They should only be challenged when they have reached the point where taking them on has become a 50-50 proposition, it's just not a challenge otherwise.

The likes of Mr Tanczos have no interest in freedom, despite their protestations to the contrary. They cannot deal, in their tiny world view, with the fact that not every "freedom fighter" is a Nelson Mandela in the waiting. They cannot believe that murderers who behead Nepalese workers in Iraq are not Minutemen fighting for freedom. They cannot see that they are, quite clearly, precisely the opposite. The ideologies of people like Mr Tanczos have been tested and found wanting, by the millions of people murdered at the hands of those who led these movements. But rather than admit the mistake and see murderous terrorists for what they are, they move further into the realm of the unreal, contorting their ideologies to fit.

Thus Osama bin Laden is Nelson Mandela and an American marine is a terrorist. Moral relativism is the only way to do this, Marxism and all its bastard children are abject failures but must be rescued somehow. Admitting to it would be far too ego crushing to the generations of the 60's and 70's who could never quite bring themselves to admit that every form of leftist ideology from the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany to the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda led to the death of untold millions. The only way to explain it all away is to project the problem onto those who must fight it. In so doing they actively seek to have the horrors happen again and again, until, one bright and sunny day, the utopia they seek magically springs from the gulags and gas chambers.

Stupid Growth

There is from the OC Register, via John Ray, a good article on the anti-choice "Smart Growth" or "New Urbanism".

From the NZ Greens, there is a confused article about why people should not choose to live where they choose and drive what they want. Every reason under the sun and more as to why you should live boxed into the area you work. The ultimate sentence:

For those who are asking, what difference can a nation of 4 million make on a planet of 6 billion hell-bent on destruction, well we could make a difference for 4 million New Zealanders, and the world is crying out for role models. And our children and grandchildren deserve nothing less.

World hell-bent on destruction, do it for the grandchildren. Hello? Chicken Little? Yes, this is your sky-is-falling call.

As for me. I live in a city where the public transport is pretty good. But I am moving out to a more suburban area. Why? Because apartment life is constrained. Everything outside the apartment is communal, there is nothing that you are responsible for so ultimately no one is responsible. Everything turns into a tip, leaving the condition of the area up to the nature of the caretaker. And transport is a pain in the bum, even with regular services it is uncertain, inconvenient and generally dirty. Give me a patch of land and a car any day and the choice to use it.

Skateboarders for peace

It seems respect is a little lacking these days. I guess the thought that the man lying beneath the tomb might be their grandfather or great-grandfather never occured to them. But I imagine there are many thoughts that don't occur to twats like this...

Unknown Warrior's tomb desecrated by 'cretins'

Less than five months after the tomb was unveiled in Wellington as a monument to New Zealand's war dead, skateboarders have ridden over its brass cover, causing deep scratches and nicks in its granite platform.
"I would like to get my hands on the cretins who did this," National War Memorial assistant curator Martin Thompson said yesterday. "They are brain-dead cretins. They have no respect. Obviously the person below us died so they could skate all over him."
The damage happened between 4.30pm on Saturday and 11am yesterday, when he arrived for work at the war memorial. Police said their only chance of finding the offenders was to catch them in the act.
Mr Thompson said the incident was the most serious of many acts of disrespect since the tomb was unveiled on November 11. Mountain bikers had ridden bikes up and down the stairs, and people had walked on the grave and spilt drinks over it.
Though some thought had been given to installing barriers to keep skateboarders and other miscreants away, Mr Thompson said the tomb had been designed to be accessible at all times, even when the war memorial was closed.
He said the bronze would have to be buffed to remove the scratches before being polished again. He could not estimate the cost.