3 Positives, 1 Negative = Positive News Day?

I'll start with the good:

1. According to this article from The Guardian, certain sections of the Gay & Lesbian community (Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association (Galha)) are waking up to the fact they will be the uber-preys for a dhimmifide West. And they are fighting back:

   A gay magazine...described...Islam as a "barmy doctrine"

   and

   Islam is growing "like a canker" in the UK through "unrestrained and irresponsible breeding"

   Gahla had made some distasteful comments on immigrants in general, but have since retracted those comments. However, interestingly, Gahla has refused to retract its comments on Islam and Muslims:
   

   Mr Broadhead wrote in the magazine: "What is wrong with being fearful of Islam? (There is a lot to fear) ... What does a moderate Muslim do, other than excuse the real nutters by adhering to this barmy doctrine?"

   He described his article as "slightly over the top in wording maybe but basically we're saying Islam is homophobic".

   Basically, they are correct on all counts. What I found surprising is that there is in existence a support group for gay and lesbian Muslims called Imaan. [Hat Tip: Dhimmi Watch]
   
2. The New York Times (shock-horror) has published a nice piece on how the Blogosphere is driving the MSM nuts:

   Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel, or so goes the old saw...The Internet, and especially the amplifying power of blogs, is changing that. Unhappy subjects discovered a decade ago that they could use their Web sites to correct the record or deconstruct articles to expose what they perceived as a journalist's bias or wrongheaded narration.

   Well fancy that! It's been happening for decade and the MSM picks up on it only now? This could then explain a sick downtrend. Seeing as the Blogosphere has appeared on the Grey Old Lady's radar, I assume that they will consider the careful analysis of Norman Podhoretz effectively demolishing the MSM's continued assertions that Bush lied (TM). [Hat Tip: Six Days via Email]
   
3. The New York Times, albeit their Public Editor, wonders what the hell was going on in the upper echelons (excuse the pun) of NYT regarding NSAGate:

   The New York Times's explanation of its decision to report, after what it said was a one-year delay, that the National Security Agency is eavesdropping domestically without court-approved warrants was woefully inadequate. And I have had unusual difficulty getting a better explanation for readers, despite the paper's repeated pledges of greater transparency.

Come on, woeful, unusual difficulty? So what is a Public Editor and what does he/she do?

The public editor serves as the readers' representative. His opinions and conclusions are his own. His column appears at least twice monthly in this section.

Wow, for a moment their I thought the NYT was imploding. Except, that the Public Editor speaks for the reader and the Public Editor is concerned that NSAGate was withheld for far too long. Presummably, he has less of a interest in national/international security than do the normally traiterous NYT editors-proper. Or perhaps he doesn't like James Risen (one of the exposers of NSAGate)? Or maybe he is jealous? [Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin]

Now to the bad news. Mark Steyn writes a candid article on how the West is being systematically being outbred from within by the RoP. In particular:

Much of what we loosely call the western world will survive this century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most western European countries...Speaking of which, if we are at war — and half the American people and significantly higher percentages in Britain, Canada, and Europe don’t accept that proposition — than what exactly is the war about? We know it’s not really a “war on terror.” Nor is it, at heart, a war against Islam, or even “radical Islam.” The Muslim faith, whatever its merits for the believers, is a problematic business for the rest of us...That’s what the war’s about: our lack of civilizational confidence. As a famous Arnold Toynbee quote puts it: “Civilizations die from suicide, not murder”—as can be seen throughout much of “the western world” right now. The progressive agenda — lavish social welfare, abortion, secularism, multiculturalism — is collectively the real suicide bomb...

And this summarises his essay quite succinctly:

Well, here’s my prediction for 2032: unless we change our ways the world faces a future … where the environment will look pretty darn good. If you’re a tree or a rock, you’ll be living in clover. It’s the Italians and the Swedes who’ll be facing extinction and the loss of their natural habitat.

Got that?

3 Positives, 1 Negative = Positive News Day?

I'll start with the good:

1. According to this article from The Guardian, certain sections of the Gay & Lesbian community (Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association (Galha)) are waking up to the fact they will be the uber-preys for a dhimmifide West. And they are fighting back:

   A gay magazine...described...Islam as a "barmy doctrine"

   and

   Islam is growing "like a canker" in the UK through "unrestrained and irresponsible breeding"

   Gahla had made some distasteful comments on immigrants in general, but have since retracted those comments. However, interestingly, Gahla has refused to retract its comments on Islam and Muslims:
   

   Mr Broadhead wrote in the magazine: "What is wrong with being fearful of Islam? (There is a lot to fear) ... What does a moderate Muslim do, other than excuse the real nutters by adhering to this barmy doctrine?"

   He described his article as "slightly over the top in wording maybe but basically we're saying Islam is homophobic".

   Basically, they are correct on all counts. What I found surprising is that there is in existence a support group for gay and lesbian Muslims called Imaan. [Hat Tip: Dhimmi Watch]
   
2. The New York Times (shock-horror) has published a nice piece on how the Blogosphere is driving the MSM nuts:

   Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel, or so goes the old saw...The Internet, and especially the amplifying power of blogs, is changing that. Unhappy subjects discovered a decade ago that they could use their Web sites to correct the record or deconstruct articles to expose what they perceived as a journalist's bias or wrongheaded narration.

   Well fancy that! It's been happening for decade and the MSM picks up on it only now? This could then explain a sick downtrend. Seeing as the Blogosphere has appeared on the Grey Old Lady's radar, I assume that they will consider the careful analysis of Norman Podhoretz effectively demolishing the MSM's continued assertions that Bush lied (TM). [Hat Tip: Six Days via Email]
   
3. The New York Times, albeit their Public Editor, wonders what the hell was going on in the upper echelons (excuse the pun) of NYT regarding NSAGate:

   The New York Times's explanation of its decision to report, after what it said was a one-year delay, that the National Security Agency is eavesdropping domestically without court-approved warrants was woefully inadequate. And I have had unusual difficulty getting a better explanation for readers, despite the paper's repeated pledges of greater transparency.

Come on, woeful, unusual difficulty? So what is a Public Editor and what does he/she do?

The public editor serves as the readers' representative. His opinions and conclusions are his own. His column appears at least twice monthly in this section.

Wow, for a moment their I thought the NYT was imploding. Except, that the Public Editor speaks for the reader and the Public Editor is concerned that NSAGate was withheld for far too long. Presummably, he has less of a interest in national/international security than do the normally traiterous NYT editors-proper. Or perhaps he doesn't like James Risen (one of the exposers of NSAGate)? Or maybe he is jealous? [Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin]

Now to the bad news. Mark Steyn writes a candid article on how the West is being systematically being outbred from within by the RoP. In particular:

Much of what we loosely call the western world will survive this century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most western European countries...Speaking of which, if we are at war — and half the American people and significantly higher percentages in Britain, Canada, and Europe don’t accept that proposition — than what exactly is the war about? We know it’s not really a “war on terror.” Nor is it, at heart, a war against Islam, or even “radical Islam.” The Muslim faith, whatever its merits for the believers, is a problematic business for the rest of us...That’s what the war’s about: our lack of civilizational confidence. As a famous Arnold Toynbee quote puts it: “Civilizations die from suicide, not murder”—as can be seen throughout much of “the western world” right now. The progressive agenda — lavish social welfare, abortion, secularism, multiculturalism — is collectively the real suicide bomb...

And this summarises his essay quite succinctly:

Well, here’s my prediction for 2032: unless we change our ways the world faces a future … where the environment will look pretty darn good. If you’re a tree or a rock, you’ll be living in clover. It’s the Italians and the Swedes who’ll be facing extinction and the loss of their natural habitat.

Got that?