The IN LOCO PARENTIS ShowIn addition to the tragic events of this week, we have seen the disgraceful efforts of so-called world leaders to avoid the consequences of their actions.
First, Kofi Annan whined that the U.S. should have forced(!) the U.N. Mission in Iraq to accept stepped-up security, even though their own spokesmen admitted that American forces DID offer to provide additional protection, but were turned down because UNO didn't want to be seen accepting help from the evil 'Merikuns. (although not, as it appears, their old Baathist handlers!) Contrast this with Kofi's desire to tool around Manhatten with sub-machine gun equipped bodyguards, and you'll see the priorities that the United Nations bureaucracy truly values. There was also a great deal of "Why do they hate us (the U.N.)?" rhetoric thrown around. Well, seeing as Al Queda had repeatedly stated that they regarded the liberation of Christian East Timor from Islamic Indonesian control as a dreadful defeat for Dar al Islam, and that the head of the Iraq mission was was the U.N. official responsible for said defeat, the picture becomes clear for those with enough wit to connect the dots. The Islamists are not just opposed to the existence of Israel out of simple anti-Semitism (which they share with their European apologists), but because it is an example of Europeans retaking an area previously dominated by Islam. Their imperialistic ambitions cannot abide this, which is also why they keep whining about Andalusia (Spain!) over five centuries after the fall of Grenada.
Regressives in denial like Noam Chomsky might want to ignore the imperialistic nature of radical Islamism, but those leftists who actually LIVE in countries where it is a political threat know better. I am amused by those individuals who advocate -increased- U.N. control over Iraq, since the UN couldn't even stop looting in their own cafeterias!
Annan couldn't top the ultimate example of pathetic carelessness this month, namely the near-complete abandonment of the elderly of Northern France to die like roasted pigs in nursing homes and attic garretts. When a blackout struck an area larger than Northern France, affecting over 50 million people, the Northeastern U.S. saw unprecedented drops in crime, citizens pitching in to direct traffic and assist each other and no looting (unlike our Canadian friends). Contrast this with the utter indifference to the heat deaths by the French government and population and one comes to the conclusion that our criminal classes are more public-spirited than the average Pierre. Of course, M. le Presidente Chirac was all condemnation from -his- vacation spot in cool, cool Quebec. He couldn't be bothered to actually return to his post and deal with the crises until after spending three weeks with his buddy (the Cretin), for, like the rest of the Gauls, to him the August holiday is more sacred than family ties or human life itself. These are the creeps lecturing -us- on political morality.
If we are to draw a moral from these events, it is that the mentality that casts off moral responsibility onto government for what should be individual efforts, either of cognition (as in the U.N. example) or of protection and care (for France) is ultimately a deadly one. As we have seen over and over again, those who advocate the elimination of individual freedom and responsibility in favor of governmental or organizational collectivism are the first to hide behind such collectivity to avoid responsibility for negative outcomes. Gee, I wonder if there is any connection between the former and the latter?