After reports that the Japanese Finance Minister, Shoichi Nakagawa, was helplessly drunk during the meeting of the G7, doubtless the announcement that the Japanese Prime Minister is the first head of government to be invited to meet Obama lowered the heat slightly in Tokyo. But other than that particular circumstance, does it really matter who’s the first to have a meeting with the new American president any more? Are other leaders round the world sobbing into their hankies? Immediately after WWII, it mattered which nation was so favoured; and after the Berlin Wall came down, the message conveyed by their head of government’s place in the queue to meet the new incumbent mattered to the new former Eastern bloc democracies, but does it mean anything today?
Verity
Pure laser … cutting and illuminating
On the Hugh Hewitt radio show, Mark Steyn referred to the Obama presidency so far as “Jimmy Carter at warp speed”.
British Lords A-Leaping – in outrage
Britain’s House of Lords is our second, or revising, chamber.
Until the middle of the last century, the lords referred to were all hereditaries and many of their antecedents had had a seat in the English Parliament since its inception. It wasn’t a full time job and didn’t pay anything. Most lords had ancestral fortunes to conserve, ancestral lands to manage and family businesses to further. Some who lived in London attended fairly frequently, but most of the rest of them rolled up whenever there was a debate to which they could contribute something by way of their expertise. They got a little daily allowance their lunch allowance and their train fare – and rolled back to the ancient pile.
In 1958, life peers (the title dies with the holder) were created as a means of widening the range of expertise in the Lords, and for rewarding those who had served the country. Such peers are created by the prime minister of the day.
It worked fairly well until Tony Blair got his grasping, febrile fingers on it. He created a number of life peers who have recently been found to have been selling access and favors for large amounts of dosh. As with all who subscribe to the Left in Britain, Blair professed to believe in “multiculturalism” and made cringe worthy, and destructive, obeisance to Islam. In this cause, he created a title for “Lord” Ahmed.
The Edinburgh Festival – and how!
The Edinbugh Festival begins in Scotland’s capital city tomorrow and despite the fireworks of creativity that it always delivers, I think this year is going to be hostage to “Jihad! The Musical!” – “A madcap romp through the wacky world of international terrorism”.
It was written by an Old Etonian and a 25 year old female compatriot.
The Edinburgh Festival opens on tomorrow (Monday), and I await the reviews with interest. In the meantime, here is one of the songs, “I Wanna Be Like Osama” for your evening viewing pleasure.
The chap who plays Osmana is stardom bound, that’s for sure. I’ll let you know when the reviews come out.
Why this pinprick in the dyke must be plugged stat
Newly elected Congressman Keith Ellison, a Muslim, must not be allowed to take his oath of office on the Koran.
First, as Town Hall columnist Dennis Prager wrote, Mr Ellison does not get to decide how he takes his oath. America does. Second, it has not bothered America�s many Jewish Congresspeople down through the decades to take their oath on the Bible, although the New Testament has no religious significance to them. Similarly, atheists/securalists have voiced no objections. This is the way you get sworn into the Congress of The United States of America.
But most important of all, Mr Ellison�s stated intention is yet one more Islamic attempt to breach the dyke to allow Islamic habits, customs and laws to seep in slowly at first, and then gain in volume until the dyke is breached. The aggression of this religion cannot be overestimated and those who surrender one-quarter of an inch to people like Mr Ellison, thinking it really doesn�t matter and �we all worship the same God�, are mistaken.
But most critically, what most people are unaware of is, an oath taken on the Koran means absolutely nothing. Muslims are instructed from childhood that they may take such an oath and lie � if it is to advance the cause of Islam. In other words, they cannot swear in a court of law, on their Koran, �No. I swear I did not rob that bank� if they really did. That�s a sin. But if it is to advance the islamic cause, then it�s not only OK, but is to be desired.
That is why such reasonable sounding requests must be resisted. A Muslim can swear on the Koran that he does not know a suspected terrorist, has never even heard of him and has no idea if he is stockpiling chemical weapons in his basement. Because the lies are to advance the cause of Dar-es-Salam � the house of islam � they are seen as a righteous grabbing of an advantage in the 1500 year war with Christianity and Western civilization.
This new Congressman must not be indulged. Mr Ellison is not big enough to defy America, and neither is his belief system.