Quick Roundup 87

Monday, August 14, 2006

Castro's Conjugal Visit

I see that the New York Times has dutifully released some photos of Castro put out by the island prison's press organ, Granma. After all the recent examples of "fauxtojournalism" in recent days, I do find myself looking at this one and wondering what the shadow from Chavez's head is supposed to be falling on.

I suspect that the photo is real and that the "shadow" is probably an artefact induced by the use of a very strong flash. But still.... Do we have any experienced photographers lurking around here today? Does this look right?

For the indisputable phoniness, you have to read the article, which will, on the one hand, make you want to gag when it discusses the alleged emotional bond between the two thugs.

"Three Hours of Emotional Exchange," Granma said of the afternoon visit by Chavez, who is Castro's closest friend and political ally in Latin America.

"An Unforgettable Afternoon Among Brothers," the newspaper entitled its story, with the lead photograph showing Chavez and Raul Castro standing next the elder Castro's bedside. All three smiled next to a large portrait of the Cuban leader on an easel.

Castro and Chavez shared "more than three hours of emotional exchange, anecdotes, laughs, photos, gifts, a frugal snack and the happiness of close friendhip," Granma said.

The newspaper quoting Chavez as saying, "This is the best visit I've ever had in my life." Expressing surprise at his recovery, Chavez reportedly commented: "What kind of human being is this? What material is it made of?

"It is, as you people say, made of caguairin," Chavez reportedly said, using the name of the tropical hardwood tree that Granma has used to describe Castro in recent days.
Yeah. And I know what substance articles like this are made of. The bit about the "frugal snack" was especially condescending. These men are not only cold-blooded thugs, they're among the world's greatest looters!

On the other hand, the descriptions of what the Cuban people supposedly think about Fidel Castro's condition will make you want to either laugh or cry:
News of Castro's illness made Cubans uneasy about the future, but a series of upbeat statements from government officials have helped calm a public facing up to the mortality of the island's longtime leader.

''What happiness I received!'' exclaimed resident Margot Gomez after seeing Sunday's newspaper during a morning walk in Havana. ''Long live Fidel and long live the revolution! He knows what to do to convert setbacks into victories!''
Conveniently absent from the story is the fact that many citizens have recently been told by the military that it has "permission to respond with force against anyone who speaks out against the government". Margot Gomez is either off her rocker or has the sense to pretend that she is.

British cop nails it.

Via Little Green Footballs is an editorial by Lord John Stevens, former head of London's Metropolitan Police, which explicitly defends the targeting of law enforcement resources known as "profiling". In the process, Lord Stevens gives a well-deserved ... um ... slapping to the British Moslem community for getting huffy every time one of their own is captured getting ready to perform an act of barbarism -- but only because their religion is mentioned. His comparison of modern-day Islamic terrorism to that of the IRA is his best point by far.
[W]hen will the Muslim community in this country accept an absolute, undeniable, total truth: that Islamic terrorism is THEIR problem? THEY own it. And it is THEIR duty to face it and eradicate it.

To stop the denial, endless fudging and constant wailing that somehow it is everyone else's problem and, if Islamic terrorism exists at all, they are somehow the main victims.

Because until that happens the problem will never be resolved.

...

[T]errorism is a major problem for the Muslim community of Britain. Of course, there will be instant squealings that this is racism. It's not. It's exactly the same as recognising that, during the Northern Ireland troubles that left thousands dead, the IRA were totally based in the Catholic community and the UVF in the Protestant.

And that, most importantly, IRA terrorism only began to draw to a close when that Catholic community it was based in decided as a whole that it was no longer prepared to back violence as the only way forward. Interestingly, it was Catholic revulsion over republican terrorist atrocities such as Enniskillen and Omagh that fuelled that change.
Lord Stevens still has some responsibilities related to law enforcement. I will be very pessimistic for Britain if he gets sacked over these remarks.

ARI to CAIR: Apologize

Most of my Objectivist readers will already have read this, but it is so good it bears repeating:
Irvine, CA—Following news of the foiled plot to bomb airlines, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) criticized President Bush for calling the would-be killers "Islamic fascists."

"CAIR is demanding that we evade the actual goal of those trying to kill us," said Dr. Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute. "Just as the Soviet Communists and the Nazis sought to impose their version of socialism on the world, so the new killers seek to impose their version of Islam on the world. They seek total power to enact the dictates of Islam. Theirs is an Islamic totalitarian movement.

"I wish Bush would take his own rhetoric seriously, because understanding this fact about the killers is crucial to achieving victory in the war. Only when the political aspiration of Islam--the imposition of its religious dogmas by force--has been shown to result in the deaths of Islamists, not their victims, will we be safe. Only when the cause of Islamic totalitarianism has been thoroughly discredited, will victory be achieved.

"CAIR's demand that we evade the role of religion in this conflict is undermining America's self-defense. For this, the group should apologize to all Americans." [bold added]
I wish CAIR would explicitly answer this one, but absent that, I'll take their continued implicit support of terrorism as their answer.

Val Prieto subs for Michelle Malkin.

I congratulate Val Prieto of Babalu Blog, whose coverage of the Cuban succession crisis I have greatly enjoyed, on his being tapped to help fill in for Michelle Malkin during her vacation.

Contest Extended

The "Find Fidel" fauxtoshop contest over at Brain Shavings has been extended to Wednesday. My plate was unexpectedly full this weekend, so maybe I'll have a chance to enter after all.

Google Video Update

It seems that Internet postings of the entirety of Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West, which have appeared at least twice on Google Video only to be pulled each time, are in violation of its owners' copyright. The 60-minute pre-release version of this important documentary is available for sale here.

Now I can stop obsessing over it!

-- CAV

4 comments:

Anon. said...

"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran . . . should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth.", which is what the Co-founder of CAIR, Omar Ahmad, said. Man I hate terrorists.

Gus Van Horn said...

Daniel,

Right you are. I also despise the motivating ideology of terrorists, Islam.

Gus

Anonymous said...

" I also despise the motivating ideology of terrorists, Islam.

I'm glad you said this b/c I'm tired of hearing about our war with "militant" or "radical" Islam. We are at war with *Islam* period. I wish this was said more frequently.

D. Eastbrook

Gus Van Horn said...

D.,

When I saw in my mailbox that "Anonymous" had left a comment for me to moderate, I halfway expected some idiot multiculturalist or opportunistic Moslem to rake me over the coals for saying that.

I was about to slip up and say that the answer to such a comment is: "If Islam is NOT the enemy of the West, then preach this to all your fellow Moslems -- you know, the ones getting ready to kill everyone -- rather than to me.

"They are the dangerous ones, and if my 'attitude' endangers all the peaceful Moslems out there, the whole problem could be circumvented by straightening them out."

But that is not the case. Reasonable people, including some Moslems, realize that I am free to say whatever I want about any ideology, so long as I do not, like, say, an Imam, incite violence.

So the correct answer to such mealy-mouthed foolishness remains what it usually gets: a refusal to post the comment unless it has entertainment value or allows me to demonstrate a point by answering it.

Gus