Category: Uncategorized

I may be the only one to find a degree of humor in sex slavery:

Marlena, aged 32, has worked as a prostitute in Lithuania, Russia, Germany and Slovenia for about 7 years. This is her story. After graduating from the University she worked as a teacher of Music. She calculated that it would take her 25 years to collect money for buying her own apartment under the condition she would save every coin. She was thinking that marrying a wealthy man could improve the situation, but no wealthy man appeared.

Finally she met a young man called Roman. He told Marlena, that his job is assisting people in their employment abroad. Marlena knew that Roman’s mother worked in Spain as a house maid and earned 500$ monthly having full board and lodging. Roman promised Marlena to find her a job at a farm close to the place where his mother worked. He asked for just 150$ for his assistance. Marlena believed him. She did not pay attention to the absence of labour contract. She knew that her employment would be illegal so she was not surprised when she saw a German visa in her passport. Marlena was promised the salary of 600$. She took a plane to Frankfurt where she was met by Dmitriy, Roman’s partner. There her problems started.

What’s fascinating is the way in which that slavery is making a global comeback, not just in Africa and Asia, but in the very Eastern European countries from which the term “slave” originated. And it’s particularly ironic to see how college-educated Western feminists who insist that they are equal to men in every way are finding themselves to be completely helpless in the face of the barbarism they have worked so hard to advance. Such a surprise!

If American women choose to reject Judeo-Christian tradition, they will eventually find themselves facing the brothel or the burqah, just as their college-educated sisters in Europe are learning now. And if you think that this bizarre future is impossible, do keep in mind that the USA is only 40-50 years behind Europe in trending towards a post-Christian culture.

Women don’t seem to realize that many of the evils they currently lament is the result of a society that has changed already. I note that a 71″ plasma goes for about 20 times more than a college-educated white woman these days. Clearly this is an outrage that all men of good will must join together and address, as it’s inexcusable that an entertainment necessity should cost so much.

As for the sex slavery, if feminists are so concerned about it, then let them end it. It’s not a problem for men and we have been reliably informed that feminists need us the way a fish needs a bicycle. Only one guess as to what the female solution to sex slavery is, since it’s the same nebulous one they propose for everything from acquaintance rape to wage inequities: “The society should change its attitude….”

Right, good luck with that.

From SwissInfo:

The 29th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent, which starts on Tuesday, is due to decide on a resolution that would amend the movement’s statutes to include the new “red crystal” emblem and recognise the Palestinian Red Crescent Society….

The new emblem was approved by a majority of the 192 signatory states to the Geneva Conventions at a stormy diplomatic conference hosted by Switzerland in December. Twenty-seven mainly Muslim countries, including Syria, voted against and ten abstained. The crystal must now be approved by the full movement, which includes all the signatory states, the 183 national Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the international bodies of the Red Cross.

This means that in another fifty years, we’ll probably be reading about Red Crystal death camps in Africa. As always, you can count on an organization electing to abandon its Christian roots to eventually devote itself to the opposite of what the organization was founded to do. I’m just disappointed that they didn’t have the nerve to go all the way and announce the Red Pentagram, or the Red Head of Baphomet.

But hardly unexpected:

Newly elected leader of the U.S. Episcopal Church Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori said on Monday she believed homosexuality was no sin and homosexuals were created by God to love people of the same gender.

Jefferts Schori, bishop of the Diocese of Nevada, was elected on Sunday as the first woman leader of the 2.3 million-member Episcopal Church. the U.S. branch of the worldwide Anglican Communion. She will formally take office later this year….

It could also widen divisions with other Anglican communities, including the Church of England, which do not allow women bishops. In the worldwide Anglican church women are bishops only in Canada, the United States and New Zealand. The Robinson issue has been particularly criticized in Africa where the church has a growing membership and where homosexuality is often taboo.

I included that last paragraph to point out that Larry’s statement yesterday about how the worldwide Anglican church is growing in no way supports his argument against my statement that female leadership is the most obvious way to see that a church has contracted a fatal spiritual disease and is on the decline.

If you attend a church that features female pastors, I encourage you to look very closely at its emphasis. The vast majority of the time, you will find a constant pressure towards social activism and away from Scripture and the salvation message of Jesus Christ. If you find this to be true of your own church, I recommend that you abandon it and go in search of one that consists of believers rather than pretenders, prey and predators.

Given that Jesus Christ and the Apostle Paul both warned against false teachers, I have always been mystified that so few Christian churches make any effort to watch for such wolves in sheep’s clothing or expel them when they show themselves.

The Fraters have this interview on NARN up at their web site. I think my next visit with them will be in August.

Today’s column was much more the sort of column I wish I wrote more often. While it’s not the sort that generates much discussion or email, it’s the sort of thing that I actually enjoy doing as opposed to cranking them out on autopilot. I’ve been contemplating the notion of dropping the column and simply continuing with the blog lately, as whatever notion I had of becoming a columnist/author in the vein of [insert name of random WND columnist here] appears to have gone by the wayside.

Please don’t think I’m asking for pats on the back or Prozac-by-email here, it’s quite normal for me to get bored with things and move on after a few years. I am a dilettante, after all, not a journalist. I should probably mention that Mr. J. Farah and I are getting along fine, just last week he emailed me to bring to my attention a topic on which he would like me to write. (Although I think I may have to cram a Nazi analogy in there just for kicks….)

Anyhow, the column is approaching its fifth year this fall, and while it’s been an interesting experience, I don’t see that there’s really much more to be done with it that can’t be accomplished as easily via the blog. Sure, VD the random blogger is intrinsicly less interesting than Vox the WND columnist, but it’s clear that being a consistent #3 there is slightly less meaningful than being the #3 winger on my local soccer club. (We got promoted this year.)

I haven’t reached any conclusions yet, I’m simply musing aloud. Reading my column today made me realize how trivial many of my columns over the last three years have been and how a literate form of communication is increasingly irrelevant in a post-literate society. I like the old books and I enjoy seeing what lessons can be gleaned from them, but I am growing less and less concerned about the precise way in which the American people decide to destroy themselves.

Admittedly, to leap off history muttering “go on and fuck yourselves, then” doesn’t exactly have an F. Buckleyesque ring to it, but it does sound rather like something I might say.

Derb forgets that modern group socialization is relatively new:

That old Viennese witch doctor cast a long shadow. If I turn out wrong, it must be Mom and Dad’s fault! This cast of mind has influenced & distorted child development research for 60 years. Nowadays, however, there is a lot of counter-research, in which the influence of the home family environment, at any rate after age three, dwindles away almost (according to some researchers, anyway) to inconsequentiality. The big determinants of adult personality are (1) genes, and (2) group socialization. The home environment of the child comes in a distant third.

Probably the best thing we dads can do to give our kids a happy and useful adulthood is to make enough money that we can choose where to live, and then choose a district where our kids will be group-socialized to civilized bourgeois norms.

This strikes me as a shallow statement, given the way in which it assumes the sort of group socialization that only occurs when children are sent away to run around and learn about primate behavior in the temporary zoos known as “schools”. Given that parents control what sort of group socialization is permitted the child – and the admission that most parents choose the Lord of the Flies method doesn’t change the fact that they are choosing it – means that parental influence is absolutely vital even if Derb’s theory is true.

Now, I agree that parents do not establish personality. That is obvious to anyone who has ever observed an infant; it’s amazing to see how children demonstrate aspects of their personalities described by their mothers when they were still in the womb. But group socialization can only become dominant in those individuals permitted to spend the vast majority of their formative years in groups, an assertion so obvious it approaches a tautology.

The Episcopalians continue their hell-bent slide towards organizational suicide:

A woman was last night elected as the first female leader of the American branch of Anglicanism in a historic but divisive development that could hasten the break-up of the worldwide Church.

The Bishop of Nevada, the Rt Rev Katharine Jefferts Schori, who is a leading liberal on homosexuality, is the first women primate in the history of Anglicanism.

Her role as Presiding Bishop is the equivalent of the Archbishop of Canterbury. Her surprise election was greeted with whoops of joy by pro-women campaigners at the General Convention of the Episcopal Church, where she was chosen by her fellow bishops in four hours of voting.

The Episcopalians appear to be on step seven. It’s interesting to see how a church that rejects Biblical instructions in the smaller issues soon begins to reject them in the larger ones. It’s not an accident that churches which embrace homosexuals and women in leadership roles soon begin to deny the Resurrection and the Bible. The only thing I find confusing about the whole thing is why they bother to call themselves Christian, although perhaps the monetary incentive to claim the millions of dollars owned by the church is reason enough to take it over.

And while I’m sure one must exist somewhere, there isn’t a single church in my experience that has continued to grow once it decides that the Apostle Paul’s insistence on male leadership is merely societal tradition and therefore outmoded. From what I’ve seen, they soon begin doing stupid things that inevitably lead to a rapidly declining membership. Now, feel free to label me sexist and so forth if you like, but I’d like to see each such critic also name a single thing in which increased female involvement has proven to be demonstrably beneficial other than the tautological benefit of involving more women.

“What a historic moment for the church,” said the Rt. Rev. Cate Waynick, the bishop of Indianapolis. “What an omen for the church….

I can’t argue with that. And by omen, I mean Damian, you understand.

Or at least, what Dear Jorge assures the American people is impossible:

There’s a great number of happy people in France today as a result of the news that the upper house of the French parliament has passed a tough new immigration bill. The bill was passed by an overwhelming number of votes weeks after it was adopted by members of the lower chamber of parliament.

The French immigration reform bill makes it more difficult for unskilled immigrants to settle in France, which in the past has created discord among French citizens who work menial jobs. The new bill, expected to be signed into law very soon, adds a number of tough measures to France’s immigration policy….

One significant provision is a requirement for immigrants to sign a contract agreeing to learn French and to respect the principles of the French Republic. In addition it makes it more difficult for them to bring their families over to join them. It also offers no provision for so-called anchor babies who are afforded citizenship as a result of being born in the country.

According to the French government, the following new rules will be part of the immigration law:

Only the qualified immigrants will be granted “skills and talents” residency permits.

Foreigners are only allowed into France to work, and not live off benefits such as welfare and free healthcare.

Foreign spouses of immigrants allowed to remain in France must wait longer before being granted residence cards.

Migrants must agree to learn French.

Migrants must sign a ‘contract’ stipulating they must respect the French way of life.

The new law also scraps the old one regarding workers receiving automatic citizenship after living and working 10 years in the country.

This is a very positive development for Europe, as it indicates that the French are electing the slow and civilized means of ending their migration problem rather than the fast and brutal one that I feared was in the cards. Americans may despise the French, but they have historically demonstrated a deepset national ruthlessness that belies their image as cheese-eating surrender monkeys.

One need only compare Algeria to Vietnam to see the difference. It will be interesting to see if the French follow through on their new laws, and how that will affect the American immigration debate. It’s interesting, too, to see how the Bush administration’s pro-immigration positions and arguments are so similar to those of the French socialist party.

While I was pleased to see the USA restore its reputation somewhat, it was very disappointing to see the first truly bad refereeing of this World Cup. In the past, I’ve often wondered if FIFA instructs its referees to do any homework about the teams involved in the games they will be working, I particularly remember a Turkey-Italy game wherein Pippo Inzaghi dove to draw an absurd penalty and the commentator speculated that the referee had obviously never seen Inzaghi and his award-winning dramas before.

The red card shown to Mastroenni was absurd. The tackle was rough and it was a foul, but it was a yellow at most. I told Spacebunny that I wouldn’t be surprised to see a make-up red given to Italy after the break; the last thing I expected was for the US to pick up another red.

As always, the Italians were both skilled and shady. Pope’s second yellow was deserved, but his first was a textbook example of the quality that the Italians call “furbo”. It means “cunning” and Gilardino showed it in spades as he grabbed Pope by the jersey and dropped to the ground, drawing both the foul and the yellow card. FIFA has done an excellent job in cutting down on the diving, now it’s time for them to start handing out yellows for grabbing jerseys, there’s simply no good explanation for ever having a fistful of an opponent’s shirt in your grasp.

It was infuriating, but it was also a compliment of sorts that the Italians felt the need to resort to the customary international practices against the USA. And while it pains me to say it, the offsides call against McBride was correct, as McBride was definitely potentially involved in the play. Had he thrown himself to the side or even held still, the linesman might have held his flag, but that little reverse stab he made at the ball as it went by assured the foul call.

Kasey Keller was fantastic in stopping Del Piero twice, Beasely was tremendously improved over the Czech game, as was Landon Donovan, the only real disappointment besides Eddie Pope’s temporary insanity was Claudio Reyna. I would have exchanged him for Josh Wolff earlier on, there’s not much call for a midfielder who won’t make that last critical pass to the strikers in the area and can’t come within five meters of the goal when he shoots either. He also stood and watched Gilardino head the ball in for Italy’s goal rather than mark him, all in all, a shoddy performance by the USA’s overrated captain.

As for the Italians, it’s amazing to see how Totti simply cannot replicate his club form with the national side. At this rate, Lippi will be sitting him after the group stages. Italy’s problem is that while they have scorers, Lippi leaves his much-needed fox-in-the-box, Inzaghi, on the bench. Since moving to Milan from Juventus, he’s reduced the play-acting and is the perfect compliment to more proactive forwards such as Tino and Iaquinta.

While I don’t see them getting out of the real Group of Death, the USA can play with Ghana. If a victory is unlikely, at least the team will likely claim some of the respect that looked so unlikely after the Czech debacle. Drawing with Italy while down a man is a significant accomplishment and should provide the squad with genuine confidence going into the final group game.

Jonah Goldberg rightly castigates Democrats who are attempting to have it both ways on the Iraqi Occupation, but in doing so, he lets his rhetoric run away with him:

The details are obviously complicated. The normal rules of war don’t fully apply, since the insurgents use terror tactics, don’t wear uniforms, etc. But, we didn’t ask that every German be put on trial who had American blood on his hands after World War II and we didn’t ask that every North Vietnamese soldier face a tribunal.

Oh wait, that’s because we bugged out, just like the Democrats want to now.

We didn’t put every German on trial, but it obviously had nothing to do with bugging out since we are still occupying Germany. Or defending them against the Soviet Union, whatever.

Perhaps that’s the line we need to take to convince the American people that the Iraqi Occupation is necessary and proper. We’re defending the Iraqi people against a revival of Abbasid expansionism.

It’s not that winning isn’t an option, it’s that winning, as defined by the Bush administration, isn’t a possibility.