Is Karen Simpleton Hughes a product of “All I needed to know I learned in Kindergarten?”
The Daily Times/Pakistan
‘Winning hearts and minds of Muslim youth’s’
“LAHORE: The US State Department is launching what it says will be the first comprehensive public diplomacy effort targeting children, hoping to shape the views of Muslim youths ages 8 to 14 with a series of summer camps and enrichment programs designed to counter negative images of the US, The Boston Globe reported on Monday.
The report said the new initiative was the brainchild of Karen Hughes, a confidante of President Bush who has become the most powerful public-diplomacy czar in decades. Hughes has argued forcefully that the US government must reach out to children younger than age 14, a population the State Department has largely neglected because they are too young for traditional exchange programmes.
(sorry for the earlier mix up between Karen Hughes & Armstrong, but come to think of it: Koran Armstrong and Koran Hughes are equally deluded, is there really a difference?)
Ignorance and stupidity on display
Another ‘why can’t we all just get along’- song
Hugh Fitzgerald comments:
How will 6,000 children, playing basketball and doing crafts, or 60,000 children, or 600,000 children, or 6 million, doing the same, all paid for by the long-suffering American taxpayer, in a program that is called the “brainchild” — presumably adopted — of Karen Hughes, overcome what they, or other children, will constantly be fed from the Qur’an, the Hadith, the Sira? Why will memories of nice camps paid for by nice Americans, with pictures of July Fourth picnics, and cowboys in Wyoming, and lobstermen in Maine -you know, the kind of thing that the karen-hughses of this world think might be just the ticket to make Muslims “like us — because they are just like us.” (I made it up, it’s not her idiotic slogan, but it just as well might be).
The way to limit the menace of Jihad is to get a large number of Muslims to change what they believe. The belief may be in Islam itself — that is, we may show them that we Infidels are well aware of what Islamic texts contain and what Islam teaches (see Ayaan Hirsi Ali, see Ibn Warraq, see Wafa Sultan, see Ali Sina, see an ever-growing list of distinguished and articulate apostates: then see Magdi Allam, for the “Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only” Muslim, see Bat Ye’or, see Oriana Fallaci, see many many others including those associated with this website), and willnot be fooled. And when that happens the Muslims will quickly realize that the blague as before will not do, and have to start speaking something with just a little more resemblance to the truth, and by degrees, as they do this, as they are forced by Infidel attitudes to do this, some of them will realize that they are not obligated to stay with Islam forever, and may become those defectors, those apostates. This is likely to take place especially among those who are non-Arabs, and who can be persuaded of what is, of course, true: that Islam has always been a vehicle of Arab supremacism, of Arab cultural and linguistic imperialism. And not if the Infidels say resolute and implacable, based on their greatly-increased knowledge of Islam, Muslims are going to have to think about Islam itself, and non-Arab Muslims will have to think about whether or not pretending to be little Arabs, with Arab names, and following Arab folkways of the seventh-century (as imagined), is really quite the thing that they want for themselves.
And if the ways in which Islam limits artistic expression, or free and skeptical inquiry, are pointed out, repeatedly, there will be some wavering Muslim parents, able to inwardly recognize, if not outwardly admit, that Islam does indeed stunt the mental (and moral) growth, and who wants that for one’s beloved children?
And if Infidels make clear that the prevalence of despotism among Muslim states is not accidental, but reflects the view, in Islam, that political legitimacy comes not from the expressed will of the people but from the will expressed by Allah in the Qur’an (and glossed by the Sunnah, that is, mainly, by what is in the Hadith and Sira), for Muslims are merely slaves of Allah, subject to his whims, then at least some Muslims are going to have to answer this criticism, and they will be unable to do so, for the true-blue Believers will admit to the justice of the charge, and indeed claim that it shows the superiority of Islam.
And if they make clear as well that the economic backwardness of Muslim states is a result of several factors, and that those factors again arise out of the teachings, attitudes, atmospherics of Islam, then there will be those who, contemplating the attraction of Islam, but also wanting economic development (say, in sub-Saharan Africa) who will choose to keep Islam out, or it if is present in their countries, to keep it from spreading. And it should be clear that inshallah-fatalism, and political despotism, both prompted in Muslim countries by the tenets of Islam, are what explain the failure of the rich Arab oil states, for example, to develop anything like modern economies, despite the ten trillion dollars they have received, since 1973 alone, in unmerited oil revenues.
Moonbats of the world stand united against reason:
Christine Nixon, police Chief Commissioner of Victoria:
“When you look at the number of people who have been killed from terrorist incidents within Western countries, yes, it is an appalling tragedy and a loss of life, but we are losing a lot more people in a lot of other ways,”
Â * Are you feeling better already?
Australia is equally affected by the ‘hearts & minds’ birdflu
“Win hearts and minds in terrorism fight”: Nixon
The shallow wisdom of far left nutroots will get us all killed, this just in from the Age
THE domestic struggle against terrorism should focus on winning the hearts and minds of alienated Islamic communities and avoid the phrase “war on terror”, says one of the nation’s top law enforcement officers, Victoria Police Chief Commissioner Christine Nixon.
In the strongest comments by any senior policing figure, Ms Nixon rejected the phrase coined after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States and used extensively by the Howard Government to justify the war in Iraq.
“It has very much a ring of what used to be the ‘war on drugs’ and I think that it was not necessarily a good term to use,” Ms Nixon told The Age.
“It is not about a war on that issue (terrorism). It is about policing in many ways, it is about working with local communities and so I think it exaggerates the issue.”
Ms Nixon’s comments come amid a growing international debate about how much the Iraq war is contributing to the threat of terrorism.
An opinion poll to be released by the Lowy Institute for International Policy next week will show twice as many Australians see the deployment of troops in Iraq as a contribution to the US alliance as do those who see it as a fight against terrorism.
Ms Nixon said the conflicts in Iraq and other global hot spots were monitored locally because of their potential to motivate Australians with radical views.
Read it all
* Lets just all pretend Islamo-fascism doesn’t exist. It might just go away by itself, right?