On the Wing

Flying in the face of widespread left wing extremism!

Archive for June, 2007

Burnt Offerings

Posted by Exile on June 29, 2007


If you haven’t heard yet, or seen the video, the burning of a charicature Mohammed was carried out in three different locations in Denmark on Saint Hans evening, the traditional midsummer festival. The video of one of these events was posted on Youtube, censored out and subsequently resurfaced on Google Video some time later.
The midsummer festival in Denmark usually includes the lighting of bonfires and the burning of an effigy of a witch. This is to send all the evil back to hell and to ensure the coming of a good and plentiful harvest. Add a good deal of beer and a few hotdogs and you have the makings of a fine old paegan evening. Some people appear to have connected Mohammed with evil influences and therefore they believe he deserves the same treatment. Or maybe it was a sort of justifiable retaliation for the burning of Danish flags following the great Motoon affair.
Who knows?

What does surprise me is the total and utter lack of muslim rage about this event. Drawing the prophet is apparently not kosher, (sorry, I meant halal) but burning an effigy of the same person has gone by without comment, loss of life, the burning of embassies or flags, or demonstrations demanding the beheading of the perpetrators.

Uh? Wha’ssup mussies? Where’s the good old jihad spirit? Where’s the raging in the streets? Why isn’t Copenhagen burning?

Perhaps the islamists are all raged out after the outrage last year? Perhaps they used all their rhetoric in one fell swoop and meant that surely they would never need to go nuts again having now shown that they can dominate the news, at least for a couple of weeks. Maybe they have nothing left to offer? Or maybe they just haven’t seen the video yet?

If that is the case, then I can’t resist giving them the opportunity. See it here.

Or was the motoon affair so desensitizing to the muslims that they have come to accept a little provocation and a little laughing at their expense?
If so, then it was all worthwhile.

Sweden, take note.

Posted in Generic | Leave a Comment »

It Wasn’t Half Hot Mum..!

Posted by Exile on June 26, 2007

Just back from Greece. We experienced the heat wave that is tormenting southern Europe at the moment. 43°C in the shade was the highest we were exposed to and the humidity was unbearable. Thank heavens for air conditioning. The pool or the sea was the only rescue and even that was warm. Coming home to slightly lower than average temperatures in Denmark was a shock to the system. But having said that, the week was great and went by too quickly. Good food, nice people and a good deal of laughter. The Ionian sea is friendly and clear and there is always the chance of seeing a green sea turtle. We didn’t see one, but there are others that did. Mosquitoes and a suicidal Greek bee that stung my wife were the only detractions.
If anyone out there is going to Zakynthos and especially the little resort of Argassi, the place to eat is the Granada Restaurant. Momma makes great food and Peri, her son, is the most welcoming of hosts. The local wine is terrific. Try it, I can thoroughly recommend it.

Ah well. Back to everyday life….

Posted in Generic | Leave a Comment »

Gone to Greece for the Week.

Posted by Exile on June 18, 2007


Don’t do anything stupid while I’m away. Take care of yourselves and I’ll be back as soon as I get finished tanning myself and emptying a Greek island of Ouzo. Just so you all know what I’m talking about, here is a picture of a bottle of my personal favourite. After a couple of pints of this, I’m anybody’s! A red nose, a balloon on a stick and a cheery wave as I go staggering by. Hell, I’m on holiday, so who cares.

Any reports you may hear of a white whale stranded on the coast of Greece may just be me blacked out on the beach, so no photos please! Warn Reuters.

Thankyou and bye bye.

Posted in Generic | Leave a Comment »

The June 2007 Bullshit Award

Posted by Exile on June 17, 2007

There are adverts on the TV that make my blood boil. A recent spate of adverts for energy saving electrical equipment has really got me going. They start, predictably enough, with someone coming into a hardware store and asking for a light bulb or a refridgerator or the like, and being told the prices of two different, but identical, items. “I’ll take the expensive one” says the guy/lady. He or she then gets given the opposite of what he or she has demanded. “But that’s not the expensive one”, he/she declares. “No. But it will be.” comes the reply. The indication being, that the cheap item uses more energy.

This is crap! Bullshit. Madness. How unintelligent can it be? The thing that uses least energy is more expensive to buy. How bloody stupid can that be? And why? Why does the most economic machine or item or whatever have to cost more? Something is seriously wrong here.

I am not one hundred percent convinced that global warming is man made. I am convinced that it is a reality. I am also convinced that any saving of our limited energy resources is a good thing. No matter how we do it. But holding everybody to ransom in the hardware store is just about shy of criminal.

If our governments are so tied up with global warming, then they should ban the production of cheap, energy guzzling electrical equipment and only allow the sale of economic equipment. Or they should reverse the pricing by law. Or offer taxation benefits for the buyer, at the point of buying, to induce them to buy the most economic item.

This is why I have a hard time believing the man-made global warming scenario. This is why I don’t believe the “save energy” campaigns. I took it seriously once, along with a whole community of citizens. We saved so much energy by insulating our homes and buying the economic stuff, at personal expense, that the power company had to increase its prices to cover its costs. We ended up paying more for using less. We went on paying more for less forever after. We never recovered our costs, as we were promised we would.

If the government is telling me to save energy and save the environment, then why aren’t they doing something to encourage me, and others, to do something about it?

Global warming? Global money making conspiracy, more like.

Someone, somewhere, is bullshitting me blind. I know it. I can smell it.
So the June 2007 Bullshit Award goes to the producers of these things, to the power companies and to the government.
Congratulations to them all.

Posted in Bullshit Award | Leave a Comment »

The Palestinian Civil War.

Posted by Exile on June 16, 2007

Let’s call things by their proper name. Gaza has just witnessed a civil war. Hamas is now in control of the Gaza strip and will doubtlessly convert it into a weapons cache for later use by Al-queda terrorists to attack Israel. Funded and fed by Iran and China, Gaza is ripe for the onslaught to follow. I wonder if the remaining bits on the west bank will experience the same fate? With Fatah folk fleeing to Egypt, they will have to travel a bit to reach the comparative safety of what is left of their safe haven.
I find it all a tad tiring. And isn’t it amazing how many weapons there are in what the press calls a refugee camp? Refugee camp, my ass. It has never been a refugee camp. Never was, never will be. You can’t be a refugee for sixty years. No matter where you live.
The good thing about all this is that all Hamas’ firepower seems to be concentrated now in Gaza. If the Israelis had ever wanted Gaza on a silver plate, they have it now. A quick invasion to “rescue” the strip from Islamic terrorists and free the Poor Palestinians would maybe not be seen to be so evil as some might think. I think Abbas would welcome it. And the Arab league probably wouldn’t object either. They are equally as worried about the state of affairs in Gaza as anybody else.
I doubt that the Israelis will do anything. Why should they? While the two factions of the Poor Palestinian People are fighting amongst themselves, they are not attacking Israel. They will soon, but noone sems to be concerned about that at the moment. But Israel will do nothing preemptive. The UN wouldn’t stomach it and any moves by Israel, no matter how one imagines it being done, will be immediately met by edicts of condemnation of Israeli aggression.
One can only hope that the civil war will continue until they, the Poor Peace Loving Palestinians, have annihilated each other. At least, the homicidally insane amongst them. That would be an end to the Palestinian problem and the beginning of a new peace in the Middle East. After all, if there are no more war mongering Poor Palestinians left standing, who would there be for Israel to oppress? Poor Palestinian neighbours? Their lives would only improve under Israeli protection.

Not that I see Israel doing much oppressing.

The Palestinian Islamists are much better, and apparently much more effective, at doing that for themselves. After all, they have had sixty years practice.

Posted in Generic | Leave a Comment »

Yay Indonesia!

Posted by Exile on June 12, 2007

Indonesian police have caught their “most wanted” man, Abu Dujana, leader of the terrorist network Jemaah Islamiah. This is the animal behind the Bali bombing in 2002 that caused the deaths of 200 people. The arrest has been confirmed by a member of the Indonesian anti-terror corps. He was one of several terrorists arrested in multiple raids carried out over the entire country. Abu Dujana’s first lieutenant is also reported captured and was apparently shot in the thigh during the arrest.

Let’s see if they can convict these two. The Indonesians aren’t too good at that.

Check the guy out at the MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base.

Posted in Generic | 1 Comment »

Why Europe Has No External Borders.

Posted by Exile on June 6, 2007

The Mediterranean island of Lampedusa (Italian Isola di Lampedusa) is the largest of the Pelagie Islands and is situated 205 km from Sicily and 113 km from Tunisia. Its population subsists on fishing, agriculture and tourism. The island is under invasion by illegal immigrants from North Africa. Even the EU bureaucrats can see that “whereas Lampedusa is a small island of 20 km2 located in the middle of the Sicilian Channel, with a population of 5 500, [it] has obvious limits to its capacity to receive and host the mass of (illegal) immigrants and asylum seekers who regularly land on its coast, often in desperate conditions.”

Illegal immigrants, eh? What then, is the Italian answer to this problem? Send them back where they came from. Which is Libya. Italy, surprisingly, has no law regarding refugees. In fact it is the only country in the EU that does not have such laws. What would be the point? The EU would simply overrule them anyway if it didn’t think them appropriate. Indeed the EU went to work on Italy after the Italians returned a load of these illegal immigrants to Libya between October 2004 and March 2005. Italy has a repatriation agreement with Libya, though the body of that agreement has remained secret since its creation. This too, is a thorn in the side of the EU. The EU cannot have independant thinkers in its midst can it? Whatever next? Sovereignty? Heaven forbid!
The EU parliament went into immediate discussion and came up with a text [P6_TA(2005)0138] to condemn Italy and to let everybody else know, that this sort of thing is unacceptable to the social democratic government of Europe and Italy had better stop this arbitrary behaviour at once. And the EU produced all the necessary articles and conventions they could find with which to back their edict up , including the Refugee Convention, the articles of human rights of everyone from the UN downward and their own version of European law. One of the points they make most use of is the principle of “non-refoulement” – or “no return”. This principle was founded in 1905 and was meant to protect any individual asylum seeker from repatriation. Over the last century this principle was expanded and broadened and is now a blanket under which thousands, and not merely one individual, can use to solidify their position as refugees. Which is why 300,000 illegal immigrants a year, every year, are coming to Europe and are not being turned away. We can’t merely repatriate them. That is to say, we could, but we mustn’t. Read the following from Jessica Rodger of the Faculty of Law, Victoria University, Wellington. She puts it better than I can:

1951 Refugee Convention

The Convention itself deals with various aspects of law relating to refugees, and remains the primary instrument of refugee law. It was intended to consolidate the various international laws and practices impacting on refugees and asylum-seekers. It was also recognised that certain countries bore a much bigger burden than others with respect to the refugee flows, therefore it was imperative that an international approach to the problem be taken. The Convention defined who exactly was to be viewed as a refugee, and spelled out what rights these people would have. In 1967, by way of a Protocol, the Convention was amended and signatories were given the opportunity to remove the geographical and temporal restrictions present in the original document.
For our purposes Article 33 of the Convention is of primary relevance. The first paragraph of this article states that:

No Contracting State shall expel or return (‘refouler’) a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.

Although this was intended to be an absolute right, states remained concerned about the erosion of their sovereignty that this could create. Therefore a second paragraph was tacked on, providing that the right of non-refoulement could not be claimed by someone who was seen as a risk to the security of the country, or who had been convicted of a ‘particularly serious crime’.

Since 1951, 137 states have signed the Convention, thereby accepting the principle of non-refoulement expressed therein. However problems have arisen regarding the interpretation of Article 33. Debate continues to surround the issue of whether or not a refugee must be inside the state in order for the right to accrue to them. If so then states would be perfectly within their rights to turn away asylum-seekers at the borders or ships at sea. There was also discussion as to whether a refugee had to meet the strict requirements of the Convention before they could be granted the right of non-refoulement. However, through the work of the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees, and general state practice, it has been accepted that Article 33 applies to all refugees, whether or not they fit the prescribed definition.

“Whether or not they fit the prescribed definition”. Which renders the definition of refugee useless. What point can such a definition serve if it is immediately rendered void by acceptance of refugee status by default? Jessica continues:

The non-refoulement principle has clearly undergone substantial development since its emergence as a vague morality-based rule. Not only is it described as the foundation of the foremost international legal instrument relating to refugees, but it has also been transplanted into other treaties. Although this indicates the importance of non-refoulement internationally, its expression in so many different ways and in so many different instruments, also serves to undermine its effectiveness. As things currently stand, refugees are in a position to shop around to see which state has the most obliging refugee laws and in particular the widest interpretation of their non-refoulement obligations. This problem, as well as others caused by the differing definitions of non-refoulement in the various instruments, may be overcome if it could be shown that the non-refoulement principle had attained the status of a customary rule.

Which I believe has been done by the EU’s chastisement of Italy. “Non-refoulement” has become a blanket customary rule.

In which case it should be repealed and a new strategy to deal with thousands of illegal immigrants coming to our shores with absolute impunity should be developed and immediate repatriation should be put in place. Illegal immigration is piracy.

We are being plundered.

Links:
Jessica Rodger.

P6_TA(2005)0138 (EU Adopted Text)

Posted in Generic | Leave a Comment »

Man the Guns!

Posted by Exile on June 3, 2007

Here’s an out-take from an article on CNN’s website:

(CNN) — Six Islamic militants – including a British and American – were killed in northern Somalia over the weekend during joint local and U.S. military attacks targeting militants, a regional official told reporters during a Sunday news conference.

The six killed include foreign nationals from the United States, Sweden, Eritrea, Britain, Yemen and Pakistan, according to Minister of Finance in the Puntland State of Somalia, Mohamed Ali Yusuf.

Who said it wasn’t a global jihad?

The article also comes with another little gem of a report:


Sources told CNN on Friday that a U.S. Navy destroyer off the coast of northern Somalia fired on a suspected al Qaeda operative who was believed to have been involved in the 1998 attacks on U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

I’ve heard of long range sniping, but this is ridiculous! Using heavy naval gunfire to target one operative?

I can hear the conversation on the bridge of the destroyer as it steamed over the horizon and spotted the enemy;

“Hey, isn’t that Abou Mohammed ben-Whatever over there on the beach in Somalia? You know, the guy that attacked our embassy in Kenya”

(Binoculars train on the huge open beaches of Somalia, 15 kilometers away..)

“Yep. Sure looks like him Skipper. I can see his turban.”

“OK. Sound battle stations. Man the guns. Let’s give him a broadside…”

Poor unlucky bastard..

Posted in Generic | Leave a Comment »

Gimme Shelter.

Posted by Exile on June 3, 2007

One of my readers sent me a link to a website showing pictures of the events around a bombing and subsequent shooting in Iraq. The pictures show an Iraqi youngster running to, and taking shelter behind, an American soldier. Obviously, this lad thinks he knows where he’s going to be safe. There are plenty of others around to take refuge behind, but he chose the big yankee grunt. Maybe because the grunt is the only one standing his ground.

I wonder if he will remember this when he gets to be an adult?

Or will he grow up to be one of the flag burners screaming “Death to America”?

See the pictures here:

Hat tip: Alec. (He knows who he is!)

Posted in Generic | Leave a Comment »