Islamification of Texas: can it be stopped?

Question 1: Is Islamification of Texas happening? Answer: yes. Evidence in the article linked below. Indeed it’s not just Texas. Minnesota is another clear example. 

TBF, the whole of America…

In 1991 a Muslim Brotherhood Memorandum set out its General Strategic Goal in America: “… a grand Jihad to eliminate and destroy Western civilisation from within”. Pretty clear. The Muslim Brotherhood has metastasised into hundreds of organisations throughout America. (And the rest of the West).

Question 2: Should it be stopped? Answer: it depends on who you are and your life views. If you’re a pious Muslim, obviously, “No” it should not be stopped because it’s a good thing. If you’re a “liberal” American, aka a bit of a Leftie, you’re going to be “no problem” and “it’s a free country”. 

If you’re like me, and you see encroachment of Islam and its values as a strong negative — as it has been throughout history, everywhere it’s happened — then your answer is, “Yes” of course it should be stopped.

Question 3: Can it be stopped? Here is the nub. Even if we all agree it should be stopped (a huge “if”), is the American system capable of doing so? It’s tough.

Lionel Shriver puts her finger on it in “The Islamification of Texas”:

With our ‘nation of immigrants’ propaganda, proud dedication to religious liberty and under-examined more-the-merrier vibe, most Americans are uncomfortable finding fault with what they perceive hazily as a race or ethnicity rather than a political ideology. Putting up barriers to folks of a certain faith seems un-American. Yanks conceive of foreign cultures mostly in terms of food – not as typified by female genital mutilation, cousin marriage, doctrinal contempt for outsiders, rape gangs, sexual abuse, real misogyny rather than the fake sort of the ‘down with the patriarchy’ crowd, anti-Semitism, homophobia and a peculiar propensity for blowing things up.

Commenters:

One: I've wrestled for some time with the fact that the sight of Sikhs in turbans or Orthodox Jews in their funny hats don't bother me, the sight of Muslims in their distinctive clothing does. I'm not worried about Jews clustering in Golders Green but am bothered by Muslims in Tower Hamlets. I have come to the conclusion that I am not a racist or anti all non-Christian religions. I just don't like groups that threaten or commit violence or which want to take over and change my country. I believe that most UK Muslims are not violent Jihadists, but equally that if the UK became an Islamic state many of them would be perfectly happy about it. [Link]

Another: Americas traditions of religious freedom don't apply to an aggressive proselytising political cult masquerading as a religion which has a stated aim of destroying America and the Constitution. See it for what it is - a hostile invading army - and act accordingly. [Link]

To this latter, I’m like: “Yes… and?”. I mean, what would “act accordingly” look like?

Dog Day Morning

Our Byron. This morning. Park Siena. Looking East to Central, Hong Kong 

Memory-holing "with Chinese characteristics" | Deng Xiaoping > Gang of Four

The Wall

I took the above photo in early 1977 — a political slogan just outside Beijing.. 

It was near the Evergreen People's Commune, where we language students were working, as part of our "Open Door Schooling" program (Kāimén bànxué, 开门办学). The blue plastic and bamboo structure is a greenhouse, removable come spring (in case you're wondering).

Here's what the white characters in the slogan mean:

"Thoroughly criticise the anti-revolutionary revisionist line of Deng Xiaoping".

In the middle, the black characters overwrite the three characters “Deng Xiao Ping”, and they are: "Gang of Four". 

A palimpsest of the times. 

There's the new characters "Gang of Four", but you can still see the old characters: “Deng Xiaoping". 

This captures in one photo the dramatic changes happening in China at the time.

Rewind a little what had happened in the previous few months. At the time I was studying Mandarin at the Peking Languages Institute (PLI), as an Australian diplomat attached to our Embassy, but with special permission to do full time language study.

September 9th 1976: Chairman Mao Tse-tung died. 

We were walking along the main shopping street of Wangfujing when the news broke. People all around us suddenly burst out crying. It was kind of surreal. We had no idea what was happening. The Great Leader had died. The Great Helmsman had dropped the helm.

October 6th 1976: The Gang of Four was arrested. They had been in charge of China’s Cultural Revolution.

I was at school, the PLI, when the news trickled out. At first our teachers didn't want to admit it. In retrospect, I think quite a few of our teachers were G-4 sympathisers. 

October 21 1976: Began three days of nationwide celebrations for the downfall of the Gang of Four. 

We took part in the celebs along the main east-west street, Chang'an Jie in Beijing. Crowds were huge and happy. Jubilant. Drums drumming, gongs gonging. 

Fireworks let off everywhere. So many they ran out of fireworks. 

Maotai liquor was drunk everywhere. So much they ran out of Maotai. 

Celebratory meals were "hairy" crabs, just then in peak season, tied in bundles of four: three male one female, representing the Gang of Four, three leftie dudes led by Jing Qing, aka "Madame Mao" the wife of Mao Tse-tung. And by then a hated ultra-leftie. 

The overthrow of the G-4 was a glorious happy exuberant time for China. While — as an aside here — in America today, Democrats fight to install the leftist society China giddily shrugged off fifty years ago. Jiang Qing has been resurrected in male form as Hasan Piker the Maoist Pied Piper leading the rats of the DSA-Dems to perdition. See them side by side:

The smug self righteousness etched into both faces.
Superimpose the faces and you have another palimpsest.

July 22 1977: The formal rehabilitation of Deng Xiaoping. 

Deng had been overthrown twice before; but he re-arose three times. This latest would be his final, as he ruled China for the rest of his life. But, delightfully, he did so with no formal title except “Chairman of the China Bridge Association”, Deng being a master of the bluff and counter bluff of Contract Bridge. He wasn’t Chairman of the Party, or Premier of the State. He ruled by the force of his personality.

The photo I took at top would have been right about that time. Explaining why the farmers couldn't do a more thorough job, like whitewashing the wall and starting over. Time pressure. You can imagine the local village head on the arrest of the G-4: "What should we do? Repaint the whole thing?". Locals: "No boss, there's no time. And anyway things might change again. Better just paint over Deng". Done. 

Deng himself  would have approved of such pragmatism….

It was Deng who set China on the path to "Open up and Reform". The "Four Modernisations". The whole panoply of what allowed China get rich. Which was, to be clear, capitalism. As I’ve said often on this blog: in the past 40 years, China has succeeded economically to the exact extent it has allowed the Free Market to flourish. Deng: “To get rich is glorious”. “It doesn’t matter if the cat is black or white, so long as it catches mice”. “Look to the future”. Which homonym is also “Look to money”.

Deng is the non-Bernie Sanders. Bernie the socialist; Bernie the darling of the Left. That’s not Deng. Dare we suggest Deng was the Trump of the times? Rough, crude, brusque, opinionated. Direct to the point of rudeness. The drainer of the swamp?

When I say Memory-holing "with Chinese characteristics", I'm referring to Winston Smith's job in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four: which was to get rid of inconvenient facts from the past. To memory-hole them. "With Chinese characteristics" refers to Deng's reference to what they were doing as "Socialism with Chinese characteristics" to make the move to Free Markets more palatable. 

===============

The characters on the wall:

彻底批判邓小平 四人帮反革命修正主义路线

Chèdǐ pīpàn Dèng Xiǎopíng  Sìrén Bāng fǎngémìng xiūzhèng zhǔyì lùxiàn

Thoroughly criticize Deng Xiaoping's Gang of Four’s counter-revolutionary revisionist line.

“Why I Quit the Dems. And So Should You!” | Alan Dershowitz

Alan Dershowitz talks to Brendan O’Neill. About “Why I Quit the Dems: And So Should You!” Subtitle: “Confession of a Reluctant Republican”. The latest of his many books.

Dershowitz is a famous lawyer. Professor of Law at Harvard for fifty years (1964-2013), the youngest-ever tenured, with the longest-ever tenure at Harvard.

He was a lifetime Democrat, as his extended family still is. His next-door neighbour in Martha’s Vineyard is Barack Obama. He was a lead on the “Dream Team” that defended O.J. Simpson. (Hmmm… on that last one).

In short: this is a man with impeccable left-Democrat credentials, now coming out as a “Reluctant Republican”. He calls it “the lesser of two evils”. 

 

This is exactly the reason one should vote Republican today. The lesser of two evils. Because the Democratic Party is being consumed before our eyes by the Socialists of the DSA in cahoots with Islamists. This being the most dangerous collusion I can imagine. The “Red-Green Alliance”. Socialism with Islamism. Authoritarianism Communism + the Divine Right of Islam. Beware, my friends! 

Dershowitz split from the Democrats — or rather they split from him — when he defended Donald Trump in one of his law-fare trials. Dershowitz did not defend Trump because he liked him. Far from it. But because he believes in the fundamental Constitutional right of any person to have the best defence available, a foundation of Western Jurisprudence, of Western Democracy itself. 

For holding to that principle, to that constitutional conviction, he was shunned by the Democrats.

By the way, I watched his journey to where he is today, in real time over the years, on his podcast, The DershShow. He was the most deeply knowledgeable commentator on the cases brought against Trump in New York by AG Letitia James and DA Alvin Bragg. Cases which have either collapsed or are collapsing, even in deep-Blue NYC.

The way it is today

If the Right are against something the Left will instinctively support it, however absurd and inconsistent that makes them look. Trump wanted to keep schools open during Covid, so the Left immediately switched and demanded schools close.

Open borders are demonstrably incompatible with 'safeguarding' women and girls but the Right want border control, so 'progressives' abandon women rather than admit it's a sensible policy.  

The same goes for gender.  When someone on the Right says a bald man in a dress is not a woman, even when it's blindingly obvious he is not, a Lefty activist will insist he's got a vagina.  

Net Zero is a dog’s breakfast of self harm, but England must plough on buying gas from Norway,  Australia must buy back gas we already sold to Japan, because the Right are against economic suicide. 

The masterpiece of Leftist derangement is Islamo-philia  - women's rights, gay rights, freedom of expression, humanism - all thrown out the window because the Right believes Islamic ideology is not progressive! Indeed that it’s a threat to Western values. 

In short, Elon Musk — the greatest entrepreneur of the millennium— is 'stupid' because the Left are incapable of controlling their hate. And so, hate on the world’s most consequential human.

Oh dear. What a hot mess.

Entrepreneurs are choosing Hong Kong

It's not often I see Hong Kong promoted as a place for people to come to live. As opposed to the many vids about coming to Hong Kong to do a bit of touristing. 

For business: sure. We're in the top three financial hubs of the world (the other two New York and London) and likely to become the biggest over the next decade. Things are happening.

 

We live here and are citizens. As in Permanent Residents, so we know about all the stuff that he mentions as we've done it all. We do find it a lovely place to live. Very cosmopolitan, very "east-meets-west", very safe, very open, very good (cheap, quick, efficient) transportation. For older folks like me, the health system is world class. As he says, the tax system is simple and low. Yet our social safety net is robust, and budgets in the black. In short, we are a well-run place.

He's right about the very high costs of accomodation. We're lucky having bought here over 25 years ago, and fully paid off. If you don't have accommodation, that's going to take a big chunk of cash. 

Bottom line: sure, give it a go. As he suggests. Whether or not you move here, a visit is always fun. Don't miss out on the walking trails if you do come. Most people miss this. But our Country Parks are fabulous and right on our doorstep. Super accessible. We're entering the best period for trekking, which is basically any time but summer. 

Bon Voyage! 一路平安! Welcome to Hong Kong. 欢迎来香港!

Discovery Bay panorama

 

Looking East to Central Hong Kong 

Palestinians Finally Get Their Own Country!

Joke, Joyce…

You know what it was never about? Land. 

For the “Free Palestine” crowd? They never wanted a country.

It was never about a “Palestinian State”. It was never about a “Two State Solution”. Never.

It’s always been about the Jews. As in “they can’t live here”. As in “If they try to live here we will kill them”. 

That’s in the doctrines. It’s in their foundational documents. Most tellingly, it’s in their consistent actions.

(By “their” I mean every part of the Palestinian lobby, Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Fatah, Iran, IRGC…etc, etc. But I also mean Islam). 

It’s da Jooz!

Whatever the problem… 

It’s da Jooz!

Feel better now?

Documentary on October 7th massacre of Jews

I watched it for the first time today, the three year anniversary of October 7th. It’s long. It’s harrowing.

Pogroms By Pierre Rehov (2024).

Related:

“How the West failed the test of October 7”. Brendan O’Neill:

“This was the orgy of barbarism so many in the West called “resistance”. This was the carnival of Nazi-like violence that leftists called “a day of celebration”.…

“We will rue the empire of lies we allowed to rise up. We will regret our failure to stand with the Jewish nation in its darkest hour.”.

”Israel’s Enemies Will Never Forgive it for Refusing to Die.”. Jeffrey Blehar. 

“The Greens are in the process of exchanging their political identity: Once an environmentally focused party, they’re adopting a new shade of green as they are swiftly being taken over by pro-Palestinian extremists.”

Someone once asked the redoubtable professor Thomas Sowell what Israel could do to improve its image. He replied in one word: “Fail”. Success breeds envy; envy breeds contempt; contempt becomes hate.

Yet with all the hate on Israel, its economy is booming. Israel refuses to fail, let alone die. 

“There are dark days ahead for British democracy” | Hugo Timms

I'm getting back, for a bit, to what I originally started this blog for. Namely, to  keep a record of interesting links, especially about Islam.

As in the article below, highlighting something happening in all the Anglosphere, and also across Europe. 

Which is: Democracy hijacked by Muslim block-voting. A block which votes according to foreign feuds and clan loyalties. If your immigration policy encouraged this block into your home, this was always going to happen.

And now it is happening. In front of our eyes.

In the U.K. it’s happening with the active, indeed enthusiastic, participation of The Greens, led by Zack Polanski, himself Jewish, but all-in with the Jew-hating “From the River to the Sea“ crowd, the Hamas caucus of Labour and The Greens. The “let’s annihilate Israel” crowd. 

How far The Greens have strayed from loving Pandas and hating Nukes! The Green in their name no longer represents the environment; it represents the green of radical Islam, of Hezbollah, Houthi and Hamas.

For The Greens, it’s now “let’s partner with the genocidal death cultists”. What could possibly go wrong?

There are dark days ahead for British democracy. 

Related: “The Lebanonisation of Britain.”

“The Green Party is now an openly anti-Jewish party” | Brendan O’Neill

I seem to be quoting Spiked a lot lately. There’s a reason. Its contributors are based. Mostly ex-lefties who’ve been mugged by reality. Who as a result have moved to the Common Sense centre of politics. 

Simply stated the Common Sense centre is: belief in secure borders, in law and order, in legal immigration, in free speech, in freedom of religion, in tolerance of minorities, in women’s rights, in gay rights, in sound education, in measured globalism. It is pro social justice, but anti Woke. It is pro free markets, but anti oligarchs. It is pro capitalism, but anti socialism. It is pro democracy, but anti “democratic” socialism.

Even more simply stated: it believes in classical liberal values. It believes in the values of western enlightenment. It is peaceable, but not pacifist; it is “peace through strength”; and will use that strength to pick up its cudgels if threatened by barbarians at the gate.

It is, in short like the Democrats in America of thirty years ago. Like Bill Clinton. If you’re Australian, it’s like the Left of Bob Hawke or Paul Keating. 

That’s my summary of the leanings of Spiked. 

Amongst whom on Spiked, Brendan O’Neill is the most forthright; the most trenchant. This time talking about the “Zionism is racism” resolution adopted yesterday by the Greens Party of England and Wales. Shame on The Greens.

By the way, I’m green but not Green. Small “g” green, not capital “G” Green. 

I’m green as in cherishing the climate, supporting control of climate change, caring for our flora and fauna and for our fragile planet. I’ve been a member of the Australian Conservation Foundation since 1970. 

But I’m not Green with the capital “G”. I’m not with the likes of Greenpeace and The Greens in Germany or England or Australia, which have done more harm to the environment than all the fossil fuel companies in history. I made my case for that judgment years ago, here. 

On the “Zionism is Racism” issue, I remember when this was debated globally, at the United Nations Durban Conference back in the 1970s. It was initiated and promoted by the Soviet Union. But it failed. What the Soviet Union at the height of its powers was unable to push through, The Greens of England and Wales have now achieved. Yay, Greens. 

Let Brendan loose! Let him make the case that The Greens are a party of bourgeois bigots!

“The Greens’ adoption of the ‘Zionism is Racism’ policy confirms they are a party of bourgeois bigots.”

Or below the fold, courtesy Spiked.

Beijing, Bikes, Bonnets. 1977

I took this photo in the Fall of 1976, when I was a student at the Peking Languages Institute.

It’s on Beijing’s main east-west street: Chang’an Jie, near Jianguomen Wai.

Three things to notice:

1. Bikes. This line of bikes went all along the kilometres of Chang’an Jie. Simple one-speed machines. You didn’t need more than one gear on the flat Beijing streets. Sturdy as heck. Indestructible. Brands like Flying Pigeon. Now all gone, replaced with cars. In some places bikes are illegal. By the way, honesty ruled then. You hardly needed to lock your bike. People didn’t steal. True, ‘dat.

2. The one car in the pic: Partly obscured; it’s a Shanghai SH760 Sedan. 

Grok: ”This was the most prominent passenger car in mainland China during the 1970s and 1980s. It was widely used as a taxi and a standard vehicle for government officials who were not high enough in rank to qualify for the larger, more exclusive Hongqi state limousines.” 

The Shanghai was a copy of Chrysler and Ford models of the late 1950s. A copy. Plus ça change.

3. The clothes. Blue or grey cotton trousers and jackets, the bonnets of the day: “comrade cap”, like a Peaky Blinders flat cap. It was what my fellow students and I wore. That was all that was available for clothes then. Still, you needed ration tickets to purchase, just as you needed ration coupons for rice, for meat, for flour, for basically any necessity.

Today Chinese dress like anywhere else, though they’ve got some quirks of their own. Like tucking T-shirts into their trousers. And trousers with belts no matter what. And of course they’ve got more than enough consumer goods and food. They’re even getting fat, like we westerners…

“The‘rights’ of illegal migrants trump the rights of British citizens” | Tom Slater

Mass illegal immigration goes on despite the large majority of citizens being against it. Britain is just one country in this pickle. The rest of the west has more or less of the same.

The “refugees” part of this issue is based on international agreements made for a Cold War world. That’s nearly a century ago. Well past their “use-by” date. They can’t handle a mobile interconnected world where all migrants have the “form of words”, right there on their iPhones, to make a (usually bogus) asylum claim. 

Tim Slater’s  conclusion:

What began as a border crisis is turning into a full-blown crisis of state legitimacy. A state that cannot control its borders cannot keep its citizens safe. A state that puts the phoney rights of illegal migrants over the hard-won rights of citizens cannot expect to command Brits’ loyalty for much longer. A state that would rather stop the protests than stop the boats is truly playing with fire.

Read it all at “Why stop the boats when you can stop the protests?”

Or below the fold, courtesy Spiked.

Regard the Moon. And live in peace

An Occasional Reader sent me this explanation of a Chinese character (望) that's relevant in these days of the "Mid Autumn Festival". 

It's by a guy who calls himself "Uncle Hanzi", as in "Uncle Chinese character", a westerner, but who knows whereof he speaks when it comes to Chinese characters and their etymology. Which I admire. I admire both him and the characters he studies and explains. 

I'd not heard of him before, so thanks to the O.R..

Click the photo above to go to his explanation of the character 望 (wàng) is "to look at" but which I also think of as "to regard", as in looking at while in a relaxed mode, while chillaxing... regarding the moon, looking at with interest, contemplation and some longing. 

Like the guy in the photo above, at the end of a pier. Which reminds me so much of the pier in Oslo which we saw in mid-winter some years ago, and I'm going to try to find. To prove my point. While you're waiting, regard the above photo. 

LATER: found it. But, tbf, it's not much like the photo I took. Just goes to show the fallibility of memory. Here it is. Or maybe it's like "you've seen one pier you've seen them all". Whereas with the moon, it's different. 

ADDED: while we're here, talking about the moon and calligraphy and Chinese poems, I'd like to draw O.R.'s attention to the poem by Li Bai, which I did in my own calligraphy. Which is kind of ok. There's a style there. Not sure it'd be praised by master calligraphers. So I'll just call it guai zi, or "strange characters". Like those of the noted Hong Kong calligrapher, Ding Yanyong. But [ahem] clearly not as good. (or as guai).

"Wang", 望, also became famous after the downfall of the Gang of Four in 1979 and Deng Xiaoping took over. He needed to change the country. He needed to get the thinking away from revenge over the disastrous policies of Mao Tse-tung. He needed some positivity. 

He came up with the phrase "望前看" Wang qian kan, or "Look to the future". I was there in China at the time and remember the profound effect this simple phrase had. He had others. He was Trump before Trump. Today we'd call it "reframing". 

And, look (望) we get it. "Look to the future" lets lots of horrid people who did horrid things get away with no consequence. But it was needed. As Thomas Sowell says "there's no ideal solution, only trade offs". I guess you could say that Deng was a master of trade offs. 

I seem to have wandered rather far from Uncle Hanzi's explanation of the 望 character, of "looking at the moon", so I'll leave it there. For now. I may return.

Back again: I remember also how quickly Chinese made kind of fun of Deng's formulation of "Look to the future". Chinese is full of homonyms. Words that sound alike. So, "qian" as in "the future" also sounds like "money". The phrase quickly became "look to money". Did Deng care about this? I'll bet he did not. It was probably a feature of his little saying, not a bug. He didn't mind, at all, that people said "let's look to making money", when decades had been wasted making Maoism. 

John Cleese is controversial. “Who the fuck cares?” | Andrew Doyle

 Apologists for Islam will say: “But not all Muslims are violent”. Or “most Muslims are peaceful”. Or “Muslims don’t want to implement sharia law”. Or… whatever.

But listen to their representatives. Listen to the likes of the Muslim Council of Great Britain. To “Hope not Hate”. To "5Pillars". To any of the preachers in any of the thousands of mosques in Britain. They’re all the same. Islam is the supreme religion. Islam must dominate. We must apply Sharia law. Women are inferior. Homosexuality is an abomination. We must have a caliphate. And so on and so…drearily…on.

In short “We are not here to take part. We’re here to take over”. Muslim influencers say exactly this, in exactly these words, openly and proudly.

These pro-Islam forces are trying to suppress one of the U.K.’s comedy geniuses, the National Treasure, John Cleese, he of Monty Python, The Life of Brian and Fawlty Towers fame.

Andrew Doyle lashes out in “John Cleese is not a terrorist”:

I have recently felt a growing nostalgia for the days when words remained attached to their traditional definitions. We’ve become so used to activists in positions of influence mangling the English language that even basic communication is often impeded. Phrases such as ‘far right’, ‘genocide’, ‘racist’ and ‘hate’ have become so unmoored from their meanings that they have lost much of their utility.

[Another recent example. We used to say “illegal immigrants”. It’s in the legislation. Now it’s “small boat migrants”, according to the Telegraph. You know, like a kind of tourism, or perhaps a yachting community…]

We cannot even be secure in our use of the word ‘terrorist’ any longer, given that so many are determined to abuse it. How else might we explain the fact that John Cleese has been reported to Prevent, the UK government programme designed to stop people from becoming terrorists? Are disgruntled hoteliers, dead parrots and silly walks now deemed early warning signs of radicalisation? 

Temple of Heaven, Peking, 1977

From a recently found Kodachrome slide of Peking -- as it was then -- in the 1970s, when I first got there. 

The above is May Day 1977, half a century ago. I was very much taken by framing hard down, with little at the horizon, and lots of sky. A little too much so, in the one above, I reckon.

I converted the slide into a the digital above with Photomyne App. Not difficult at all, but couldn't have been done at all, just a few years ago. 

I'll post the occasional converted slide from the seventies, if and when there's a decent one. Most of them so far are pretty ordinary, tbf. Still, they’re colour slides from the seventies in Peking. An historical time. Mao Tse-tung's death. The earthquakes. The overthrow of the Gang of Four. The revival of Deng Xiaoping. The beginning of the transformation of China. It all started then. 

Here's the above, same day, Temple of Heaven, panned out a bit. People on both sides. Waiting for a VIP to go down the centre. But who? 

Penny Wong lies

 Australia ForeignMinister PennyWong: “In the West Bank the situation is worsening. In the first six months of this year alone, settler violence has driven more than 15,000 children from their homes.”

That was our Foreign Minister Penny Wong, on 23 September 2026, lying to the United Nations General Assembly. 

When I first read that, I thought “it doesn’t pass the sniff test”. It just doesn’t sound right.

And it wasn’t.

The “more than 15,000” is out by more than an order of magnitude (>10x). 

The actual figure, from the official counter of these things, the United Nations (the very body at which she was spreading this lie), is under 1,000. Source: United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).

Moreover, Wong says nothing about why the children were displaced. Which was: in responses to attacks from Palestinians. 

She doesn’t mention the Palestinian settlers attacks on Jews at all. Which though fewer than Israeli Settler-on-Palestinian are far more deadly. 

Finally, no recognition from our blatant Jew-hating FM, that we’re talking Area C in the “disputed territories” (the West Bank), an area under Israel sovereignty per (agreed!) Oslo Accords II of 1995. Why should Jews not be able to settle there and expand settlements? No reason. Other than visceral blood-hatred of Jews by brain-rotted Palestinians, brought up to hate Jews from suckling stage. Or must we accept that any “Palestinian State” will be, like Hitler’s Germany, judenrein? 

Why do we have to put up with such pernicious lying from politicians, like Penny Wong, who we elect to do their best for Australia?  Duplicitously quoting false data which helps genocidal death cultists, is hardly in our best interests. Even if it helps her Labor party with its Hamas caucus. Sleazy self interest; against the national interest. That’s our Penny Wong.

Natasha Hausdorff (Natasha The Wonderful) tackles Wong’s duplicity and other speakers’ falsehoods, all from the recent UNGA.

MSM carry water for terrorists | the case of Flydubai Flight 1073

Rich Lowry being spot-on, yet again.

When I first heard of the Flydubai news — that is, the failed terrorist hijack mass-murder attempt —  I thought it was an “altercation”, because that’s what the news said.

Then I delved into it and it was clear that one pilot, an Omani Muslim, had attacked the other pilot, an Indian national, and tried to crash the plane. That was news from onboard the plane. From all the videos onboard. From all the passengers and crew onboard. From every sentient being with an operating brain. 

And yet:

I went back to check with CNN. Not just its main site, but its “ breaking news” site, hours after we all knew the terrorist part of the story. “All” but CNN. Which still carried the  “altercation” angle! No hint that it was an attempted mass-murder-suicide event. Sigh….

The satirical Babylon Bee has a take on it. How the New York Times might have covered previous mass-murder events. 

• 911: “Planes diverted to Twin Towers after passengers quarrel”. 
• Custer’s Last Stand: “American Servicemen Engage in Spirited Debate With Locals”. 
• Pearl Harbour: “Japanese Tourists Visit Hawaii”. 

Rich Lowry gives three reasons the mainstream media (MSM) is incapable of calling out Islamic terrorism.

Summary courtesy Grok:

In the National Review video “CNN and The New York Times Can’t Bring Themselves To Be Honest About Islamic Terrorism,” Rich Lowry ends with three reasons the mainstream media is hesitant to call an incident Islamic terrorism (here, the Flydubai Flight 1073 cockpit attack):

1.  Multiculturalist sympathy. The media shares the multiculturalist attitudes of the left, so it tends to treat the West and the United States as in the wrong, and Islamists as deserving some sympathy and as portrayed too harshly. It does not want to blame Islam if it can avoid it.

2.  Fear of feeding “bigots.” It treats people who focus on Islamic terrorism as irrational and bigoted, and does not want to give them “any oxygen.”

3.  Bias against Israel. On the Middle East dispute itself, Lowry says the media is deeply biased against Israel, which produces unusual and indefensible standards for what is fit to print when the subject is Islamic terrorism.

Seems to me these reasons are broadly correct (though not exhaustive). They are powerful mind-viruses that do great harm to societies — vide: U.K., France, Germany — while Leftish governments refuse to take any steps to stop the causes of the harm, because it would violate one or all of these three mindsets

Look at recent history. Wide swathes of voters, around 70-80%, want control over mass immigration. It is often the top concern of voters. Result: nothing. Explanation: see above. 

Remember my example of David Sedaris. I’m a big fan of his. I love his writing. But I criticised one of his essays. Where his worry about the 2020 nationwide riots, about widespread looting, massive property destruction, all in the wake of the police killing of George Floyd, was not the huge amount of damage ($300+ Billion, mainly to minority businesses), nor the deaths (20+), but that “they will give Trump talking points” in the presidential election battle. 

Sedaris’ concern, in other words, was “fear of feeding the bigots”. Not addressing the issue itself, no matter how deadly serious, but the fear it might help your political opponents. 

I’m going to call that: warped values. No matter how much I like and admire his writings. 

Cirrus. Periwinkle

 

West, from our Siena Park, Discovery Bay, Hong Kong 

China's National Day celebs in Hong Kong

 

Looking East to Central from our place in Discovery Bay

“Don’t fuck with Zionists” | Brendan O’Neill

Brendan O’Neill at his rhetorical best. Discussing the failed plot to bring down a Flydubai jet with 147 people on board. 

I’m 100% with him on this.

“Don’t fuck with Zionists”, Spiked, 1 October 2026

Brendan’s final paragraph: 

Ask yourself this: who would you rather have with you on a flight if some psycho with a knife were to try to take it down? Coddled, pasty-faced Gen Z Westerners who need a self-care day every time JK Rowling tweets? Or Zionists? A few people from that state that has survived against all the odds? Men and women who likely have military training, don’t buckle in the face of danger, and who are world famous for refusing to take shit from jihadists? I know who I’d choose. Yesterday, the world was once again reminded: don’t fuck with Zionists. How many more reminders do you need?

Stop Qatari funding of western universities!

Especially any funding via the Muslim Brotherhood or any of its many affiliates.

They are pushing for the downfall of the West, to be controlled by Islam.

I’ve long warned here of Qatar’s duplicity; of licking Trump’s boots then funding anti-west curricula.

I’ve long warned of the insidious danger of the Muslim Brotherhood.

It’s crazy that we allow them to fund our own destruction. 

Singapore under Lee Kwan-yew was not so stupid. Early on, he banned any foreign funding of mosques. But we in the West: “oh no, that would be racist”. Or something.….

See here. And here.

List Of Celebrities Who Have Condemned Iran For Sentencing Women To Public Beatings For Uncovering Their Faces

We are blessed to live in a world where movie stars, musicians, and celebrities of all stripes care so deeply about the oppressed people of the Middle East. There is such power in hearing these voices boldly call out injustice, wherever it may be.

Here now is the complete list of all the brave celebrities who have condemned the Iranian regime for its mass executions and for beating women who uncover their faces:

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

An incredible list. Let's all take a moment to applaud these heroes!

**********

(H/t: Babylon Bee. The list is as long as that of Bernie Sanders’ accomplishments…).

It's the Competence, Stupid!

It's not about whether or not they're women!

No matter what the Dems keep banging on about, like: "America didn't vote for Kamala in 2024, because... misogyny".  No. It's not.

Look at the two women above. From the U.S. and the U.K. 

I could never vote for Kamala Harris, because she's proven herself an incompetent dolt. 

I could always vote for Kemi Badenoch, because she's proven herself a highly competent operator. 

Better yet, she stands for common sense ideas and policies. (most pleasing to me -- she's anti-woke and its poisonous ideology).

It's not about them being women! It's about their competence. FFS.... 

Yet the Dems are prolly going to put Kamala forward again in 2028, then bitch and moan about misogyny when she doesn't win. Again.

If Kemi doesn't win at the next election it'll be more about how the Right in the U.K. is fractured -- Tories, Reform, Restore -- than about her competence. Let alone her sex. 

Close Call. “Another Flight 93 Averted” | Jeffrey Blehar.

 … to quote one proud Israeli commentator, “Overall, the probability that a plane full of Israelis will contain a trained assault team, two additional pilots, and, statistically, at least one cardiac surgeon, psychologist, lawyer, and diamond dealer is substantially higher than 50%.”

From “Another Flight 93 Averted” by Jeffrey Blehar.

The Indian pilot of FlyDubai FZ1073, Captain Smit Machchhar, managed to unlock the cockpit door.

This was crucial. Had he not done so, passengers could not have stormed the cockpit and the plane would certainly have been brought down. With all 174 aboard killed. 

What a monstrous tragedy mercifully avoided.

If you’re religious, and you’re a sane person, you’ll thank God. Unless you’re Muslim, in which case you’ll curse Allah wail why did Allah forsake us?? (yet again…).

For an atheist like me: I see it as a combination of bravery, but also of luck. We, the civilised world, were lucky this time. 

Questions: how will this affect the Abraham Accords? How will it affect ongoing negotiations for more countries to make peace with Israel? How will it affect the FlyDubai flights, which are quite recent addition to the region?

“…young men are taking up the pipe…” | Joseph Morris

 

My bestie, Oz on left. Me with pipe. 18 September 1970

More people are smoking pipes. Apparently. And more young people. 

So says Joseph Morris in “The church of pipe smoking”. 

The photo above was at an anti-Vietnam war protest in Canberra, Australia. It was front page of the 19 September Sydney Morning Herald and Canberra Times. The first and last time we were famous! 

And… this is us 56 years later, at the Spanish MoviDa, in Melbourne a few weeks ago:

No smoking …

Morris’ penultimate para:

Like so many remnants of our culture, pipe smoking is threatened. There could have been no show this year had the Toolmaker’s Son banned smoking in beer gardens. As it is, the generational smoking ban means the influx of younger people will cease. But my experience at the show has been a good one. Young hipsters, maybe, but sincerely trying to discover the hobbies of their antecedents. Older eccentrics, definitely, but most kind and charming. Talented craftsmen, making something only sought after by a few, facing ever-rising costs. I may call it a religion with tongue very firmly in cheek (avoiding the pipe stem), but think of these people brought together in common cause, with ever-more young people desperately seeking a connection to previous generations. There’s no lanyardism, weathervane politics, or prizes for Islamists at the UK Pipe Show. 

The Mission Statement of the National Review | William F. Buckley Jnr.

From the essay “Our Mission Statement”, November 19, 1955, by William F. Buckley Jnr, founding editor-in-chief of the National Review. I came across the article quite recently. 

“Conservatives in this country… are non-licensed nonconformists.. this is dangerous business in a Liberal world…”.

I like that term "nonconformist". I feel that's what we are, we conservatives, in most societies: non-conformist. Because, in most western societies, it’s conformist to be Left-of-centre.

Here in Discovery Bay, Hong Kong, for example, the majority (~70%) of our community is Left-leaning. That's the conformist side (by definition). They are the conformists in most cities in most major countries, at least in the West. Leftists (aka “liberals” in the United States) feel free to say whatever they think, about whatever topic, knowing that those around them are going to agree. 

Not so for conservatives, for nonconformists. 

The National Review, now over 70 years old, is the most respected magazine on the conservative side of politics in the United States. It's the sane Right, if you will. The thoughtful Right. It is quite ready to savage Trump, for example, if he goes against its stated “credenda” (see below).

I quote in full its Mission Statement. It comes at the end of Buckley's essay. It has stood the test of time very well, I reckon. 

Quote:

The Magazine’s Credenda

Among our convictions:

A. It is the job of centralized government (in peacetime) to protect its citizens’ lives, liberty and property. All other activities of government tend to diminish freedom and hamper progress. The growth of government (the dominant social feature of this century) must be fought relentlessly. In this great social conflict of the era, we are, without reservations, on the libertarian side.

Yay! It's China’s National Day

 

Which means it's a national holiday here in China and the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong. Which means that I have to look after myself for the day, as Arlene is off. Gloom...

Hong Kong Gloaming