File This: Muslims prefer the EU’s Airbus over Boeing… well Duh!!! birds of a feather flock together, who’s ya Banker Baby?

 

Airbus soars past Boeing at Dubai Air show

SMH
November 19, 2009 - 10:52AM

Airbus said yesterday it has received US$5.3 billion (A$5.7 billion) in orders and letters of intent for new aircraft at the Dubai Airshow, while rival Boeing announced two orders for less than US$800 million (A$860 million).

"We had a good airshow, better than many expected," said Airbus chief operating officer John Leahy in a statement released a day before the biennial show ends, with overall sales down sharply on 2007.

The Airbus orders were for 15 aircraft worth more than US$3.6 billion, in addition to memorandums of understanding on another 18 valued at around US$1.7 billion.
Sales were down at the Dubai Airshow, where Airbus jets dramatically outsold Boeing's offerings.

Sales were down at the Dubai Airshow, where Airbus jets dramatically outsold Boeing's offerings. Photo: AFP

The largest came from Ethiopian Airlines for 12 A350-900s worth US$2.9 billion, while Air Austral ordered two A380 superjumbos worth US$655 million. Air Austral plans to be the first airline to fly the A380 with an all-economy class fit-out of more than 800 seats.

Swiss-based charter airline Comlux placed a firm order for one Airbus Corporate Jet (ACJ) worth US$75 million.

Meanwhile, Airbus signed an MoU to supply Yemenia Airlines with 10 A320s worth US$770 million, and an MoU with Senegal Airlines for two A320s and two A330-200s valued at US$670 million.

An MoU was also signed with Nepal Airlines for one A320 and one A330-200 worth US$258 million.

Arch-rival Boeing received orders from the Algerian national carrier Air Algerie for seven Boeing B737-800s. The price was not disclosed, but it should range between US$493 million and US$553 million according to catalogue prices.

Boeing also confirmed an order for four B737s by the Algerian domestic carrier Tassili Airlines, valued at US$228.4 million.

Sales are sharply lower for the two companies that than in 2007, when they received orders and letters of intent worth around US$75 billion, mostly from Gulf carriers.

Show organisers said yesterday that orders by the next to last day have exceeded US$13 billion -- way below US$155.5 billion in 2007.

Leahy warned that the aviation industry is still struggling to overcome the impact of the global financial crisis.

"Our industry is not out of the woods yet. There will be a difficult winter ahead of us," he said.

"But with the deals we made in Dubai and the interest in our products that we saw here, spring may not be that far away," he added.

I would SWIM backwards,naked,spitting boiling lava from my ears arse hole and nose,singing the battle Hymn of the Republic,Waltzing Matilda and God Save the Queen simultaneously, before I set foot on an Airbus from Sydney to Los Angele’s or New York.

BOEING….Tried and Tested made by people who THINK just like YOU,in the

USA.

Coming Soon,something reassuringly familiar about this picture.

I would much rather fly with people who have helped to master the art of WALKING on the Moon than with those who feel they are bound to WORSHIP it.

787

Technorati Tags: Airbus,BOEING,Dubai Airshow,Muslims buy EU's Airbus

What makes Obama Bow ?: To the Pignoramus in Chief, Hussein Obama.

I see you were unable to answer a simple question on your “I hate America more than you do world tour part  3” in Japan last week.

The question was “……bombings, of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, do you think that it was the right decision?”

The Video below shows your inability, refusal,obfuscation to answer a simple question, that required a SIMPLE Yes or No.

I live in a country that had more Japanese bombs dropped on it than Pearl Harbour, the question is easily answered by anyone with the slightest knowledge of WW2 and the Japanese mindset, the answer is a simple YES.

But I guess it would not be fair of me to expect a Hip in da groove, hoop shooting “Community Organizer in Chief” to be aware of such “ancient history” I know, I know, for you and your party the WRONG SIDE won WW2, maybe that’s why you refuse to acknowledge that the dropping of the A Bomb was what brought the end of WW2.

An Australian, no Hussein, NOT an Austrian,who could have given you many many reasons as to why the  Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the correct decision is no longer with us.

I bet, just like the many hundreds of thousands of Australian, British and American troops who were captured or killed by the Japanese during WW2 in the Pacific, you have no idea or for that matter care who he was.

Hussein Obama felt the need to Bow to the ideological descendants of the above example of Japanese WW2 atrocity. 

Australian, British and American soldiers were beheaded during WW2 in the same way as their allies then, the Islamists,execute,torture their prisoners,hostages,today as I write this, Hussein just what is it with you head hunters?

 

 

When you cannot, or refuse to HONOUR those who died at the hands of those you now seek to impress and ingratiate yourself to,you deny history a voice, and by doing so you refute FACTS,but I guess that’s what been a Democrat,Hope and Change, Redistributive, Islamic apologist,Messiah is all about.

What the Lick Spittle Pignoramus in Chief BOWS to

Beheaded at whim and worked to death: Japan's repugnant treatment of Allied PoWs

Daily Mail

The sheer brutality of the battle for the Far East defies imagination. And in a new book, historian Max Hastings argues that Japanese intransigence made it far worse.

Yesterday, he explained why America had to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. Here, in the final part of our exclusive serialisation, he reveals how the West was stunned when it emerged how cruelly their prisoners of war had suffered...

As the men of the victorious British 14th Army advanced through Burma on the road to Mandalay in January 1945 they encountered Japanese savagery towards prisoners.

After a battle, the Berkshires found dead British soldiers beaten, stripped of their boots and suspended by electric flex upside down from trees. This sharpened the battalion's sentiment against their enemy.

Back in Britain it was beginning to emerge that such inhumanity was not confined to the battlefield.

Men who had escaped from Japanese captivity brought tales of brutality so extreme that politicians and officials censored them for fear of the Japanese imposing even more terrible sufferings upon tens of thousands of PoWs who remained in their hands.

The US government suppressed for months the first eyewitness accounts of the 1942 Bataan death march in the Philippines on which so many captured American GIs perished, and news of the beheadings of shot-down aircrew.

In official circles a reluctance persisted to believe the worst. As late as January 1945, a Foreign Office committee concluded that it was only in some outlying areas that there might be ill-treatment by rogue military officers.

A few weeks later, such thinking was discredited as substantial numbers of British and Australian PoWs were freed in Burma and the Philippines.

Their liberators were stunned by stories of starvation and rampant disease; of men worked to death in their thousands, tortured or beheaded for small infractions of discipline.

More than a quarter of Western PoWs lost their lives in Japanese captivity. This represented deprivation and brutality of a kind familiar to Russian and Jewish prisoners of the Nazis in Europe, yet shocking to the American, British and Australian public.

It seemed incomprehensible that a nation with pretensions to civilisation could have defied every principle of humanity and the supposed rules of war.

The overwhelming majority of Allied prisoners were taken during the first months of the Far East war when the Philippines, Dutch East Indies, Hong Kong, Malaya and Burma were overrun.

As disarmed soldiers milled about awaiting their fate in Manila or Singapore, Hong Kong or Rangoon, they contemplated a life behind barbed wire with dismay, but without the terror that their real prospects merited.

They had been conditioned to suppose that surrender was a misfortune that might befall any fighting man.

In the weeks that followed, as their rations shrank, medicines vanished, and Japanese policy was revealed, they learned differently. Dispatched to labour in jungles, torrid plains or mines and quarries, they grew to understand that, in the eyes of their captors, they had become slaves.

They had forfeited all fundamental human respect. A Japanese war reporter described seeing American prisoners - "men of the arrogant nation which sought to treat our motherland with unwarranted contempt.

"As I gaze upon them, I feel as if I am watching dirty water running from the sewers of a nation whose origins were mongrel, and whose pride has been lost. Japanese soldiers look extraordinarily handsome, and I feel very proud to belong to their race."

As prisoners' residual fitness ebbed away, some abandoned hope and acquiesced to a fate that soon overtook them. A feeling of loneliness was a contributory factor in the deaths of many, particularly the younger ones.

The key to survival was adaptability. It was essential to recognise that this new life, however unspeakable, represented reality.

Those who pined for home, who gazed tearfully at photos of loved ones, were doomed. Some men could not bring themselves to stomach unfamiliar, repulsive food. "They preferred to die rather than to eat what they were given," said US airman Doug Idlett.

"The ones who wouldn't eat died pretty early on," said Corporal Paul Reuter. "I buried people who looked much better than me. I never turned down anything that was edible."

Australian Snow Peat saw a maggot an inch long, and said: "Meat, you beauty! You've got to give it a go. Think they're currants in the Christmas pudding. Think they're anything."

But in the shipyards near Osaka, two starving British prisoners ate lard from a great tub used for greasing the slipway. It had been treated with arsenic to repel insects. They died.

Prisoners were bereft of possessions. Mel Rosen owned a loincloth, a bottle and a pot of pepper. Many PoWs boasted only the loincloth. Even where there were razor blades, shaving was unfashionable, shaggy beards the norm.

In the midst of all this, they were occasionally permitted to dispatch cards home, couched in terms that mocked their condition, and phrases usually dictated by their jailers. "Dear Mum & all," wrote Fred Thompson from Java to his family in Essex, "I am very well and hope you are too.

"The Japanese treat us well. My daily work is easy and we are paid. We have plenty of food and much recreation. Goodbye, God bless you, my love to you all."

Thompson expressed reality in the privacy of his diary: "Somehow we keep going. We are all skeletons, just living from day to day. This life just teaches one not to hope or expect anything. My emotions are non-existent."

Prisoner Paul Reuter slept on the top deck of a three-tier bunk in his camp. When disease and vitamin deficiency caused him to go blind for three weeks, no man would change places to enable him to sleep at ground level.

"Some people would steal," he said. "There was a lot of barter, then bitterness about people who reneged on the deals.

"There were only a few fights, but a lot of arguing - about places in line, about who got a spoonful more."

This was a world in which gentleness was neither a virtue that commanded esteem, nor a quality that promoted survival.

Philip Stibbe, in Rangoon Jail, wrote: "We became hardened and even callous. Bets were laid about who would be next to die. Everything possible was done to save the lives of the sick, but it was worse than useless to grieve over the inevitable."

Self-respect was deeply discounted. Every day, prisoners were exposed to their own impotence. Rosen watched Japanese soldiers kick ailing Americans into latrine pits: "You don't know the meaning of frustration until you've had to stand by and take that."

Almost every prisoner afterwards felt ashamed that he had stood passively by while the Japanese beat or killed his comrades. And prisoners hated the necessity to bow to every Japanese, whatever his rank and whatever theirs. No display of deference shielded them from the erratic whims of their masters.

Japanese behaviour vacillated between grotesquery and sadism. Ted Whincup laboured on the notorious Burma railway, a 250-mile track carved through mountain and dense jungle.

The commandant insisted that the prisoners' four-piece band should muster outside the guardroom and play "Hi, ho, hi, ho, it's off to work we go" - the tune from Snow White - each morning as skeletal inmates shambled forth to their labours.

If guards here took a dislike to a prisoner, they killed him with a casual shove into a ravine.

The Japanese seemed especially ill-disposed towards tall men, whom they obliged to bend to receive punishment, usually administered with a cane.

One day Airman Fred Jackson was working on an airfield on the coral island of Ambon when, for no reason, six British officers were paraded in line, and one by one punched to the ground by a Japanese warrant officer.

A trooper of the 3rd Hussars, being beaten by a guard with a rifle, raised an arm to ward off blows and was accused of having struck the man. After several days of beatings, he was tied to a tree and bayoneted to death.

An officer of the Gordons who protested against sick men being forced to work was also tied to a tree, beneath which guards lit a fire and burnt him like some Christian martyr.

Although Labour on the notorious Burma railway represented the worst fate that could befall an Allied PoW, shipment to Japan as a slave labourer also proved fatal to many.

In June 1944, the commandant in Hall Romney's camp announced to the prisoners that their job on the railway was done. They were now going to Japan.

Conditions in the holds of transport ships were always appalling, sometimes fatal. Overlaid on hunger and thirst was the threat of US submarines. The Japanese made no attempt to identify ships carrying PoWs. At least 10,000 perished following Allied attacks.

RAOC wireless mechanic Alf Evans was among 1,500 men on the Kachidoki Maru when she was sunk. Evans jumped into the water and dog-paddled to a small raft to which three other men were already clinging to.

One had two broken legs, another a dislocated thigh. They were all naked, and coated in oil. A Japanese destroyer arrived, and began to pick up survivors - but only Japanese.

Evans paddled to a lifeboat left empty after its occupants were rescued, and climbed aboard, joining two Gordon Highlanders. They hauled in other men, until they were 30 strong.

After three days and nights afloat, they were taken aboard a Japanese submarine-hunter. The captain reviewed the bedraggled figures paraded on his deck, and at first ordered them thrown over the side. Then he changed his mind and administered savage beatings all round.

Eventually the prisoners were transferred-to the hold of a whaling factory ship, in which they completed their journey to Japan. Filthy and almost naked, they were landed on the dockside and marched through the streets, between lines of watching Japanese women, to a cavalry barracks. There they were clothed in sacking and dispatched to work 12-hour shifts in the furnaces of a chemical work.

Many prisoners' feet were so swollen by beriberi that in the desperate cold of a Japanese winter, they could not wear shoes. Even under such blankets as they had, men shivered at night, for there was no heating in their barracks.

At Stephen Abbott's camp when prisoners begged for relief, the commandant said contemptuously: "If you wish to live you must become hardened to cold, as Japanese are. You must teach your men to have strong willpower - like Japanese."

Yet by 1944 the death rate in most Japanese camps had declined steeply from the earlier years. The most vulnerable were gone. Those who remained were frail, often verging on madness, but possessed a brute capacity to endure that kept many alive to the end.

Out of fairness, it should be noted that there were instances in which PoWs were shown kindness, even granted means to survive through Japanese compassion.

In his camp, Doug Idlett told a Japanese interpreter he had beriberi "and the next day he handed me a bottle of Vitamin B. I never saw him again, but I felt that he had contributed to me being alive."

Lt Masaichi Kikuchi, commanding an airfield defence unit in Singapore early in 1945, was allotted a labour force of 300 Indian PoWs. The officer who handed over the men said carelessly: "When you're finished, you can do what you like with them. If I was you, I'd shove them into a tunnel with a few demolition charges."

Kikuchi could do no such thing. When two Indians escaped and were returned after being re-captured, he did not execute them, as he should have done. He thought it unjustified.

The point of such stories is not that they contradict an overarching view of the Japanese as ruthless and sadistic in their treatment of despised captives. It is that, as always in human affairs, the story deserves shading.

There was undoubtedly some maltreatment of German and Japanese PoWs in Allied hands. This is not to suggest moral equivalence, merely that few belligerents in any war can boast unblemished records in the treatment of prisoners, as events in Iraq have recently reminded us.

Since 1945, pleas have been entered in mitigation of what the Japanese did to prisoners in the Second World War. First there was the administrative difficulty of handling unexpectedly large numbers of captives in 1942.

This has some validity. Many armies in modern history have encountered such problems in the chaos of victory, and their prisoners have suffered.

Moreover, food and medical supplies were desperately short in many parts of the Japanese empire. Western prisoners, goes this argument, merely shared privations endured by local civilians and Japanese soldiers.

Such claims might be plausible, but for the fact that prisoners were left starving and neglected even where means were available to alleviate pain. There is no record of PoWs at any time or place being adequately fed.

The Japanese maltreated captives as a matter of policy, not necessity. The casual sadism was so widespread, that it must be considered institutional.

There were so many arbitrary beheadings, clubbings and bayonetings that it is impossible to dismiss these as unauthorised initiatives by individual officers and men.

A people who adopt a code which rejects the concept of mercy towards the weak and afflicted seem to place themselves outside the pale of civilisation. Japanese sometimes justify their inhumanity by suggesting that it was matched by equally callous Allied bombing of civilians.

Japanese moral indignation caused many US aircrew captured in 1944-45 to be treated as "war criminals". Eight B-29 crewmen were killed by un-anaesthetised vivisection carried out in front of medical students at a hospital. Their stomachs, hearts, lungs and brain segments were removed.

Half a century later, one doctor present said: "There was no debate among the doctors about whether to do the operations - that was what made it so strange."

Any society that can indulge such actions has lost its moral compass. War is inherently inhumane, but the Japanese practised extraordinary refinements of inhumanity in the treatment of those thrown upon their mercy. Some of them knew it.

In Stephen Abbott's camp, little old Mr Yogi, the civilian interpreter, told the British officer: "The war has changed the real Japan. We were much as you are before the war - when the army had not control. You must not think our true standards are what you see now."

Yet, unlike Mr Yogi, the new Japan that emerged from the war has proved distressingly reluctant to confront the historic guilt of the old. Its spirit of denial contrasted starkly with the penitence of postwar Germany.

Though successive Japanese prime ministers expressed formal regret for Japan's wartime actions, the country refused to pay reparations to victims, or to acknowledge its record in school history texts.

I embarked upon this history of the war with a determination to view Japanese conduct objectively, thrusting aside nationalistic sentiments. It proved hard to sustain lofty aspirations to detachment in the face of the evidence of systemic Japanese barbarism, displayed against Americans and Europeans but on a vastly wider scale against their fellow Asians.

In modern times, only Hitler's SS has matched militarist Japan in rationalising and institutionalising atrocity. Stalin's Soviet Union never sought to dignify its great killings as the acts of gentlemen, as did Hirohito's nation.

It is easy to perceive why so many Japanese behaved as they did, conditioned as they were. Yet it remains difficult to empathise with those who did such things, especially when Japan still rejects its historic legacy.

Many Japanese today adopt the view that it is time to bury all old grievances - those of Japan's former enemies about the treatment of prisoners and subject peoples, along with those of their own nation about firebombing, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

"In war, both sides do terrible things," former Lt Hayashi Inoue argued in 2005. "Surely after 60 years, the time has come to stop criticising Japan for things done so long ago."

Wartime Japan was responsible for almost as many deaths in Asia as was Nazi Germany in Europe. Germany has paid almost £3billion to 1.5 million victims of the Hitler era. But Japan goes to extraordinary lengths to escape any admission of responsibility, far less of liability for compensation, towards its wartime victims.

Most modern Japanese do not accept the ill-treatment of subject peoples and prisoners by their forebears, even where supported by overwhelming evidence, and those who do acknowledge it incur the disdain or outright hostility of their fellow-countrymen for doing so.

It is repugnant the way they still seek to excuse, and even to ennoble, the actions of their parents and grandparents, so many of whom forsook humanity in favour of a perversion of honour and an aggressive nationalism which should properly be recalled with shame.

The Japanese nation (Hussein Obama / Islamist Democrats ?) is guilty of a collective rejection of historical fact. As long as such denial persists, it will remain impossible for the world to believe that Japan has come to terms with the horrors it inflicted.

• Abridged extract from NEMESIS: THE BATTLE FOR JAPAN 1944-45 by Max Hastings, published by HarperPress on October 1 at £25. Max Hastings 2007. To order a copy at £22.50 (p&p free), call 0845 606 4213.

Australians in Captivity

Sir Edward Weary Dunlop

War Diaries

 

Japanese midget submarine No. 21, which took part in a raid on Sydney Harbour on the night of 31 May/1 June 1942, being lowered on to blocks on shore after its raising from the harbour bottom. No. 21 was one of three Japanese midget submarines which tried to penetrate the harbour defences. One became entangled in the boom and was scuttled by its crew. Another went up the harbour where it fired a torpedo at the cruiser USS Chicago. The torpedo missed and sank a harbour ferry, the HMAS Kuttabul, which was being used as a barracks ship. Nineteen Australian and British sailors were killed. The third submarine was destroyed by depth charges without having fired any torpedos.

 

The Battle for Australia Remembered 

Technorati Tags: Hussein Obama,Japan,Obowma,Atomic Bomb,WW2

Shocking Scenes as Hulk Hogan bashed Semi Conscious at Sydney’s Star City Casino. Video.

 

I heard the Hulk Interviewed a few weeks back when he came here to sus out the place for his upcoming Hulkamania tour.

He seemed like a really good guy and very genuine,he attracted a lot of positive attention whilst he was here then,I hope he is able to continue with his wrestling matches and was not too badly injured today, he did not deserve that kind of treatment,it was uncalled for.

The only positive from Australia’s point of view is that his assailant was NOT an Australian,thank God.

Technorati Tags: Hulk Hogan bashed semi conscious,Hulkamania,Sydney Australia,Star City Casino,Ric Flair

Ignoble Islam, Respect this!

Ignoble Islam: Afghan Women prefer to set themselves on FIRE than live under the LOVE of Sharia Law.

Technorati Tags: Afghanistan,Sharia Law,Self Emulation,The Lurve of allah

Scientology, a “Criminal Organization”

 

Scientology 'a criminal organisation': Nick Xenophon

Daily Telegraph
November 17, 2009 11:00PM

INDEPENDENT senator Nick Xenophon has accused the Church of Scientology of being a criminal organisation.

The South Australian parliamentarian said he had been contacted by a number of former Scientologists, after he questioned the organisation's tax exempt status in a recent television interview.

"They have provided long and detailed letters to me about the workings of this organisation,'' he told the Senate today.

"These people rightly see themselves as victims of Scientology.''

Senator Xenophon said their correspondence implicated the organisation in a range of crimes, including forced imprisonment, coerced abortions, embezzlement of church funds, physical violence, intimidation and blackmail.

"I am deeply concerned about this organisation and the devastating impact it can have on its followers,'' he said.

Senator Xenophon said the Church of Scientology had been convicted of fraud in France and was facing similar charges in Belgium.

A number of the organisation's former high ranking executives in the US had also recently spoken out against its leader, David Miscavige, saying they had seen him assaulting staff and urging others to do the same, he said.

"What we are seeing is a worldwide pattern of abuse and criminality,'' Senator Xenophon said.

"On the body of evidence, this is not happening by accident, it is happening by design.

"Scientology is not a religious organisation, it is a criminal organisation that hides behind its so-called religious beliefs.''

At Last someone here in Australia calling these loons what they are. See  Lisa McPherson

Technorati Tags: Scientology,Nick Xenophon,criminal organization,range of crimes,including forced imprisonment,coerced abortions,embezzlement of church funds,physical violence,intimidation and blackmail.

 

Aussie Round up

 

One of the Joys of been an Australian is without doubt the following… Enjoy!!!!

Now watch it again.

Having said all of the above, well done England, worthy finalists.

Tiger Down Under

Religion of Peace

Sun

 

Technorati Tags: Tiger Woods,Skin Cancer,Australia 4 Nations Champions,Pious Muslim,Islamic Sociopaths Inc.

How do we know that the attack at Fort Hood was an act of Islamist terrorism?….Major Nidal Hassan told us so.

 

Why I Murdered 13 American Soldiers at Fort Hood: Nidal Hassan Explains It All to You

By Barry Rubin*

November 14, 2009

How do we know that the attack at Fort Hood was an act of Islamist terrorism? Simple, Major Nidal Hassan told us so. You’ve seen reports of a long list of things he did and said along these lines. But what’s most amazing of all is this:

Hassan is the first terrorist in history to give an academic lecture explaining why he was about to attack. Yet that still isn’t enough for too many people—including the president of the United States--to understand that the murderous assault at Fort Hood was a Jihad attack.
It was reported that the audience was shocked and frightened by his lecture. He was supposed to speak on some medical topic yet instead talked on the topic: “The Koranic World View as it Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military.” All you have to do is look at the 50 Power Point slides and they tell you everything you need to know.
It is quite a good talk. He’s logical and presents his evidence. This is clearly not the work of a mad man or a fool, though there’s still a note of ambiguity in it. He's still working out what to do in his own mind and is trying to figure out if he has a way out other than in effect deserting the U.S. army and becoming a Jihad warrior. Ultimately, he concluded that he could not be a proper Muslim without killing American soldiers. Obviously, other Muslims could reach different conclusions but Hassan strongly grounds himself in Islamic texts.
In a sense, Hassan's lecture was a cry for help: Can anyone show me another way out? Can anyone refute my interpretation of Islam? One Muslim in the audience reportedly tried to do so. But unless these issues are openly discussed and debated--rather than swept under the rug--more people will die.
In fact, I’d recommend that teachers use this lecture in teaching classes on both Islam and Islamist politics. .
Follow along with me and you’ll understand everything.
Hassan deals with three topics: What Islam teaches Muslims, how Muslims view the wars in Afghanistan and Iran, how this might affect Muslims in the U.S. military. [Slide 2] Hassan defines Jihad, showing how silly are the claims that it only means a personal struggle to behave better. It also signifies holy war, of course. [Slide 5].
Now here’s Hassan’s central theme. Muslims cannot fight in an infidel army against other Muslims. And Hassan himself says that it’s getting hard for Muslims in the U.S. military to justify doing so. [Slide 11] Obviously, Hassan was deciding that he couldn’t do so.
He then quotes the Koran extensively to prove the point. Allah will punish anyone who kills a Muslim [Slide 12]. Hassan then gives four examples of Muslim soldiers who broke under the strain. One who killed fellow American soldiers (which Hassan would himself do), one accused of espionage (but was acquitted), one who deserted, and one who refused deployment to Iraq. [Slide 13]
Quoting the Koran, Hassan next provides a number of quotations to show that the believer must obey Allah. If they do, they will enjoy great delights (though he left out the 72 virgins, there’s one quote hinting at pederasty), and if they don’t they will suffer torments of Hell.
Finally, he gets into the heavy stuff. Hassan introduces the concept of “defensive Jihad” which is a core element in radical Islamist thinking and has especially been promoted by Usama bin Ladin and al-Qaida. [Slides 37-39]. If others attack and oppress Muslims, then it is the duty of all Muslims to fight them. September 11 was justified by its perpetrators by saying that the United States had attacked Muslims and therefore it was mandatory to kill Americans in return.
And here is the crux of the matter: Verse 60:08, “Allah forbids you…from dealing kindly and justly” with those who fight Muslims.” [Slide 40]
If Nidal Hassan believed this and would follow it, he must—to be a proper Muslim in his eyes—pick up a gun and join the Jihad, Muslim side. He was not shooting Americans because he caught battle fatigue from American soldiers he treated. Think about it. To have done so, Hassan would have had to sympathize with them, thinking about what it would be like for him if he’d been fighting…Muslims in Iraq or Afghanistan. But that was precisely his problem. He sympathized with the other side.
Being ordered to ship out to one of these countries, Hassan now had to decide: which side are you on? Would he choose the side of Allah and the Muslims, to be rewarded in Heaven? Or would he join with the infidels, to be punished with Hell and to betray his religion? He made his decision.
It is interesting that no Muslim debate has developed over a very simple issue: What if two groups of Muslims are fighting, cannot one side with one group, even if it has non-Muslim allies? After all, Americans are not going to Iraq or Afghanistan simply to “kill Muslims” but to defend Muslims from being killed. The Saudis, Kuwaitis, and Egyptians had no problem with using Western troops to save them from Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in 1991, for example. The Iraqi and Afghan governments, made up of pious Muslims, do the same thing.
Arab nationalists who are Muslims can take this position more easily. But for Islamists the problem is not some abstraction but knowledge that they are fighting a battle to seize control of all Muslim-majority states and indeed perhaps of the entire world.
The true problem, then, is not that some Muslims help infidels kill Muslims, but that some Muslims help infidels kill Islamists. But Hassan never considered this point, which could be quite persuasive to other Muslims in Western militaries.
So, in his thinking, how might Hassan have escaped from that stark choice? Hassan answers that question. Quoting the Koran, he indicated that if the Americans ended the wars, then that would be okay and no killing would be necessary. [Slide 42]
Another alternative is if the Americans accepted Islam or agreed to become subservient to Muslim rulers (dhimmis) and paid a special tax [Slide 43-44].
The third alternative would be if the Muslim Messiah came, destroyed Christianity as a false religion and set off the post-history utopia. [Slide 45]. He didn’t mention another part of this description, which was the murder of all Jews.
A digression is appropriate here. Hassan, although a Palestinian, has never been quoted as attacking Israel or the Jews. This is one more reminder that this struggle isn’t all just about Israel. But it also tells something important about Hassan which also applies to many Muslim radicals in Europe. Hassan is an American. As such he has no other nationality, neither Palestinian nor Arab. He doesn’t support Hamas or Fatah. But he has a religion that directs his thinking. That’s why he is an Islamist and why he supports a generalized Islamist revolutionary movement, al-Qaida.
As one moderate Muslim from Canada pointed out, the clothes he wore the day before committing his Jihad attack was not (as some sources put it in a silly manner) some martyr or even Arab garb but the clothing of Pakistan and Afghanistan. He is an al-Qaida Jihadi, having changed sides in the War on Terror.
Hassan was no fool or blind fanatic. Indeed, he presents a sophisticated view. For example, he quotes contradictory Quranic verses, one suggesting that all religions can enter Heaven; another that all non-Muslims will go to Hell [Slide 47].
His conclusion takes on tremendous significance in light of what would happen at Fort Hood. He writes:
“If Muslim groups can convince Muslims that they are fighting for God against injustices of the `infidels’; i.e., the enemies of Islam, then Muslims can become a potent adversary ie: suicide bombing, etc.”
And of course, these groups did so convince Hassan. [Slide 48]
Why? Hassan tells us:
“God expects full loyalty. Promises heaven and threatens with Hell. Muslims may seem moderate (compromising) but God is not.” [Slide 49]
And at the very end, he proposes what might have been his own escape route:
"Recommendation: Department of Defense should allow Muslim soldiers the option of being released as `Conscientious objectors’ to increase troop morale and decrease adverse events.” [Slide 50]
If that had existed for Hassan, I think, he would not have killed people. This proposal is worth debating, though it has negative implications too, of course. But then he had other options. He could have resigned his commission, deserted, or refused deployment as a conscientious objector and gone to prison. In fact, Hassan himself cited individuals who had done the last two.
Consequently, Hassan's lecture also tells us why Muslims can choose not to be Jihadists, though this requires ignoring or rationalizing clear, religiously binding commandments in their religion or by being basically secular people of Muslim background. This is the kind of solution found in Christianity and Judaism, of course.
Hassan was too pious and consistent to take this way out. The answer to his personal behavior must be found in a mix of psychological factors and political-religious beliefs. The fact  is, however, that he clearly did see himself as a Jihad warrior in the end. The existence of psycological factors in no way negates the importance of religious considerations.
All terrorists have some psychological forces working to make them follow such a path. Yet if not for ideological--and in the case of Islamists, religious--beliefs they never would have become terrorists. In contrast, criminals have psychological factors plus material goals, while mentally ill people who commit crimes are compelled by purely psychogical factors. Hassan does not fit either of those two categories.
Equally, his action cannot be attributed to a "misreading" or "heretical" interpretation of Islam. To read this lecture is to understand how carefully and self-critically he approached the issues. Anything so obviously false or deviant from mainstream Islam would simply not appeal to so many Muslims. Hassan was looking for a way out in the texts and listed the "loopholes" he did find: either the United States must not fight anyone who was a Muslim or it must let him out of the military.
What Hassan neglected was an explanation that lay outside what his strict reading of the Muslim texts would allow him to say: the United States must fight, in general, because the Islamists have been the aggressors. And the United States is actually fighting as allies with one group of (more moderate) Muslims against another (of radical Islamists). Yet the texts always deal with the Muslim community as a united whole (the umma), an interpretation that just doesn't correspond with reality. Indeed and ironically, this view enables Islamists to themselves kill thousands of Muslims all over the world! 
The fact that Hassan’s lecture has not been the centerpiece of the whole post-massacre debate is a true example of how impoverished are the “experts,” journalists, and politicians at dealing with these issues. Of course, without exploring the Islamic factor, they're wasting everyone's time. They're also going to be wasting quite a few lives.

---

*Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal.

Many thanks to Barry for forwarding me the above article, I urge ANV readers to go to his web site GLORIA (Global Research in International Affairs Center) for some of the BEST commentary on world events and most particularly the activities of the members of the “ Religion of Peace” aka. Islam.

Technorati Tags: Major Nidal Hassan,Ft. Hood,Barry Rubin,Islamic Sociopaths Inc.,Muslim Terrorism,Barry Rubin GLORIA Center

Devolution is possible,Britain is ever ready to prove it, just ask Baroness Valerie Amos, just who’s idea was it to send this LOON here ?

 

Envoy surprised by climate of scepticism

SMH

JONATHAN PEARLMAN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT
November 14, 2009

BRITAIN'S new high commissioner,

has expressed surprise that Australians are still debating whether humans cause climate change and says other nations have long since ''moved on''.

In her first public comments since arriving in Canberra three weeks ago, Baroness Amos, a former leader of the House of Lords, said Australia was well-positioned to lead the international community on climate change but the public debate should move beyond scepticism and negativity to finding solutions.

Her comments come days after a senior Liberal, Nick Minchin, said he and most of his party colleagues believed man-made climate change was a myth.

''I have been surprised that the science itself is being questioned,'' she said. ''These are things where there have been debates over a long period of time in other countries and where we have reached conclusions and moved on.

''In the UK, there is a degree of political consensus about what in broad terms needs to be done. There is a lot of debate about how we do it. You would certainly not see on a daily basis … the kind of negative reporting that you have here.''

British envoys tend to be among the most influential of the foreign diplomats in Canberra and usually have a direct line to senior political and business leaders. When she first met Kevin Rudd, on her third day in the country, Baroness Amos presented the Prime Minister with a world map showing the potentially horrific global consequences of rising temperatures, including the risk of more dangerous bushfires.

''Australia as a country has seen the impact of some of this, in terms of drought and what is happening with annual fires,'' she said.

''I was a bit surprised at the negativity of some of the debate … It would be great for Australia to be out there and leading the way. Being a resource-rich country does not mean that, in putting in place measures that lead to clean-coal technology and lower emissions, economically you need to fall behind.''

Baroness Amos, who was born in Guyana in South America, said relations between Britain and Australia were evolving and should focus on future common goals - such as promoting human rights or dealing with cultural diversity - rather than dwelling on their shared past.

''We did go through a period where we took the relationship for granted. We just assumed we had strong historical ties and a very strong legacy and it would just go on and on.

''We should look at what we can do together as nations, particularly how we can take the partnership between our young people from being about travel and working holidays to … looking forward in the world.''

Baroness Amos said a decision on whether to become a republic was ''definitely an issue for Australia'' and would not affect relations with Britain.

The baroness, who first visited Australia for a Commonwealth leaders' meeting in 2002, is a keen cricket, tennis and soccer fan but is still ''getting the hang'' of Australian rules. ''It's a sport-mad nation. It seems to have got the balance right between working hard and enjoying life.''

Baroness Amos, who was a political appointment rather than a career diplomat, was posted for a year but said she hoped to stay on if the Labour Government loses next year's election.

Dear Baroness Amos, GO HOME NOW or STFUP, you like the majority of your socialist ideologues have nothing to contribute to Australia,as a matter of fact you sound STUPID and ignorant in the extreme to say the least.

The European Parliaments “England” would be a far more suitable environment for you and your cabal of like thinkers to wank in.

May I ask just how many times you and your personally selected pampered Socialist “pooches” have FARTED since you arrived in Australia, just how much C0 2 you have expelled and how much tax you have paid to Kevin 07,Penny Wong and Peter Garrett for engaging in such anti environmentally sensitive activities?

How about you just shut the Fuck UP and pretend you are ascending the ladder of evolution, collect your pay packet and chill out, and when your contract expires just fuck off back to Guyana  and share the wealth that you have been able to extract from the social and political system you claim you are so determined to destroy, before you are deported,in chains back to whence from where you came, our jails are full, we don’t need any more snake oil sales “persons”

Technorati Tags: Baroness Amos,UK,House of Lords,Green Hoax,Climate Change,Nick Minchin

Nicolas Sarkozy,shows Guts and Leadership, something the west no longer can or has the will to.

 

Nicolas Sarkozy pushes for burqa ban in France

Telegraph
12 Nov 2009

President Nicolas Sarkozy has reiterated his belief that the burqa, the head-to-toe veil worn by some Muslim women, has no place in secular France.

"France is a country where there is no place for the burqa, where there is no place for the subservience of women," he said in a speech on French national identity.

France, home to Europe's biggest Muslim minority, has set up a special panel of 32 lawmakers to consider whether a law should be enacted to bar Muslim women from wearing the full veil.
The country has had a long-running debate on how far it is willing to go to accommodate Islam without undermining the tradition of separating church and state, enshrined in a flagship 1905 law.

In 2004, it passed a law banning headscarves or any other "conspicuous" religious symbols in state schools to defend secularism.

Mr Sarkozy in June said the burqa was not a symbol of religious faith but a sign of women's "subservience" and declared that the full veil was "not welcome" in France.

He was speaking on Thursday in the Alpine town of La Chapelle en Vercors in his first intervention in a country-wide debate begun last month on what it means to be French.

Public meetings are due to take place in some 450 government offices around the country, involving campaigners, students, parents and teachers, unions, business leaders and French and European lawmakers.

The debate will end with a conference early next year on the twin questions of "what it means to be French today" and "what immigration contributes to our national identity."

The Socialist opposition has accused the government of pandering to anti-immigrant sentiment to shore up support on the Right ahead of regional elections in March.

It has said the debate risks alienating France's large immigrant communities.

But Mr Sarkozy on Thursday defended the "noble debate" and said: "Those who do not want this debate are afraid of it."

Is France, the “western” European nation,most infected with the scourge of Islam, declaring enough is enough ? or is this it’s death rattle?

Either way, well done Sarkozy and God Bless.

 

Technorati Tags: President Nicolas Sarkozy,France,burqa,Islamic Sociopaths Inc.,La Chapelle en Vercors,"noble debate"

Australian schoolboy bashed for refusing to follow dictates of Ramadan: Life in Australia’s schools inside the “Occupied Territories” of SW Sydney.

 

Muslim kids bullied my son over salami sandwich during Ramadan, family claims

By Bruce McDougall
The Daily Telegraph
November 13, 2009 6:42AM

A SYDNEY couple has withdrawn their two children from a public primary school, claiming their 11-year-old son was bullied by Muslim students because he ate a salami sandwich during Ramadan.

Andrew Grigoriou said yesterday he complained to the school and to police after his son Antonios was chased and later assaulted by Muslim students after a confrontation over the contents of his lunch.

Antonios, a Year 5 student of Greek-Australian background at Punchbowl Public School in Sydney's southwest, said he and a friend had to be locked inside the library for an hour after being chased by a group of Muslim boys offended by his choice of food while they were fasting.

The Grigoriou family said the following exchange took place:

Muslim student to Antonios: "Why are you eating ham, it's Ramadan?"

Antonios: "My mum packed this for lunch today."

Muslim student: "Don't eat that. How can you eat pig, it's disgusting."

During the confrontation a Muslim boy allegedly accused Antonios of saying: "F. . . the Muslims" but Antonios denied swearing.

Mr Grigoriou said he removed his son and a younger child from the school on Tuesday after the boy was punched in the eye and kicked in the legs by a Muslim student.

"It has broken my heart to see this happening to my boy," he said. Antonios, who wrote about his experiences in words and drawings, still has nightmares.

The Department of Education and Training said it had a zero tolerance policy towards racism.

"Claims of bullying or racial intolerance are taken very seriously and looked into," a spokeswoman said. "The School Education Director is looking into the matter and called the father concerned.

"As a result . . . the school will work with all families and students involved to ensure that the values promoted by Punchbowl Public School and the department are understood and supported."

After the salami sandwich incident a student described as "the ringleader of the group" was suspended from the school. The department said that the school had "ongoing cultural and interfaith awareness programs to improve understanding among students of events like Ramadan and Christmas".

Other parents also complained to The Daily Telegraph about bullying at the school and claimed victims received too little protection.

One said her 12-year-old son was scared to open his lunch box at school because he was harassed about what is in it. "He has been bullied from day one . . . about being a Christian and about the hot salami in his lunch," she said.

"My boy has a Greek background . . . the bullying is extreme.

"He has been called a fat pig and hit on the back with a stick."

Another mother said her young son refused to go on school excursions for fear he would be bashed.

These apprentice Assassin’s, Rapist’s, Drug dealers, Car re birthers and common criminals are simply doing what they do because they CAN, they enabled and facilitated by the same socialist arse clowns who are reported above :"As a result . . . the school will work with all families and students involved to ensure that the values promoted by Punchbowl Public School and the department are understood and supported." talk about the arsonist’s arriving at the fire dressed as Firemen.

Australia’s SAS should be recalled from Afghanistan immediately and let lose in South Western Sydney aka. Sydney’s Occupied Territories.

capture + disarmament + internment + repatriation = a return to Labor’s pre Muslim / Multiculturalist’s chaos in Australia.

Islam IS what Islam DOES

 

Technorati Tags: Andrew Grigoriou,Antonios Grigoriou,Muslims,Ramadan,Punchbowl Public School,Religion of Peace,Islamic Sociopaths Inc.,Multiculturalism,Diversity,Harmony

13 Good Americans Dead, 38 wounded,to ensure the Left’s Cult of “Diversity” rules the US Military.

Spencer at NRO: "'Islamophobia' was duly avoided at Fort Hood. All it cost was 13 dead and 38 wounded."

Nov 11, 2009 10:51 am | Robert

Yesterday I was asked to participate in a Symposium at National Review about the Fort Hood massacre and the role political correctness played in it. Here is my entry: The Fort Hood massacre wouldn't have happened were it not for political correctness. Nidal Hasan lectured on the Koran's punishments for...

read more

 

Technorati Tags: Diversity,Islamic Sociopaths Inc.,Fort Hood,US Military,Cultural sensitivity,Religion of Peace.

Hasan the Muslim … the Ft. Hood mass murderer

 

Fox News talking heads are asking how……..

Hasan was able to do what he did.

Why would he and his co religionists in the US Military,NOT feel free to engage in their Religions Satanic manifesto ?, when the commander in chief of the worlds most powerful military force on earth, dictates that Non Muslim Americans,follow his example and bow, roll over, SUBMITT to Islam,rather than reject it,in fact the “Community Organizer in Chief” demands non Muslims Americans RESPECT Islam and what it’s followers have given the world in the name of this thing they, Islamist’s call “allah”. 

Hussein Obowma has made it clear by his words and actions as to what “Religion”, “Ideology” “Medievil Cult” he expects Americans to obey and follow.

Americans VOTED for “Change they can believe in” …… now I believe that you can get a FREE koran from CAIR upon request, until you get your copy of same, just remember SATAN Good,God Bad and you too might avoid getting shot to death by one of the President of the United States of America’s ideologues that he DEMANDS that YOU RESPECT….. spsssss I know, I know don’t ask why, just respect it you might live a lot longer if you do……

Or do ya wanna Fight? for not only YOUR life but for that of your Wife,Children,Parents,Brothers, Sisters and Loved ones.

Internment of Muslims, and their facilitators / apologists in the West, combined with Repatriation to an Islamic (cesspool) of their choice is the ONLY answer to the continuation of Judeo /Christian Democracies.

Hussein Obowma’s friends can believe in anything he, and they want to, so long as they are unable, and are prevented from  killing “Americans” (Judeo Christian Western Democracies citizens) who do not.

Islam IS what Islam DOES

Hussein Obama IS what Hussein Obama DOES

The American Commander in Chief,Hussein Obama, bows to the CULT who’s followers are dancing in the streets every time an American is slaughtered by HIS “Religion of Peace” that he Decrees Americans RESPECT. 

A Muslim is in the White House.. God Damn Hussein Obama.

Technorati Tags: Ft. Hood,Hussein Obama,A Muslim is in the White House.. God Damn Hussein Obama.

Muslim KILLER

 

What part of Ralph Peters comments on the Fort Hood Muslim Killer does Hussein Obama and his cabal of US taxpayer funded Muslim apologists not understand?

Whilst the Wives,Husbands,Mothers and Fathers,Brothers and Sisters and Children of the victims, of the latest Islamic Terrorist attack upon civilization,wrestle with their indescribable pain and suffering, make plans to bury their loved ones all the MSM and the Islamic Terrorist apologists on the left can do is rush to be the first with the best excuse for this piece of SHITS murderous behaviour.

As Ralph Peters says in the above interview, where is the coverage of VICTIMS of this Islamist savage’s MASS MURDER Spree?

Hussein Obama has previously decreed that there is no war on terror nor are there any Islamic Terrorists.

Saying it so don’t make it so Hussein, just ask the victims and their families.

 Islam IS what Islam DOES

Call this horror by its name: Islamist terror

By RALPH PETERS
NYPost
November 7, 2009

On Thursday afternoon, a radicalized Muslim US Army officer shouting, "Allahu akbar!" ("God is great!") committed the worst act of terror on American soil since 9/11. And no one wants to call it an act of terror or associate it with Islam.

What cowards we are. Political correctness killed those patriotic Americans at Fort Hood as surely as the Islamist gunman did. And the media treat it like a case of nondenominational shoplifting.

This was a terrorist act. When an extremist plans and executes a murderous plot against our unarmed soldiers to protest our efforts to counter Islamist fanatics, it's an act of terror.

Period.

When the terrorist posts anti-American hate speech on the Web; apparently praises suicide bombers and uses his own name; loudly criticizes US policies; argues (as a psychiatrist, no less) with his military patients over the worth of their sacrifices; refuses, in the name of Islam, to be photographed with female colleagues; lists his nationality as "Palestinian" in a Muslim spouse-matching program and parades around central Texas in a fundamentalist playsuit -- well, it only seems fair to call this terrorist an "Islamist terrorist."

But the president won't. Despite his promise to get to all the facts. Because there's no such thing as "Islamist terrorism" in ObamaWorld.

And the Army won't. Because its senior leaders are so sick with political correctness that pandering to America haters is safer than calling terrorism "terrorism."

And the media won't. Because they have more interest in the shooter than in our troops -- despite their crocodile tears.

Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan planned this terrorist attack and executed it in cold blood. The resulting massacre was the first tragedy. The second was that he wasn't killed on the spot.

Hasan survived. Now the rest of us will have to foot his massive medical bills. Activist lawyers will get involved, claiming "harassment" drove him temporarily insane. There'll be no end of trial delays. At best, taxpayer dollars will fund his prison lifestyle for decades to come, since our politically correct Army leadership wouldn't dare pursue or carry out the death penalty.

Maj. Hasan will be a hero to Islamist terrorists abroad and their sympathizers here. While US Muslim organizations decry his acts publicly, Hasan will be praised privately. And he'll have the last laugh.

But Hasan isn't the sole guilty party. The US Army's unforgivable political correctness is also to blame for the casualties at Fort Hood.

Given the myriad warning signs, it's appalling that no action was taken against a man apparently known to praise suicide bombers and openly damn US policy. But no officer in his

chain of command, either at Walter Reed Army Medical Center or at Fort Hood, had the guts to take meaningful action against a dysfunctional soldier and an incompetent doctor.

Had Hasan been a Lutheran or a Methodist, he would've been gone with the simoom. But officers fear charges of discrimination when faced with misconduct among protected minorities.

Now 12 soldiers and a security guard lie dead. At least 38 people were wounded, 28 of them seriously. If heads don't roll in this maggot's chain of command, the Army will have shamed itself beyond moral redemption.

There's another important issue, too. How could the Army allow an obviously incompetent and dysfunctional psychiatrist to treat our troubled soldiers returning from war? An Islamist wacko is counseled for arguing with veterans who've been assigned to his care? And he's not removed

from duty? What planet does the Army live on?

For the first time since I joined the Army in 1976, I'm ashamed of its dereliction of duty. The chain of command protected a budding terrorist who was waving one red flag after another.

Because it was safer for careers than doing something about him.

Get ready for the apologias. We've already heard from the terrorist's family that "he's a good American." In their world, maybe he is.

But when do we, the American public, knock off the PC nonsense?

A disgruntled Muslim soldier murdered his officers way back in 2003, in Kuwait, on the eve of

Operation Iraqi Freedom. Recently? An American mullah shoots it out with the feds in Detroit.

A Muslim fanatic attacks an Arkansas recruiting station. A Muslim media owner, after playing the peace card, beheads his wife. A Muslim father runs over his daughter because she's becoming too Westernized.

Muslim terrorist wannabes are busted again and again. And we're assured that "Islam's a religion of peace."

I guarantee you that the Obama administration's nonresponse to the Fort Hood attack will mock the memory of our dead.

Ralph Peters' latest novel is "The War After Armageddon."

Technorati Tags: Fort Hood,Islamic Sociopaths Inc.,Ralph Peters,O'Rielly,Religion of Peace,Islamic Terrorism,Vale America's finest.

Australia’s Rupert Murdoch gives Comrade Kevin 07 a reality check “Rudd delusional”

 

Rupert Murdoch speaks out on recovery and opportunity missed

By Terry McCrann
The Daily Telegraph
November 07, 2009

A YEAR ago I spoke to Rupert Murdoch at the very darkest point of the global financial meltdown. What a difference a year makes. Then, the News Corporation chairman and chief executive was gobsmacked at the wealth destruction. Now he apologises for being "bearish" - I'd call it instead cautious and realistic.

He's not taking the US recovery for granted; he recognises only too well the deep structural problems America faces and has added to over the past year; he has some fundamental question marks over President (Barack) Obama and, even more, the US Congress.

While he emphasises the fundamental entrepreneurial strengths of America, and the driving spirit of the people, he thinks all the negative factors will ensure a very, very slow recovery in the world's biggest economy.

"I think the danger of a double dip (back into recession) is unlikely; and there's a case that can be made that it has turned the corner and will recover strongly," he said.

But the Fed has poured money into the banking system - the $US700 billion bailout was wrong in principle, in practice a necessity - and the banks were sitting tight on credit. Cutting it back even to their best customers. Officially the jobless rate was 10 per cent, in reality it was probably more than 15 per cent. There was as yet no sign of a jobs pick-up and the key driver of recovery - capital formation by small business - was not happening, he added.

A critical issue was political leadership.

OBAMA OF THE three choices for President in last year's election, did the US get the right one, I ask? He pauses, then says: "No. I think Hillary (Clinton) would have been a lot tougher.

"I wouldn't have liked everything she did. (John) McCain (the Republican candidate who stood against Obama) would have had policies more to my approval.

"Albeit he would also have been unpredictable," he adds.

Obama has very, very enormous charm and a great way with words. But there's his total inexperience of the real world, the commercial world. And the same goes for the whole White House, Murdoch says.

Further he doesn't listen. And like Rudd he wants to micro-manage everything.

He faces huge geo-political challenges. Take Afghanistan: he doesn't know what he should do. I do, Murdoch adds with emphasis. He should send the extra troops.

The core problem was indecisive leadership. Last month he came out with a speech on education, with which I agreed 100 per cent. And then he concluded with: "I look to Congress to send me a bill. They'll never send him a bill!" Murdoch thunders.

The question still to be answered is whether he was an ideologue.

How many times had you been to the Obama White House, I asked?

Never, he responds. Followed by "I only went once when Bush was there."

RUDD HE'S very intelligent, he's very interesting, Murdoch starts. But then moves quickly to "but he's kidding himself with the G20", the grouping of the top 20 countries which includes Australia and which Rudd has been pushing to replace the G8 - of only the top eight countries which does not include Australia - as the main global negotiating forum.

Obama had no interest in the G20. He even wanted to cut the G8 to the G4 and really to a G2 - just the US and China - to agree to all the big decisions.

Rudd was kidding himself that we could use the G20 to lead the world. Or that we could strike out alone with a cap- and-trade system for reducing greenhouse gas emissions - our ETS or Emissions Trading Scheme.

That we'd lead and the rest would follow. All it would do would be to push up the cost of living in Australia, and the rest of the world would laugh at us.

His efforts to "lead the world" were delusional. But was it hurting Australia? Not yet, Murdoch asks and answers his own question.

THE NATIONAL BROADBAND NETWORK THE Government had to decide whether the national broadband network should be built as a great national asset. To go to every school, to every hospital, to every business, to every home, Murdoch says striking his hand for emphasis at each destination.

But then it had to decide whether to hold it as a public utility or whether to sell it to private enterprise.

If the latter, it could only happen if the Government was prepared to write off half the cost openly upfront.

To spend $40 billion to build it; to be prepared to sell it for $20 billion, so that the investors buying it could have a chance of a return.

In all this would Telstra be the major shareholder in such an NBN? Its biggest shareholder, the Future Fund, would not want it to go there unless it could see an acceptable return.

MURDOCH AND THE MEDIA COULD he be tempted back into free-to-air television in Australia?

He pauses before responding with a yes. But then immediately adds "If I had my choice of buying Telstra out of Foxtel or FTA, I would take the former".

So the future is Foxtel rather than FTA, I respond?

"Absolutely," he comes back, and then immediately details the continual, slow but inexorable drop in the network audience in the US. And he digresses into musing about the future of NBC - one of the major networks, put up for sale by its parent GE.

"In its present condition , it's unsaleable," he says.

And while we couldn't buy a second network, we would be interested in NBC's Universal movie studio. We'd be allowed to own two studios, he says.

Interestingly while he would like to buy Telstra out of its 50 per cent stake in Foxtel, he has no interest in the 25 per cent owned by James Packer's CMH group.

Asked to comment on Packer, he says he has no comment. Then adds, he had made his bed with his decision to became a major global player in gaming. But he'd kept the two media assets - the 25 per cent of Foxtel and the half share of Fox Sports (NewsCorp has the other 50 per cent).

"I'd certainly be interested in Fox Sports, but not another 25 per cent of Foxtel. There'd be no point unless you were going to get the whole thing."

THE LOST CHANCE ASKED about the challenges and opportunities in media going forward, Murdoch comes up with a surprising nomination: the great opportunity missed. The Food Network.

No, it wasn't a simple "MasterChef moment", but a textbook example of building hugely profitable media business, which in classic Murdoch style, he thinks he should have done.

It takes years for a new station/network to get on the cable channels in the US, Murdoch says with the knowledge of exactly his own struggles over two decades. New channels generally ask for 15-20c per customer per month.

"The Food Network went in at 2c and achieved total distribution." That delivered all the food advertisers. With very cheap programming, it's now a $US350 million revenue business that throws off an incredible $US250 million profit! It's a business that's gone from nothing to a value of at least $US3 billion. And all that's still only charging the 2c! Murdoch adds with emphatic undisguised admiration. But they are about to renegotiate that.

Technorati Tags: Rupert Murdoch,Kevin Rudd's Australia 2009,Kevin 07 Rudd,Hussein Obama,ETS,Copenhagen