"I just talked on the phone to a young man named Todd Nicely, quadruple amputee. I met him at Walter Reed, and he's now at Bethesda. I'm, I'm not prepared to say that--to these young men and women who are putting their lives and their families on the line that we are going to leave it at date certain." -John McCain
Interpol - The Heinrich Maneuver
On his Blog, Auster writes:
Like a stadium full of vuvuzela players, the conservative commentariat keep filling our ears with the senseless and sense-obliterating message that the main problem with the first radical leftist president in American history is not that he is a radical leftist who is out to harm and weaken America (the principal goal of the international left at least since the 1960s), but that he is "inexperienced," "incompetent," "indecisive," "detached," or (in Mark Steyn's latest exercise) "unengaged." How can they indict him as a leftist revolutionary and complain about the fact that he is not up to--or not interested in--the job? What possesses these conservatives that they are unwilling or unable to acknowledge that an enemy is an enemy? Don't they see that if Obama is "unengaged" in, say, the Gulf oil spill disaster, it's for exactly the same reason that he was hyper-engaged in ramming through the health care bill? Namely that he wants America to be crippled, he wants America to be rendered unable to sustain itself as a free and independent country, so that the left and the nonwhites and the Muslims can take it over. Some of the conservatives do seem to see this disturbing truth, but then they veer away from it, obsessing on Obama's inexperience and detachment. Yes, he's detached. He's detached from America in the same sense that if your worst enemy saw you drowning in a lake, instead of saving you he would be detached about it and go play golf.
Stataholic Responds:
While there may be some degree of truth in this, it misses a very basic issue.
When the American economy gets weaker, it actually makes it much harder for non-Whites to take over than it otherwise would've been.
This is for two reasons...
1. A weaker economy pushes voters to the hard Right:
"Our main finding is that higher per capita GDP growth is significantly negatively linked to the support for extreme political positions. While estimates vary between specifications, we find that roughly a one percentage point decline in growth translates into a one percentage point higher vote share of right-wing or nationalist parties. Moreover, we find that the amount of income inequality in a country affects the role that growth plays. Highly unequal countries display a lower growth effect than more equal countries. For countries with a more equal distribution of income, a one percentage point drop in the growth rate may increase the vote share of far right parties by up to two percentage points"-The OECD’s growth prospects and political extremism
2. A weaker economy, obviously, makes the United States less attractive to non-White immigrants.
Note: This incisive meditation on prenuptial agreements is excerpted from an essay entitled "Don’t Marry: Why Modern, Western Marriage Has Become A Bad Business Decision For Men".
Note the overall conclusion of the piece is not necessarily being endorsed here.
Pre-Nups
If a man insists on a Pre-Nup, he is selfish and unromantic. However, when is the last time a woman who demanded a Pre-Nup was called “unromantic”? On the contrary, if a woman requests a Pre-Nup, she is being fiscally responsible, sensible and looking out for herself. (Note: If your fiancée refuses to sign a Pre-Nup, she has just shown her hand. Best to leave now.) Why is it that a woman can refuse a Pre-Nup, and it is accepted by society? In reality, the man should be outraged that she is after a legal contract, and not love.
What is astounding is the hypocrisy of the usual reaction towards Pre-Nups. Women can conveniently assert that a man is unromantic if he suggests a Pre-Nup. After all, how can a man pollute true love with the signing of legal paperwork! However, what is a marriage licence? Nothing more than a legal contract entered into between the man, woman and local and state government authorities. A woman does not seem to balk at signing this legal paperwork, which entitles her to at least half the assets a man has accumulated as well as half of everything he earns in the future, and obligates him to support her in perpetuity in the event of a breakup. Why aren’t men allowed to note how unromantic this contract is? The distraction of bridal magazines, place setting selection, floral arrangements, wedding dresses, receptions, wedding showers, and honeymoons have clouded the legal reality of what men are getting themselves into. Marriage is as much an unromantic legal contract as a prenuptial agreement is.
Initially, Pre-Nups were devised as a way to protect women. Nuptial agreements were popularised in the 19th century, mostly to protect heiresses from marrying men who were “out for their money”. Until the Married Women’s Property Act of 1848, under English Common Law, a woman’s property, upon marriage, was usually transferred to her husband.
Guess which US State currently has the highest unemployment rate?
Nevada does.
This is interesting because I really don't like what Nevada has come to represent lately.
I remember a few years ago there were these ads Las Vegas put out which said: "What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas."
What that slogan represented was a pernicious attempt to institutionalize the desocializtion of the sexual act.
Now probably the point of marriage ceremonies being invented in the first place was to make known to everyone that this or that Woman now belonged to this or that Man.
This will help the Man have greater paternity confidence, thus giving him enough of a stake in her welfare and the welfare of her future children to actually go through the trouble of looking out for their best interests.
But what the Las Vegas tourism board has been promoting is the total opposite of marriage, sexual acts so anonymous and meaningless as to not even become known as rumors outside of a tiny city only infrequently visited.
Anyway, the reason I’m mentioning Nevada having the highest unemployment is because it's an example of how the bad economy is having a salutary effect in many areas.
Since there's no actual purpose served by what Las Vegas is selling, and because it's a massively inefficient means of entertainment, it's the first thing to be cut.
Now if only people would get it through their thick skulls that the same description applies to America's overseas military commitments.
Wilders is starting to show where his real priorities lie.
And sadly it turns out to have nothing to do with defending Europe or its indigenous peoples.
Geert Wilders: Change Jordan's name to Palestine
Geert Wilders, who leads the right-wing Party for Freedom (PVV) in Holland, said last week he believes Jordan should be renamed Palestine. The Jordanian government responded by saying Wilders' speech was reminiscent of the Israeli right wing.
"Jordan is Palestine," said Wilders, who heads the third-largest party in Holland. "Changing its name to Palestine will end the conflict in the Middle East and provide the Palestinians with an alternate homeland."
The basic issue here is that there's only so much energy, power, and moral capital Whites have left. If its expended on supporting Israel's campaign of mass scale population replacement against Palestinians in the Middle East, you can forget about stopping the creation of large Muslim states in the heart of Europe.
Wilder's Country of Holland is being invaded by Muslims, and yet instead of concentrating on stopping the invasion IN HIS OWN COUNTRY, he wants to pick a fight with Muslims thousands of miles away in their ancient Homeland!
Its just sickening.
Wilders added that Israel deserved a special status in the Dutch government because it was fighting for Jerusalem in its name.
"If Jerusalem falls into the hands of the Muslims, Athens and Rome will be next. Thus, Jerusalem is the main front protecting the West. It is not a conflict over territory but rather an ideological battle, between the mentality of the liberated West and the ideology of Islamic barbarism," he said.
YES IT IS A CONFLICT OVER TERRITORY YOU WEAK MINDED FOOL.
Also I don't understand this reference to Athens and Rome.
Athens and Rome, thankfully, are in NO WAY WHATSOEVER dependant on protection from the Israeli Army, or aid from the Israeli Government.
All of Israel could be wiped off the map and Athens and Rome would be no worse off.
And if the destruction of Israel weakened the EU it would be of profound benefit to both Greece and Italy as they would no longer have evil-hearted bureaucrats constantly and audaciously harrassing them to let in Non-European immigrants.
"There has been an independent Palestinian state since 1946, and it is the kingdom of Jordan."
That's a lie. Jordan is run by Jordanians, the majority of the population are Jordanians.
Really, if it's okay for Wilders to say that Jordan should be renamed Palestine because they let in a lot of Palestinian refugees, why shouldn't Holland be renamed Morocco because they let in a lot of Moroccans?
Wilders also called on the Dutch government to refer to Jordan as Palestine and move its embassy to Jerusalem.
You notice he doesn't call on the Dutch government to cut off Non-European immigration! Instead he only calls on them to meddle in Middle East politics at the behest of his Jewish paymasters.
It's clear what Country he cares about more, and it isn't Holland.
The Saudi Al-Watan carried Jordan's response to Wilders' speech. The kingdom's embassy in Hague was outraged, and said the Dutch ambassador would soon be summoned to explain.
As well he should be.
Jordan's minister for media affairs and communications, Nabil Al Sharif, asked for clarifications. He described Wilders' declaration as "an echo of the voice of the Israeli Right" and "crows' screams".
I don't blame him for being upset. Can you imagine being told that the Country of your birth, which in this case is also the Country that employs you, doesn't actually exist? If anything he should be more upset.
"Jordan is an independent and secure country which supports the Palestinian issue, and these imaginings of finding them an alternate homeland are nothing but the delusions of a few people," he said.
The PVV nearly tripled its power in the last election, going from nine parliament seats to 24. The right-wing party, which has called for a ban on minarets and Muslim scarves, has been holding so far unsuccessful negotiations with the liberal Right.
If the liberal Right doesn't want to spend its last dime fighting pointless and unjust wars in the Middle East, they'd be wise to refuse to joining any kind of coalition with Wilders.
________________________________________________________
A European party much less beholden to the Likkud government in Tel Aviv than Wilder's PVV is the Greek political party Golden Dawn.
Golden Dawn's
website is found here:
http://www.xryshaygh.com/index.php/home
Information on how to donate to Golden Dawn
can be found here:
http://www.xryshaygh.com/index.php/home/oikonomikh-enisxysh
Golden Dawn NYC's
website is found here:
http://xaameriki.wordpress.com/
I have some concerns about this study in terms of how overly small the sample size was, but at the same time I think it jibes with common sense and anecdotal experience.
It’s kind of like if you were listening to the soundtrack to a war movie while walking around the supermarket, it would make you want to start fighting a war over control of the produce.
In the same way it makes sense that listening to Romantic Music would make a Woman more open to the tenderer emotions which would make her look more kindly on the advances of a member of the opposite sex.
At the same time its important to understand that the study only constitutes direct evidence of a particular French Song making French Women more open to giving out their phone numbers to Men than another French song.
Whether Romantic Music in general does the trick hasn’t yet been studied scientifically enough to make firm conclusions justified.
Women 'give men phone number after listening to romantic music'
Scientists from the universities of southern Brittany and southern Paris recruited 87 single women aged 18 to 20.
The volunteers each spent five minutes in a waiting room where one of two carefully selected tunes played in the background.
In another room was a young man, who had also been carefully selected, by another panel of women, to be "average" in looks.
After exposure to the background music, the woman was instructed to discuss the difference between two food products – an organic cookie and a non-organic cookie – with the young man.
At the end of their conversation, the man used a standard chat-up line, asking the girl for her phone number and saying he wanted to ask her out for a drink.
What swayed his chances of success was the music that had been played in the waiting room, the researchers found.
When a "neutral" song – "L'heure du the" ("Time for tea") by Vincent Delerm – was played, only 28 per cent of women responded positively.
But when the romantic ballad "Je l'aime a mourir" ("I love her to death") by Francis Cabrel was played, his success rate nearly doubled, to 52 per cent.
"Our results confirm that the effect of exposure to media content is not limited to violence and could have the potential to influence a high spectrum of behaviour," said Nicolas Gueguen, one of the three researchers.
"The results are interesting for scientists who work on the effect of background music on individuals' behaviour."
The research appears in the journal, Psychology of Music.
Obama Most Hated American President in Great Britain Since Nixon
What a difference 18 months and an oil spill makes. In January 2009 Barack Obama was hugely popular on this side of the Atlantic, and could have walked on water in the eyes of the British media, the political elites, and the general public. In June 2010 however he probably qualifies as the most despised US president since Nixon among the British people.
Why did they despise Nixon? Did Vietnam have that much of an effect on Britain?
In fact you can’t open a London paper at this time without reading yet another fiery broadside against a leader who famously boasted of restoring “America’s standing” in the world.
I guess the British press is turning into the Israeli press when it comes to their stance toward Obama.
When even Obama’s most ardent political supporters in Britain, including Boris Johnson, are on the offensive against the White House, you know the president’s halo has dramatically slipped.
The James Watson hating Commie?
It’s hard to believe that any politician could become more disliked in the UK than Gordon Brown, but Barack Obama is achieving that in spades. And as Janet Daley noted of the British press, the love affair with Barack is well and truly over.
The key catalyst for rising anti-Obama sentiment in the UK has been his disastrous handling of the BP issue, and his relentless desire to crush Britain’s biggest company.
Much like his relentless desire to crush Israel, Obama's relentless desire to crush BP mostly amounts to sitting back and watching as they destroy themselves.
I guess what the British and Jews want is someone who'll kiss up to them relentlessly, like Bush did.
Now Bush actually did more to set up Britain and especially Israel being in the increasingly weak positions they're in today, certainly far more than Obama has, but with some people its all about their desire for an ego trip.
There is no doubting BP’s responsibility over the Gulf oil disaster, and it is right that the firm is being held to account for its failures. But the brutal, almost sadistic trashing of BP by the imperious Obama administration, which has helped wipe out about half its value,
Yeah sure, that's why the Stock went down.
...threatens its very future, as well as the pensions of 18 million British people and the jobs of 29,000 Americans.
29,000 American jobs ain't much.
There is now the very real danger of the bankrupting of a great British enterprise, and the prospect even of a Chinese or Russian takeover.
As I've said repeatedly at this Blog, the future lies in the hands of a Russo-Chinese alliance. The symbolism of Russians and/or Chinese taking over a backbone of the British Empire like BP would be a good sign that my idea will come to fruition.
"Instead of adopting a constructive, statesmanlike approach, Barack Obama's decision to launch a 'boot on the throat' campaign, while adopting a thinly veiled Brit-bashing agenda,
Really? (Talk about Israeli type levels of paranoia.)
...has generated significant bad blood in America's closest ally.
This is what America does that Britain can't take sitting down? It was the incompetent British company who started the trouble in the first place by not following proper safety standards or having a meaningful plan for dealing with oil leaks.
At the same time, the president has inexplicably rejected offers of help from the UK and an array of European countries, no doubt out of both pride and protectionism."
By Jane Austen
Anyway, I don't understand how the Brits can say they want the US Government to take the blame for for BP screwing things up, while BP has always denied the right of the US Government to get the entirety of BP's profits from drilling in American waters.
H/T: Auster
It appears that England has decided to give up on being anything but an example to the World of how not to do everything.
Mini gun to lure female UK cops
MEMBERS of Scotland Yard's elite bodyguard unit are being armed with smaller, lighter "baby" guns as part of a drive to attract more female officers.
The move is aimed at recruiting bodyguards with smaller hands. However, critics fear it could hamper the close protection officers who guard the Queen, the Prime Minister and other VIPs if they have to fend off an attack.
You think?
"It's a disadvantage because the smaller guns have less firepower and are less accurate," said a police firearms expert.
You think?
Supporters deny the Yard is putting political correctness before security by trying to recruit women.
They say the change is part of a legitimate attempt by the Metropolitan police chiefs to reflect the community better.
Others believe the move underlines the explosion of a "diversity agenda" that began in the 1990s and was led by a new breed of police chiefs who thought the traditional force was too male-dominated.
The trend to bring more women into the police was reinforced last week when British Prime Minister David Cameron was seen jogging with a female protection officer.
Does his wife know about this?
Oh wait. They mean the female protection officer was there to protect him! Nothing says: "Don't even try to mess with this guy" quite like him being protected by a girl.
Historically, the standard-issue weapon of the Met's specialist and royalty protection units is the Glock 17, a semiautomatic pistol fed with 17 rounds of ammunition.
The self-loading pistol has a magazine that is double-stacked in a zigzag formation and requires a wide gun butt.
The replacement weapon for women officers and those with smaller hands is believed to be the "sub-compact" version, the Glock 26.
Marketed by its Austrian manufacturer as the "Baby Glock", the gun has a single magazine with 10 bullets and therefore requires a smaller butt.
17 bullets, 10 bullets, what's the difference?
The Glock 26's barrel is just under 9cm long, more than 2.5cm shorter than that of the Glock 17. This makes it a less accurate weapon, particularly at longer range.
What's the dif?
In a firefight, officers using the "Baby Glock" would have to stop shooting and reload their weapon more frequently than those with the bigger gun.
No way that will get anyone killed!
Details of the new guns were disclosed by John Bunn, a senior detective in the Yard's counter-terrorism command, to the Metropolitan Police Authority, the force's watchdog.
Noting "considerable improvements" in the work of SO1, the specialist protection unit, Mr Bunn wrote in a report: "A diversity forum and work strands following best Metropolitan police service practice have been established, for example changing the type of firearm used to accommodate smaller hands, changes in recruitment advertising, female-only insight days and mentoring for under-represented groups expressing an
interest in SO1."
Just fire all the Men and get it over with.
Lawrence Auster Writes On His Blog:
“Bliss is it now to be alive,” cry the anti-Israel paleocons, Alt-Rightists, and Buchananites. Little do they realize they are cheering their own final discrediting, brought on by their cheers for Israel’s enemies, because they will never again be able to deny the truth of what they really are.
William Kristol wrote yesterday:
THE WEEKLY STANDARD has learned that senior Obama administration officials have been telling foreign governments that the administration intends to support an effort next week at the United Nations to set up an independent commission, under UN auspices, to investigate Israel’s behavior in the Gaza flotilla incident.
Statsaholic Replies:
The destruction of Israel, to the extent it occurs, will most assuredly not discredit the Paleocons or Alternative Rightists.
In the same way that Jewish influence only increased after their use of Black Africans to destroy the power of Whites in the South, the Alternative Right will only be empowered if they manage to use Palestinians to destroy the power of Jews over Palestine.
There are literally millions of people in America who believe the continued existence of Israel is needed for the "plan" of their pathetic false God.
Nothing could be better for Alternative Rightists then for these people, these fools, to see that their so called God is a weakling and coward in comparison to a small band of internet commentators.
In my younger and more vulnerable years my father gave me some advice I’ve been turning over in my mind ever since. “Whenever you feel like criticizing any one,” he told me, “just remember that all the people in this world haven’t had the advantages that you’ve had.”
…
“She’s a nice girl,” said Tom after a moment. “They oughtn’t to let her run around the country this way.”
“Who oughtn’t to?” replied Daisy coldly.
“Her family.”
“Her family is one aunt about a thousand years old. Besides, Nick’s going to look after her, aren’t you, Nick? She’s going to spend lots of week-ends out here this summer. I think the home influence will be very good for her.”
Daisy and Tom looked at each other for a moment in silence.
...
There was dancing now on the canvas in the garden; old men pushing young girls backward in eternal graceless circles, superior couples holding each other tortuously, fashionably, and keeping in the corners-and a great number of single girls dancing individualistically or relieving the orchestra for a moment of the burden of the banjo or the traps. By midnight the hilarity had increased. A celebrated tenor had sung in Italian, and a notorious contralto had sung over the garden, while happy, vacuous bursts of laughter rose toward the summer sky. A pair of stage twins, who turned out to be the girls in yellow, did a baby act in costume, and the champagne was served in glasses bigger than ginger-bowls. The moon had risen higher, and gloating in the Sound was a triangle of silver scales, trembling a little to the still, tinny drip of the banjoes on the lawn.
I was still with Jordan Baker. We were sitting at a table with a man of about my age and a rowdy little girl, who gave upon the slightest provocation to uncontrollable laughter. I was enjoying myself now. I had taken two finger-bowls of champagne, and the scene had changed before my eyes into something significant, elemental, and profound.
…
And as the moon rose higher the inessential houses began to melt away until gradually I became aware of the old island here that flowered once for Dutch sailors’ eyes; a fresh, green breast of the new world. Its vanished trees, the trees that had made way for Gatsby’s house, had once pandered in whispers to the last and greatest of all human dreams; for a transitory enchanted moment man must have held his breath in the presence of this continent, compelled into an aesthetic contemplation he neither understood nor desired, face to face for the last time in history with something commensurate to his capacity for wonder.
As I say there brooding on the old, unknown world, I thought of Gatsby’s wonder when he first picked out the green light at the end of Daisy’s dock. He had come a long way to this blue lawn, and his must have seemed so close that he could hardly fail to grasp it. He did not know that it was already behind him, somewhere back in that vast obscurity beyond the city, where the dark fields of the republic rolled on under the night.
Gatsby believed in the green light, the orgiastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eludes us then, but that’s no matter-tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms farther…. And one fine morning-
So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
Strongly, Auster seems to think that the Gaza Flotilla incident was actually good for Israel, for some convoluted and assumption filled reason.
But he didn't really provide any evidence that the critics of Israel have actually been put in a worse position by this event.
One would think it would've been the Israelis who'd be made to look worse, considering how they were willing to kill poorly armed people in International Waters just to stop the Gazans from getting their hands on the Anti-Semitic and deadly substance known as concrete.
Also, Auster seems to have taken his eye off the ball. He actually seems to care more about whether Richard Spencer is considered a mainstream Rightist in America than the position of the people who actually have a chance of destroying the Zionist State by the mechanism of demographics, and by the mechanism of the conviviality that exists between them and various groups such as Hezbollah.
You know, the Palestinians...
Egypt: Gaza blockade a failure, border stays open
An Egyptian security official declared the blockade of Gaza a failure Monday and said his country will keep its border with the Palestinian territory open indefinitely.
Keeping that crossing point open long term would ease the blockade imposed by Israel three years ago to isolate and punish Gaza's Hamas rulers. It also restores a link to the outside the world for some of Gaza's 1.5 million Palestinians.
Egypt opened its border with Gaza soon after Israel's deadly raid on an international flotilla of activists trying to break the blockade a week ago. Israel has not publicly protested the Egyptian move, but officials declined to comment Monday.
In another escalation of the tension off Gaza's shores, Israeli naval forces shot and killed four men wearing wet suits off the coast on Monday, and the militant group Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades said they were members of its marine unit training for a mission.
Vice President Joe Biden said Monday the U.S. is closely consulting with Egypt and other allies to find new ways to "address the humanitarian, economic, security, and political aspects of the situation in Gaza." He issued the statement after meeting Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in the Egyptian Red Sea resort of Sharm El-Sheikh.
This comment by Simon appeared at AltRight in response to Keith Preston's article "We Will Win".
While it seems certain that the current cultural Marxism/Liberal Progressivism will not remain the hegemonic ideology of the West forever, immigration is creating 'facts on the ground' far more irreversible than was the Communist threat. Countries like Brazil, India and other multicultural, polyethnic societies point towards the future, as does the history of the Ottoman Turks and the millet system. This may also fail eventually - although the Ottoman Empire was very successful at repressing internal rebellion.
I also think that ethnic, racial and cultural elements of Western civilisation and the European peoples will survive in some areas, albeit greatly diminished. The African population pump will continue...
I really doubt it will continue. It's only the EU-American Anti-European alliance which is keeping the Black Africans alive at the population they are now.
Once this alliance is replaced by the Russo-Chinese alliance, things will almost certainly change.
Probably one Man could cut off the massive population growth occuring in Africa, if he struck the American economy in exactly the right time and place.
If Bin Laden takes 20 airplanes out of the sky in the context of Middle Eastern conflict, the World Economy shuts down.
...but eventually African emigration will be curtailed, perhaps by an Islamic caliphate in Europe.
If there was a Caliphate, they almost certainly would do that.
There will be enclaves of whites and mixed-race cultural-whites. As environmental conditions* change, some of these will expand again.
I don't know if this guy has looked at the Demographics properly. There's still plenty of time for Europe to be saved from being taken over by Non-Europeans. All it would take would be an escalating series of tit for tats, that eventually ends up turning into an all out war.
Still, there's no doubt that future historians will look back in wonder at how Western civilisation achieved global dominance in a few short centuries, only to throw it all away within an even shorter time.
*Both cultural and physical. Culturally, the 'Death of the West' and consequent decline in technology and living conditions will make high latitudes a lot less comfortable for tropic-adapted populations. And there's going to be a new Ice Age within the next few thousand years, to which Europeans and east-Asians are well adapted.
When you consider what South Africa is doing to anyone of European descent, and especially Boers who are partially of French descent, this story is quite sickening:
Sarkozy Charts New Course for Franco-African Relations
Agence France-Presse
France and Africa opened new venues for cooperation on Tuesday to reshape global diplomacy, boost trade, battle climate change and fight pirates.
At a two-day summit in the Riviera city of Nice, France shifted its focus away from its traditional west African allies and engaged with the continent as a whole, reaching out to economic powerhouses South Africa and Nigeria.
That's how biased the Media is. South Africa is the Rape Capital of the World, and is seething with HIV, but let's not mention those things and instead concentrate on how its average income is high by African standards.
And the funny thing is that in absolute terms Mexico has a stronger economy than South Africa does, with a per capita income 34% higher, and yet I've never heard of anyone calling Mexico an "economic powerhouse".
“This summit is a new step,” Sarkozy told reporters after meeting with the 38 African leaders for his first Africa-France summit since taking office in 2007.
The French president waded into the heated debate over United Nations reform, backing Africa’s call for more seats at the Security Council and also a voice at the Group of 20 club of rich economies.
Why?!?
“How can we accept a world where 25 percent of the population lives in Africa and yet it does not have a permanent seat at the Security Council?” Sarkozy said.
Because the more powerful a Country is, the more of a right it has to be on the Security Council. The whole point of the Security Council is to prevent another World War, and allowing geopolitically weak Black African Countries on it would be incredibly dangerous.
All it will do is push the most powerful Countries to start taking major steps without consensus from the Security Council, greatly increasing the chances of major powers blundering into direct confrontation.
“This is an anomaly, an injustice and a source of imbalance,” said the president who pledged to push for change to give Africa more of a say, in particular when France takes the helm of the G20 next year.
Let's just disband the G20 before that happens.
Describing global governance as a “critical point” for Africa, South African President Jacob Zuma said leaders had agreed to discuss at their next African Union summit a French proposal to seek two Security Council seats with 10-year mandates.
Did you catch the part about "global governance"?
That would be an intermediary step on the way to satisfying Africa’s long-standing demand for two permanent Security Council seats with veto powers.
“We cannot have institutions that were established in the 1940s, when there were fewer countries and colonialism,” said Zuma.
Then let's destroy the United Nations, as it was established in the 1940's.
“Those rules are outdated.”
While global governance topped Africa’s list of demands, France put strong emphasis on economic ties, inviting more than 200 French and African heads of companies to the summit.
The push on the economic front comes as France has taken a back seat to China, Africa’s biggest trade partner, which has injected billions over the past decade to tap into raw materials needed to fuel its hungry economy.
French oil giant Total, nuclear behemoth Areva and other firms launched a solar power project for southern Africa to generate badly-needed electricity with state-of-the-art French technology.
How much you want to bet the French weren't paid enough to meet expenses?
“France has technology and we can put it to good use for Africa, instead of having aid budgets that never fulfil their promise,” Sarkozy said.
Because we all know Black Africans aren't smart enough to, you know, take the money you give them and use it to buy technology on their own.
Young children may be smart enough to responsibly handle being given an allowance, but I guess it would be racist to expect the Blacks to be as smart as small children.
"The most important point that Walt has been making lately is that Israel is more and more acting like an irrational regime. In International Relations Theory, states are rational actors because they have checks placed upon them by other actors. Israel is buttressed by the USA and therefore any check is removed. The speed of their strategic deterioration is increasing as the timeframe for a two-state solution is lessening. Demography is Destiny, so Israel needs to choose what it wants very soon because its ability to choose for itself won't be around much longer."
-Niccolo and Donkey
The thing about Israel killing nine people on that boat trying to bring relief supplies to Gaza is that Zionists seem to be saying they were trouble makers trying to destroy Israel by making them look bad.
But if they were, why did Israel play into their hands by killing them, when it would've been so much easier to just let them onto the Gazan coast, check their cargo for contraband, and then let them give their non-contraband cargo to the Gazans on the coast?
Are they actually having that much success starving the Palestinians out of Gaza that they don't want to risk undermining this great success with humanitarian aid?
I've seen no real evidence that the population of Gaza is lower now than it was before the occupation began.
The suffering and death rates of the inhabitants sure is higher, but the birth rates for Palestinians is so high as well that this is being overcome.
So Israel isn't getting any closer to turning Gaza into a place without any Palestinians anyway, or even a place with a Jewish majority, so what's the point?
Posts
All Comments
© Free Blogger Templates Blogger Theme by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008
Back to TOP
