Monday, July 25, 2005
More insanity at the University of Maryland - Europe
Why does UofM Europe instructor Peyton Glass hate anyone who's not a liberal?
I don't know. Ask him. He works, according to his letter in the European Stars and Stripes, for UofM in England.
Wouldn't you just love to have an open minded, tolerant instructor who generated lively discussion without abusing you because your political views differed?
Most people would. So...if you would, don't enroll in any UofM classes in which Peyton Glass is the instructor.
But, just so you know I'm not making this up, here's his letter in full. Read it carefully, noting how he insults his students' viewpoints.
We have been unbelievably inconsiderate in failing to take into consideration the havoc that having to consider alternative points of view creates in the conservative mind. Accordingly, these changes to the UMUC curriculum will be made:
As an English teacher, I take responsibility for promoting what we liberals smugly refer to as “literature,” with its tendency toward asking questions rather than supplying answers. To
accommodate conservatives, questions will be mostly eliminated. Hamlet’s “To be or not to be, that is the question” will now be taught as “To be. Yep, that’s the answer.” Trashy liberal novels such as “Huckleberry Finn” will be replaced by “Aesop’s Fables” and “The Collected Writings of Bill O’Reilly.”
History. At no time will America be shown to have done anything morally questionable at any place or under any circumstances.
Slavery never happened; or if it did, it was invented by the French.
Geography. Maps will show only the United States and those countries currently supporting us, such as Great Britain and
Guam.
The sciences. As every good conservative knows, the universe was created on April 23, 6004 B.C. at 9:23 a.m.
Central Standard Time by Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and Rush Limbaugh. Everything was perfectly constructed and therefore there is no need for the liberal concept of “evilution.” Other liberal notions to be removed from the classroom will include gravity, the heliocentric solar system (the absurd idea that the Earth goes around the sun — a heresy for which liberal propagandists
Galileo and Copernicus were rightly condemned), and the concept of the “round Earth.”
We hope this clears everything up, and, again, we’re really sorry for confusing everybody.
Peyton Glass
Harrogate, United
Kingdom
Peyton, just so you know, you're not confusing anyone. Left wing bias in academia is a pretty well recognized phenomenon. Part of the landscape. The sad part continues to be the lack of recognition of how your bias affects your teaching environment and also cuts off discussion in class. I'm sure, however, that such a thing never occurs in Peyton's classroom.
I don't know. Ask him. He works, according to his letter in the European Stars and Stripes, for UofM in England.
Wouldn't you just love to have an open minded, tolerant instructor who generated lively discussion without abusing you because your political views differed?
Most people would. So...if you would, don't enroll in any UofM classes in which Peyton Glass is the instructor.
But, just so you know I'm not making this up, here's his letter in full. Read it carefully, noting how he insults his students' viewpoints.
A liberal ‘apologizes’
I — and my other second-rate colleagues
on the faculty of University of Maryland University
College — would like to apologize to the author of “Leftist ideas rule academia” (letter, July 2) for our spreading of liberal doctrine in our classrooms.
We have been unbelievably inconsiderate in failing to take into consideration the havoc that having to consider alternative points of view creates in the conservative mind. Accordingly, these changes to the UMUC curriculum will be made:
As an English teacher, I take responsibility for promoting what we liberals smugly refer to as “literature,” with its tendency toward asking questions rather than supplying answers. To
accommodate conservatives, questions will be mostly eliminated. Hamlet’s “To be or not to be, that is the question” will now be taught as “To be. Yep, that’s the answer.” Trashy liberal novels such as “Huckleberry Finn” will be replaced by “Aesop’s Fables” and “The Collected Writings of Bill O’Reilly.”
History. At no time will America be shown to have done anything morally questionable at any place or under any circumstances.
Slavery never happened; or if it did, it was invented by the French.
Geography. Maps will show only the United States and those countries currently supporting us, such as Great Britain and
Guam.
The sciences. As every good conservative knows, the universe was created on April 23, 6004 B.C. at 9:23 a.m.
Central Standard Time by Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and Rush Limbaugh. Everything was perfectly constructed and therefore there is no need for the liberal concept of “evilution.” Other liberal notions to be removed from the classroom will include gravity, the heliocentric solar system (the absurd idea that the Earth goes around the sun — a heresy for which liberal propagandists
Galileo and Copernicus were rightly condemned), and the concept of the “round Earth.”
We hope this clears everything up, and, again, we’re really sorry for confusing everybody.
Peyton Glass
Harrogate, United
Kingdom
Peyton, just so you know, you're not confusing anyone. Left wing bias in academia is a pretty well recognized phenomenon. Part of the landscape. The sad part continues to be the lack of recognition of how your bias affects your teaching environment and also cuts off discussion in class. I'm sure, however, that such a thing never occurs in Peyton's classroom.
The Empire Strikes Back
Who ever said the Stars and Stripes was boring never read the letters to the editor.
The fiendish editors have massed a number of responses to the left wing gibberish above from Peyton Glass. As you might imagine, a few readers of the paper decided that Mr.(?) Glass went a bit too far in his sarcasm, leading to these delightful letters to the editor on Saturday, 23 July.
A delightful mix of which calls Mr. (?) Peyton exactly what he is: a narrow minded left wing bigot with a poorly defined sense of tolerance that only his left wing academic fellow travelers would appreciate. Again, I've reprinted them in full below.
A conservative ‘apologizes’
Apparently the writer of “A liberal ‘apologizes’” (letter, July 18) knows the political views of every single person who ever did anything productive or counterproductive anywhere in history.
So I, as a conservative, because I am patriotic and believe in strong family values, am responsible and apologize for all negative occurrences and I realize that liberals are the smartest, most well-educated, open-minded, kind-hearted, well-intentioned people since the dawn of human existence.
When the letter writer talks about appreciating “alternative points of view” and in the same article bashes the “conservative mind,” this makes his argument petty and moot. Also, to suggest that universal forces or “liberal notions” (as the letter writer put it) such as gravity have a political affiliation is beyond absurd.
I suggest before he sends another letter about how oppressive the opposing view is, he buy a full-length mirror and stand in front.
Jason Bensley
Riedstadt, Germany
Civility not part of curriculum
In regard to “A liberal ‘apologizes,’” the author’s comments — meant to be tongue-in-cheek, or simply mean-spirited — smack of the same institutional arrogance that led the speaker at the recent graduation in Germany to espouse his particular viewpoint, regardless of his audience (“UMUC graduation speaker stirs up controversy,” article, June 14).
While they can pat themselves on the back for bringing academic “truth” to the assembled, and stand satisfied at how they enlightened the uninformed with their viewpoints, the fact is, there is a time and a place for everything. For those who worked so hard to obtain a degree, having the event culminating their achievement turn from a celebration of their accomplishment into an ego-driven forum for political rants is simply uncalled for.
It’s a shame Western Civ is offered, but civility itself isn’t on the curriculum.
Kevin Lewis
Harrogate, England
Why print the letter?
Please explain to me what the point of printing the letter “A liberal ‘apologizes’” was, other than to inflame and upset conservatives and furthermore portray to people that conservatives are ignorant or stupid.
A newspaper such as Stars and Stripes, which in many cases is the only newspaper a servicemember has access to, should be a source of unbiased news. While opinions are obviously biased, printing a letter such as this serves only to inflame opposing views and can show Stripes as a left-leaning news source.
Out of all the letters Stripes receives every day, it shouldn’t have been too hard to pick out something that isn’t a piece of political trash.
Sgt. Sean Gavett
SHAPE, Belgium
Lack of good judgment
It’s unfortunate to see “A liberal ‘apologizes.’” As a professional educator, the letter writer showed a lack of good judgment by using Stars and Stripes to engage in a battle of philosophy with a student. He should have thought about the possible repercussions of his actions. He also should have thought about the University of Maryland University College’s image before he submitted his letter.
I hope the UMUC board of ethics looks into his actions. Finally, it’s unfortunate that the writer feels he has to demean conservatives for what he thinks they believe.
I have had the pleasure of taking courses through UMUC and have met professors who have engaged in passing off their personal opinions (both liberal and conservative) as part of the curriculum. It’s unfortunate that it happens, but it does. However, when discussions based upon opinion occurred between professor and student, a level of respect for each other’s beliefs was maintained at all times.
The letter writer should have either kept his opinions on a professional level or realized that he should have kept his opinions to himself. He also needs to remember that without the continued revenue coming in from the student body that he is demeaning, he may find himself without a job.
Tech. Sgt. Donald Hoobler
Iraq
The fiendish editors have massed a number of responses to the left wing gibberish above from Peyton Glass. As you might imagine, a few readers of the paper decided that Mr.(?) Glass went a bit too far in his sarcasm, leading to these delightful letters to the editor on Saturday, 23 July.
A delightful mix of which calls Mr. (?) Peyton exactly what he is: a narrow minded left wing bigot with a poorly defined sense of tolerance that only his left wing academic fellow travelers would appreciate. Again, I've reprinted them in full below.
A conservative ‘apologizes’
Apparently the writer of “A liberal ‘apologizes’” (letter, July 18) knows the political views of every single person who ever did anything productive or counterproductive anywhere in history.
So I, as a conservative, because I am patriotic and believe in strong family values, am responsible and apologize for all negative occurrences and I realize that liberals are the smartest, most well-educated, open-minded, kind-hearted, well-intentioned people since the dawn of human existence.
When the letter writer talks about appreciating “alternative points of view” and in the same article bashes the “conservative mind,” this makes his argument petty and moot. Also, to suggest that universal forces or “liberal notions” (as the letter writer put it) such as gravity have a political affiliation is beyond absurd.
I suggest before he sends another letter about how oppressive the opposing view is, he buy a full-length mirror and stand in front.
Jason Bensley
Riedstadt, Germany
Civility not part of curriculum
In regard to “A liberal ‘apologizes,’” the author’s comments — meant to be tongue-in-cheek, or simply mean-spirited — smack of the same institutional arrogance that led the speaker at the recent graduation in Germany to espouse his particular viewpoint, regardless of his audience (“UMUC graduation speaker stirs up controversy,” article, June 14).
While they can pat themselves on the back for bringing academic “truth” to the assembled, and stand satisfied at how they enlightened the uninformed with their viewpoints, the fact is, there is a time and a place for everything. For those who worked so hard to obtain a degree, having the event culminating their achievement turn from a celebration of their accomplishment into an ego-driven forum for political rants is simply uncalled for.
It’s a shame Western Civ is offered, but civility itself isn’t on the curriculum.
Kevin Lewis
Harrogate, England
Why print the letter?
Please explain to me what the point of printing the letter “A liberal ‘apologizes’” was, other than to inflame and upset conservatives and furthermore portray to people that conservatives are ignorant or stupid.
A newspaper such as Stars and Stripes, which in many cases is the only newspaper a servicemember has access to, should be a source of unbiased news. While opinions are obviously biased, printing a letter such as this serves only to inflame opposing views and can show Stripes as a left-leaning news source.
Out of all the letters Stripes receives every day, it shouldn’t have been too hard to pick out something that isn’t a piece of political trash.
Sgt. Sean Gavett
SHAPE, Belgium
Lack of good judgment
It’s unfortunate to see “A liberal ‘apologizes.’” As a professional educator, the letter writer showed a lack of good judgment by using Stars and Stripes to engage in a battle of philosophy with a student. He should have thought about the possible repercussions of his actions. He also should have thought about the University of Maryland University College’s image before he submitted his letter.
I hope the UMUC board of ethics looks into his actions. Finally, it’s unfortunate that the writer feels he has to demean conservatives for what he thinks they believe.
I have had the pleasure of taking courses through UMUC and have met professors who have engaged in passing off their personal opinions (both liberal and conservative) as part of the curriculum. It’s unfortunate that it happens, but it does. However, when discussions based upon opinion occurred between professor and student, a level of respect for each other’s beliefs was maintained at all times.
The letter writer should have either kept his opinions on a professional level or realized that he should have kept his opinions to himself. He also needs to remember that without the continued revenue coming in from the student body that he is demeaning, he may find himself without a job.
Tech. Sgt. Donald Hoobler
Iraq
Saturday, July 23, 2005
Left wing principal wouldn’t allow a picture of the President in classroom
Interesting story in Smoking Gun from New York, where the left wing wife of a NY state assemblyman allegedly told an elementary school teacher to remove a picture of President Bush from the classroom. She also allegedly harassed the young female teacher who has filed suit. The harassment centered on items such as the President's photo and the teacher's work with Republican organizations.
The alleged "principal" culprit in this case is one Joyce Becker-Seddio, the wife of state Assemblyman Frank Seddio, a Brooklyn Democrat.
Can you imagine my principal telling me I could not have a picture of the President in my classroom? I wonder if Ms. Becker-Seddio allows the American flag in the classroom? Pledge of Allegiance?
Note: Red text added as a revision.
The alleged "principal" culprit in this case is one Joyce Becker-Seddio, the wife of state Assemblyman Frank Seddio, a Brooklyn Democrat.
"In her U.S. District Court complaint, a copy of which you'll find below, Caruso contends that she was retaliated against by Becker-Seddio because of her political work, which has included volunteering at last year's GOP convention and membership in the Republican National Committee. Caruso, who taught first and third graders at Birch Lane, also claims that when the principal spotted the Bush portrait late last year--it was hanging among photos of other U.S. presidents--she "became outraged and insisted that the picture be removed."
Yes, can't have a picture of that fascist Republican hanging in the middle of our American, bastion of tolerance, elementary school, can we Ms. Becker-Seddio.
Incidents like this reinforce Favorite WifeÂs concern about my entering the teaching profession. She realizes the profession has more than its fair share of left wing, union loving fanatics (and intolerant ones at that) and knows what a guy like me would do when introduced into that type of mix. Still, it would be fun. Think of the possibilities.Can you imagine my principal telling me I could not have a picture of the President in my classroom? I wonder if Ms. Becker-Seddio allows the American flag in the classroom? Pledge of Allegiance?
Note: Red text added as a revision.
The Germans transferred the anti-American diplomat in NY
Wow, even the German Foreign Ministry must have realized what a public relations debacle this “gentleman” and his wife were for trans-Atlantic relations.
Wonder where he will end up? I vote for North Korea or the Sudan.
Enjoy your new job, anti-Ami jerk.
Wonder where he will end up? I vote for North Korea or the Sudan.
Enjoy your new job, anti-Ami jerk.
I just knew he was a Democrat
A few days ago, I blogged about this.
I know, I know. I'm a fascist just for bringing this entire problem to your attention.
Right Wing News has more.
Keep remembering little nuggets such as this when Democrats complain about questioning their patriotism. We are at war, in a war of ideas, and these guys continue to believe trashing America and the flag has no ramifications.I know, I know. I'm a fascist just for bringing this entire problem to your attention.
The enemy was trying to kill us before Iraq, AND Afghanistan, AND 9/11
I know that’s irrelevant to the left wing anti-war side of the fence, but I do enjoy showing them how off base their rhetoric and hate continues to be.
The Anchoress has pictures. She could have gone even deeper into history, but what she has shown makes the point well enough.
The Anchoress has pictures. She could have gone even deeper into history, but what she has shown makes the point well enough.
Senate Democrats – chutzpah or just a lack of shame
A little of both I believe.
Watching Senator Schumer (D (-), NY) has become a fascinating hobby. His ability to spout left wing ideology is amazing, and his comments about Judge Roberts, the need for documents, and Roberts’ lack of time for a judge, well, are just mind boggling in their idiocy.
The best part about Schumer’s complaint that Roberts has relatively little time as a judge: he lacks the time in office because of the Dems in the Senate.
Read on.
“Mr. Schumer lamented that Judge John Roberts, who was confirmed in 2003 for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, "does not have a long and fulsome record -- he's only had two years as a judge." We agree that his record is anything but "fulsome," which means "offensive and disgusting," as the senator would know if he had looked it up. The senator made it clear that he and other Democrats will demand what will almost certainly amount to the largest disclosure of confidential memoranda in the history of the Senate's judicial-confirmation process. Since Judge Roberts previously served as an associate counsel in the Reagan White House and as deputy solicitor general (1989-93) in the Justice Department of the first Bush administration, the memoranda are nearly limitless.
To paraphrase Saddam Hussein, Senate Democrats will seek to unleash the "mother of all document dumps." The way Mr. Schumer tells it, the situation -- like being an orphan -- is a regrettable fact of life. "If [Judge Roberts] was a judge of 15 or 20 years -- [it would] be a little different," Mr. Schumer explained with a straight face. "You'd have a long record. But we don't." So let the document dump begin.
Why does Judge Roberts have so little experience as a judge? It's because Mr. Schumer and his Democratic colleagues tried to spike Judge Roberts' chances of becoming a judge long before he finally reached the bench. In January 1992, President George H.W. Bush nominated Judge Roberts to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Sen. Joe Biden, a Democrat who then was the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, refused to grant even a hearing. In May 2001, President Bush nominated Judge Roberts to the same court. Despite receiving what the Democrats considered to be the gold-standard endorsement -- a unanimous, well-qualified rating from the American Bar Association -- Mr. Schumer and his fellow Democrats refused to give Judge Roberts a hearing over the next 19 months. A Republican-controlled Senate finally confirmed Judge Roberts in May 2003 when he was nominated a third time.
Like the mercy-seeking orphan, Mr. Schumer would not be in the position he finds himself today if Democrats had not killed Judge Roberts' judicial opportunities in 1992, 2001 and 2002. Just as the murderous orphan deserved no mercy, Mr. Schumer should not expect to go fishing in waters so far over his head.”
The Democrats in the Senate truly have no shame.
Watching Senator Schumer (D (-), NY) has become a fascinating hobby. His ability to spout left wing ideology is amazing, and his comments about Judge Roberts, the need for documents, and Roberts’ lack of time for a judge, well, are just mind boggling in their idiocy.
The best part about Schumer’s complaint that Roberts has relatively little time as a judge: he lacks the time in office because of the Dems in the Senate.
Read on.
“Mr. Schumer lamented that Judge John Roberts, who was confirmed in 2003 for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, "does not have a long and fulsome record -- he's only had two years as a judge." We agree that his record is anything but "fulsome," which means "offensive and disgusting," as the senator would know if he had looked it up. The senator made it clear that he and other Democrats will demand what will almost certainly amount to the largest disclosure of confidential memoranda in the history of the Senate's judicial-confirmation process. Since Judge Roberts previously served as an associate counsel in the Reagan White House and as deputy solicitor general (1989-93) in the Justice Department of the first Bush administration, the memoranda are nearly limitless.
To paraphrase Saddam Hussein, Senate Democrats will seek to unleash the "mother of all document dumps." The way Mr. Schumer tells it, the situation -- like being an orphan -- is a regrettable fact of life. "If [Judge Roberts] was a judge of 15 or 20 years -- [it would] be a little different," Mr. Schumer explained with a straight face. "You'd have a long record. But we don't." So let the document dump begin.
Why does Judge Roberts have so little experience as a judge? It's because Mr. Schumer and his Democratic colleagues tried to spike Judge Roberts' chances of becoming a judge long before he finally reached the bench. In January 1992, President George H.W. Bush nominated Judge Roberts to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Sen. Joe Biden, a Democrat who then was the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, refused to grant even a hearing. In May 2001, President Bush nominated Judge Roberts to the same court. Despite receiving what the Democrats considered to be the gold-standard endorsement -- a unanimous, well-qualified rating from the American Bar Association -- Mr. Schumer and his fellow Democrats refused to give Judge Roberts a hearing over the next 19 months. A Republican-controlled Senate finally confirmed Judge Roberts in May 2003 when he was nominated a third time.
Like the mercy-seeking orphan, Mr. Schumer would not be in the position he finds himself today if Democrats had not killed Judge Roberts' judicial opportunities in 1992, 2001 and 2002. Just as the murderous orphan deserved no mercy, Mr. Schumer should not expect to go fishing in waters so far over his head.”
The Democrats in the Senate truly have no shame.
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Ich bin ein WIERDO!
Some German newspapers have reported that Micheal Jackson may soon be moving to Berlin.
Lucky Berlin.
Apparently Herr Jackson feels more comfortable in Berlin, where he dangled his baby over the balcony a few years ago, then the United States, where as you know, he has been so oppressed the last several years that even Jesse Jackson provided support.
So, Berlin, lock up the younger teenagers, alert the media, and enjoy the circus. Consider it our gift to you after your support in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Lucky Berlin.
Apparently Herr Jackson feels more comfortable in Berlin, where he dangled his baby over the balcony a few years ago, then the United States, where as you know, he has been so oppressed the last several years that even Jesse Jackson provided support.
So, Berlin, lock up the younger teenagers, alert the media, and enjoy the circus. Consider it our gift to you after your support in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
This looks good on paper
To win the GWOT and maintain our security, this probably needs to be done.
“Britain is drawing up a new blacklist to block alleged terrorist sympathizers from entering the country and deport those already here, officials announced Wednesday, detailing expanded efforts to head off violence such as the July 7 bombings.
Officials also said they had reached an agreement to extradite terrorism suspects of Jordanian nationality to that country. Civil libertarians have expressed concern that the deportees could be subjected to torture and other abuses, despite Jordanian pledges of good treatment.
The crackdown is part of a government campaign to root out what it views as fundamental causes of the July 7 attacks, following the disclosure that the four men who appear to have carried out the suicide bombings were young British Muslims who turned into fanatics. At least 56 people, including the bombers, died in the attacks and 700 were wounded.
Britain has for years seen itself as a haven for political refugees, including some considered extremists by other European countries and the United States. But the bombings have led the government to reconsider both its immigration policies and its tradition of freedom of speech.”
Now, the dark side of this type of legal statute.
How long before a left wing administration in Britain, or the U.S., defines terrorism down? After all, in Britain, before 7 July, they seriously contemplated a law which vitually forbids criticism of religious groups, a law advocated by Muslim organizations. Not heard much about that since 7 July, so I need to do some more research on its status.
In the U.S., would a Hillary Clinton administration maintain that anti-abortion groups are advocating terror if a guy like Rudolph (how did he not get the death penalty) belonged to their group? Would they arrest and deport the leadership of conservative think tanks for advocating the removal of left wing leaders in a Clinton administration?
Could a right wing administration (you know, just like the one we have now) define abortion as terrorism and murder and in turn prosecute the pro-abortion groups for advocating murder?
Not being paranoid at all, just thinking out loud. After watching various prosecutors use RICO to prosecute non-gangsters, and the Supreme Court advocate seizure of private property to increase the tax base, I no longer take the impossibility of such left wing antics for granted.
We all know terrorism when we see it. The question is, how the government may later define it down and in turn suppress free speech and individual liberties.
“Britain is drawing up a new blacklist to block alleged terrorist sympathizers from entering the country and deport those already here, officials announced Wednesday, detailing expanded efforts to head off violence such as the July 7 bombings.
Officials also said they had reached an agreement to extradite terrorism suspects of Jordanian nationality to that country. Civil libertarians have expressed concern that the deportees could be subjected to torture and other abuses, despite Jordanian pledges of good treatment.
The crackdown is part of a government campaign to root out what it views as fundamental causes of the July 7 attacks, following the disclosure that the four men who appear to have carried out the suicide bombings were young British Muslims who turned into fanatics. At least 56 people, including the bombers, died in the attacks and 700 were wounded.
Britain has for years seen itself as a haven for political refugees, including some considered extremists by other European countries and the United States. But the bombings have led the government to reconsider both its immigration policies and its tradition of freedom of speech.”
Now, the dark side of this type of legal statute.
How long before a left wing administration in Britain, or the U.S., defines terrorism down? After all, in Britain, before 7 July, they seriously contemplated a law which vitually forbids criticism of religious groups, a law advocated by Muslim organizations. Not heard much about that since 7 July, so I need to do some more research on its status.
In the U.S., would a Hillary Clinton administration maintain that anti-abortion groups are advocating terror if a guy like Rudolph (how did he not get the death penalty) belonged to their group? Would they arrest and deport the leadership of conservative think tanks for advocating the removal of left wing leaders in a Clinton administration?
Could a right wing administration (you know, just like the one we have now) define abortion as terrorism and murder and in turn prosecute the pro-abortion groups for advocating murder?
Not being paranoid at all, just thinking out loud. After watching various prosecutors use RICO to prosecute non-gangsters, and the Supreme Court advocate seizure of private property to increase the tax base, I no longer take the impossibility of such left wing antics for granted.
We all know terrorism when we see it. The question is, how the government may later define it down and in turn suppress free speech and individual liberties.
UTEP – professor currently in Britain – animal rights terrorist?
A days ago I blogged about animal rights extremist groups and an attack on a lab of the University of Iowa.
According to the Telegraph, seems there is an American leader of these groups gathering his forces in Britain. Tony Best, a professor at the University of Texas, El Paso.
Hope Tony Blair and our FBI are listening.
Now, the question is, will the University of Texas at El Paso keep a guy like this on their faculty?
According to the Telegraph, seems there is an American leader of these groups gathering his forces in Britain. Tony Best, a professor at the University of Texas, El Paso.
Hope Tony Blair and our FBI are listening.
Now, the question is, will the University of Texas at El Paso keep a guy like this on their faculty?
The left wing sliming of Roberts has begun
A not so subtle attempt by the WaPo to imply that Judge Roberts would not be impartial to the mean greedy corporate world in which he was once a counsel. And of course, look who his wife works for.
I seem to recall some issues in the not so recent past in which a few Democratic justices on the Court were called on conflicts of interest such as this in which they did not recuse themselves. Somehow, the Post reporters apparently failed to mention that history.
I seem to recall some issues in the not so recent past in which a few Democratic justices on the Court were called on conflicts of interest such as this in which they did not recuse themselves. Somehow, the Post reporters apparently failed to mention that history.
Dionne doesn’t like the President’s “conservative” choice
How many times did Dionne use the word “conservative” in this column about Judge Roberts?
A lot, and no I did not count.
OK, yes I did. Six times.
How many times did he use the word “conservative” as a perjorative? That’s the more important question, as it illustrates Dionne's, and much of the MSM’s, inherent left wing bias against middle of the road America.
Five times he used "conservative" in a negative fashion. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt on the sixth time, but it’s close.
A few choice gems from Dionne’s mean spirit and bigoted column about Judge Roberts and conservatives. This guy is already hysterical, and we've just begun. Imagine what Dionne will be like when President Bush nominates the next Chief Justice. Jeez. My comments are in red.
"Roberts' opponents need to lift the argument to the level of principle. It doesn't matter how nice or smart Roberts may be. What matters is that on a court where so many cases have been decided by 5-to-4 votes, Roberts's convictions and philosophy matter far more than his biography.
Anyone who doubts that Roberts will be a consistent conservative vote on the court should examine the avalanche of endorsements that immediately fell his way from right-of-center groups. Brian Fahling of the American Family Association's Center for Law and Policy called Roberts an excellent choice. The Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, said the nomination of Roberts provided "an unparalleled opportunity to restore the proper role of the Supreme Court." Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice called the nomination "great news."
These gentlemen are not "squishes," to use the popular right-wing word for conservative sellouts. They care passionately about moving the court to the right. If they think Roberts will do that, the rest of us should pay attention"
Yes, hide the women, children, and disabled, because Judge Roberts and the CONSERVATIVE majority on the court are coming for them. Unions too (if we have any left worth their salt).
Dionne implies that Roberts should be feared because of who supports his nomination. Let me restate that: A man is known by his enemies, and in this case, if his enemies are the pro-abortion crowd, People for the American Way and Ralph Neas, and the Kos kids, than Judge Roberts must be a great candidate for the Supreme Court.
But while Roberts could expand Scalia's power, the nominee's background is more similar to Rehnquist's. Like the chief justice, Roberts has been a loyal Republican Party operative. He was reportedly involved in the Bush legal effort in 2000 to block further recounts in Florida. We always knew that the Supreme Court conservatives who helped put this president in office were paving the way for an even more conservative court. Roberts's nomination is the fruit of that effort. Surely he should be questioned closely about one of the most outrageous decisions in the court's history and his role in the Florida fiasco.
A lot, and no I did not count.
OK, yes I did. Six times.
How many times did he use the word “conservative” as a perjorative? That’s the more important question, as it illustrates Dionne's, and much of the MSM’s, inherent left wing bias against middle of the road America.
Five times he used "conservative" in a negative fashion. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt on the sixth time, but it’s close.
A few choice gems from Dionne’s mean spirit and bigoted column about Judge Roberts and conservatives. This guy is already hysterical, and we've just begun. Imagine what Dionne will be like when President Bush nominates the next Chief Justice. Jeez. My comments are in red.
"Roberts' opponents need to lift the argument to the level of principle. It doesn't matter how nice or smart Roberts may be. What matters is that on a court where so many cases have been decided by 5-to-4 votes, Roberts's convictions and philosophy matter far more than his biography.
I love the comment about the "level of principle". This of course would be necessary, I'm just guessing, because the Democrats so infrequently visit that level, preferring to muck around in the slime of left wing extremism?
"The issues at stake are not abstract. They have to do with the government's power to protect the environment, to safeguard civil rights, including the rights of the disabled, and to provide protections for employees and consumers. It's admirable that this son of a steel executive worked some summers in a steel mill. More important is how he would rule on cases involving steelworkers and other working men and women.Anyone who doubts that Roberts will be a consistent conservative vote on the court should examine the avalanche of endorsements that immediately fell his way from right-of-center groups. Brian Fahling of the American Family Association's Center for Law and Policy called Roberts an excellent choice. The Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, said the nomination of Roberts provided "an unparalleled opportunity to restore the proper role of the Supreme Court." Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice called the nomination "great news."
These gentlemen are not "squishes," to use the popular right-wing word for conservative sellouts. They care passionately about moving the court to the right. If they think Roberts will do that, the rest of us should pay attention"
Yes, hide the women, children, and disabled, because Judge Roberts and the CONSERVATIVE majority on the court are coming for them. Unions too (if we have any left worth their salt).
Dionne implies that Roberts should be feared because of who supports his nomination. Let me restate that: A man is known by his enemies, and in this case, if his enemies are the pro-abortion crowd, People for the American Way and Ralph Neas, and the Kos kids, than Judge Roberts must be a great candidate for the Supreme Court.
But while Roberts could expand Scalia's power, the nominee's background is more similar to Rehnquist's. Like the chief justice, Roberts has been a loyal Republican Party operative. He was reportedly involved in the Bush legal effort in 2000 to block further recounts in Florida. We always knew that the Supreme Court conservatives who helped put this president in office were paving the way for an even more conservative court. Roberts's nomination is the fruit of that effort. Surely he should be questioned closely about one of the most outrageous decisions in the court's history and his role in the Florida fiasco.
Unlike of course, the four liberals on the court who twisted logic in multiple directions in order to allow a Gore Presidency. Question away, Mr. Dionne, America is already tired of that discussion. Show just how little ammunition you have against a great nominee by rehashing Al Gore's loss. I still can't believe how badly Gore blew that election. I mean, you're still crying for a guy that could not even win his home state.
There will be no excuse for discovering too late that Roberts is every bit as conservative as his supporters think he is.You are absolutely right. When the hearings have been completed, America will realize that the Supreme Court has a new justice who is smart and capable, and who realizes the role of the American judiciary, unlike the hysterics such as Dionne, Schumer, Leahy, and Teddy.
“There are apologists amongst us”
I wrote this before the latest attacks on London this afternoon.
Norm Geras takes on the left wing apologists for the enemy in this column in the Guardian. To its credit, the Guardian, a bastion of left wing media in Britain, published it.
“The 'We told you so' lot have been bleating on about Iraq ever since the atrocities of 7/7 - it is time to fight back”
The apologists all understand why these people are dead right?
I’ll never understand how the “root cause” group continues to go on about “why they hate us.” Such anguish fails to focus on the strengths of our liberal democracy and the potential it has to improve the lives of our citizens and people in less fortunate parts of the globe.
Such anguish also is cowardly in nature, preferring to figure out how to keep the bully from again noticing and attacking you. Sorry, boys, not in my name do you need to keep apologizing to fascists.
So, my tortured left wing friends, it's our fault these scum want to kill us.
Right.
Norm Geras takes on the left wing apologists for the enemy in this column in the Guardian. To its credit, the Guardian, a bastion of left wing media in Britain, published it.
“The 'We told you so' lot have been bleating on about Iraq ever since the atrocities of 7/7 - it is time to fight back”
The apologists all understand why these people are dead right?
The dead and missing of the 7 July attacks. Fortunately, it seems the scum failed to do much damage today. Incompetent swine.
Well, left wing apologist for the enemys, we all know why the people whose faces we see in the Guardian are dead and missing. They are dead and missing because the terrorists for whom the apologists make excuses killed them. On a bus and in the Tube, in order to demonstrate the power of their miserable little fascist ideology.I’ll never understand how the “root cause” group continues to go on about “why they hate us.” Such anguish fails to focus on the strengths of our liberal democracy and the potential it has to improve the lives of our citizens and people in less fortunate parts of the globe.
Such anguish also is cowardly in nature, preferring to figure out how to keep the bully from again noticing and attacking you. Sorry, boys, not in my name do you need to keep apologizing to fascists.
So, my tortured left wing friends, it's our fault these scum want to kill us.
Right.
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
Was it something I said?
The traffic to this site skyrocketed at about 1320 EST. Most of the hits were from Spanish language blogsites.
I have absolutely no idea what caused the traffic spike, unless it was my post on 19 July about Spanish reaction after the March 2004 terrorist attack.
We will now resume normal programming.
I have absolutely no idea what caused the traffic spike, unless it was my post on 19 July about Spanish reaction after the March 2004 terrorist attack.
We will now resume normal programming.
Red Ken is back on message in London
The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, made some outstanding statements on the day of the London attack.
“Western foreign policy has fuelled the Islamist radicalism behind the bomb attacks which killed more than 50 people in London, the British capital's mayor Ken Livingstone said on Wednesday. Livingstone, who earned the nickname "Red Ken" for his left-wing views, won widespread praise for a defiant response which helped unite London after the bombings. But he has revived his reputation for courting controversy in recent days. Asked on Wednesday what he thought had motivated the four suspected suicide bombers, Livingstone cited Western policy in the Middle East and early American backing for Osama bin Laden. "A lot of young people see the double standards, they see what happens in (U.S. detention camp) Guantanamo Bay, and they just think that there isn't a just foreign policy," he said.
Police say they believe there is a clear link between bin Laden's al Qaeda network and the four British Muslims who blew up three underground trains and a double-decker bus on July 7.
"You've just had 80 years of Western intervention into predominantly Arab lands because of a Western need for oil. We've propped up unsavoury governments, we've overthrown ones that we didn't consider sympathetic," Livingstone said.”
That’s right Ken. We caused these people to want to kill us. Was this before or after they decided to hate human rights, women, gays, and religious tolerance?
Here's what he said then:
"....I wish to speak through you directly, to those who came to London to claim lives, nothing you do, how many of us you kill will stop that flight to our cities where freedom is strong and where people can live in harmony with one another, whatever you do, how many you kill, you will fail."
I see, however, that his left wing roots have again gained control of his brain housing group and that he is, once again, spouting the usual left wing extremist rhetoric, the moral of which is: West bad, war your fault.“Western foreign policy has fuelled the Islamist radicalism behind the bomb attacks which killed more than 50 people in London, the British capital's mayor Ken Livingstone said on Wednesday. Livingstone, who earned the nickname "Red Ken" for his left-wing views, won widespread praise for a defiant response which helped unite London after the bombings. But he has revived his reputation for courting controversy in recent days. Asked on Wednesday what he thought had motivated the four suspected suicide bombers, Livingstone cited Western policy in the Middle East and early American backing for Osama bin Laden. "A lot of young people see the double standards, they see what happens in (U.S. detention camp) Guantanamo Bay, and they just think that there isn't a just foreign policy," he said.
Police say they believe there is a clear link between bin Laden's al Qaeda network and the four British Muslims who blew up three underground trains and a double-decker bus on July 7.
"You've just had 80 years of Western intervention into predominantly Arab lands because of a Western need for oil. We've propped up unsavoury governments, we've overthrown ones that we didn't consider sympathetic," Livingstone said.”
That’s right Ken. We caused these people to want to kill us. Was this before or after they decided to hate human rights, women, gays, and religious tolerance?
Well, I guess we know where Atta got his instincts for mass murder
From his dear old hate spewing, Islamic fascist father in Egypt.
Mohamed el-Amir, whose son Mohamed Atta impressed his father by flying an airplane into the World Trade Center, expressed no sorrow for the recent attacks in London.
Based on this article, the CNN producer must have had a most enjoyable visit with this hateful person, Mr. el-Amir. Wonder if CNN paid this hate-monger for the meeting?
"El-Amir said the attacks in the US and the July 7 attacks in Britain were the beginning of what would be a 50-year religious war, in which there would be many more fighters like his son.
Speaking to a CNN producer in his apartment in the upper-middle-class Cairo suburb of Giza, he declared that terror cells around the world were a "nuclear bomb that has now been activated and is ticking".
Cursing in Arabic, el-Amir also denounced Arab leaders and Muslims who condemned the London attacks as being traitors and non-Muslims.
He passionately vowed that he would do anything within his power to encourage more attacks."
So, since we’ve been under attack by scum such as this since at least 1979 (U.S. Embassy in Iran), that means we are in year 26. Only 24 more to go.
On a more serious note, we all realize this war against Islamic fascism will be a long, drawn out and extended struggle as the West helps this religion find a solid middle ground and purge itself of its fascist minority. Still many battles to be fought, however, to insure the preservation of liberty and human rights and prevent the destruction of western civilization.
Mohamed el-Amir, whose son Mohamed Atta impressed his father by flying an airplane into the World Trade Center, expressed no sorrow for the recent attacks in London.
Based on this article, the CNN producer must have had a most enjoyable visit with this hateful person, Mr. el-Amir. Wonder if CNN paid this hate-monger for the meeting?
"El-Amir said the attacks in the US and the July 7 attacks in Britain were the beginning of what would be a 50-year religious war, in which there would be many more fighters like his son.
Speaking to a CNN producer in his apartment in the upper-middle-class Cairo suburb of Giza, he declared that terror cells around the world were a "nuclear bomb that has now been activated and is ticking".
Cursing in Arabic, el-Amir also denounced Arab leaders and Muslims who condemned the London attacks as being traitors and non-Muslims.
He passionately vowed that he would do anything within his power to encourage more attacks."
So, since we’ve been under attack by scum such as this since at least 1979 (U.S. Embassy in Iran), that means we are in year 26. Only 24 more to go.
On a more serious note, we all realize this war against Islamic fascism will be a long, drawn out and extended struggle as the West helps this religion find a solid middle ground and purge itself of its fascist minority. Still many battles to be fought, however, to insure the preservation of liberty and human rights and prevent the destruction of western civilization.
California Attorney General thinks its ok to abuse the American Flag
Or else why would he allow this type of art in his office?
He also, incidentally, indicates that prison rape remains an acceptable punishment. Wonder if his thoughts and comments about GITMO reflect that type of lawlessness as well?
He also, incidentally, indicates that prison rape remains an acceptable punishment. Wonder if his thoughts and comments about GITMO reflect that type of lawlessness as well?
Why aren't human rights groups protesting against the actions of Microsoft, Cisco, and Yahoo in Red China?
For that matter, why aren't we?
Anne Applebaum of the Washington Post details how these three companies provide technological means for the Red Chinese to suppress democratic debate.
Her comments about legality versus morality address this issue squarely and without hysteria. What these three companies are doing might be legal, but is it ethical for U.S. companies to provide dictatorships with the means to suppress their people?
Seems like that's exactly what MSFT, CSCO, and YHOO are doing.
Seems like this should be an issue for shareholders to address at the next meeting. I'm a bit more disgusted with this behavior than say, executive compensation.
"If this isn't illegal, maybe it should be. After the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989, the United States passed a law prohibiting U.S. firms from selling "crime control and detection" equipment to the Chinese. But in 1989, the definition of police equipment ran to truncheons, handcuffs and riot gear. Has it been updated? We may soon find out: A few days ago, Rep. Dan Burton of the House Foreign Relations Committee wrote a letter to the Commerce Department asking exactly that. In any case, it's time to have this debate again. There could be other solutions -- such as flooding the Chinese Internet with filter-breaking technology.
Beyond legality, of course, there's morality. And here the judgment of history will prove more important than whatever Congress does or does not do today. Sixty years after the end of World War II, IBM is still battling lawsuits from plaintiffs who accuse the company of providing the "enabling technologies" that facilitated the Holocaust. Sixty years from now, will Microsoft, Cisco and Yahoo be doing the same?
The other issue, of course, concerns the defense of America. How much of the technology provided by these companies will be used to fight the American military when the war with Red China occurs in the future?
Why is Google establishing a lab in Red China?
Anne Applebaum of the Washington Post details how these three companies provide technological means for the Red Chinese to suppress democratic debate.
Her comments about legality versus morality address this issue squarely and without hysteria. What these three companies are doing might be legal, but is it ethical for U.S. companies to provide dictatorships with the means to suppress their people?
Seems like that's exactly what MSFT, CSCO, and YHOO are doing.
Seems like this should be an issue for shareholders to address at the next meeting. I'm a bit more disgusted with this behavior than say, executive compensation.
"If this isn't illegal, maybe it should be. After the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989, the United States passed a law prohibiting U.S. firms from selling "crime control and detection" equipment to the Chinese. But in 1989, the definition of police equipment ran to truncheons, handcuffs and riot gear. Has it been updated? We may soon find out: A few days ago, Rep. Dan Burton of the House Foreign Relations Committee wrote a letter to the Commerce Department asking exactly that. In any case, it's time to have this debate again. There could be other solutions -- such as flooding the Chinese Internet with filter-breaking technology.
Beyond legality, of course, there's morality. And here the judgment of history will prove more important than whatever Congress does or does not do today. Sixty years after the end of World War II, IBM is still battling lawsuits from plaintiffs who accuse the company of providing the "enabling technologies" that facilitated the Holocaust. Sixty years from now, will Microsoft, Cisco and Yahoo be doing the same?
The other issue, of course, concerns the defense of America. How much of the technology provided by these companies will be used to fight the American military when the war with Red China occurs in the future?
Why is Google establishing a lab in Red China?
Sooner or later...
...the Supreme Court decision concerning eminent domain will lead to violence.
Some poor guy will be run out of his house by the local government so that private developers (who have contributed handsomely to local politicians) can build on the land to "increase the tax base."
Imagine a man who works his entire life, pays the mortgage off on his house or business, and now sees it threatened by a land grab sanctioned by liberal justices on the Supreme Court.
The man feels powerless in the face of the law and local government as they snatch something he has worked hard to build, only to hand it off to their cronies in the private sector.
Will the left wing see this as understandable (given their logic of understanding terrorists)?
Now, calm down. I'm not advocating violence. I'm just theorizing what will happen in a nation frustrated with local politicians and judges who are beholden to the moneyed classes.
This column in the LA Times shows the dismal track record of public projects stemming from these land and property seizures.
I wonder if the MSM will track the ultimate results of the despicable land grab in CT which was the basis of the recent Supreme Court case.
Some poor guy will be run out of his house by the local government so that private developers (who have contributed handsomely to local politicians) can build on the land to "increase the tax base."
Imagine a man who works his entire life, pays the mortgage off on his house or business, and now sees it threatened by a land grab sanctioned by liberal justices on the Supreme Court.
The man feels powerless in the face of the law and local government as they snatch something he has worked hard to build, only to hand it off to their cronies in the private sector.
Will the left wing see this as understandable (given their logic of understanding terrorists)?
Now, calm down. I'm not advocating violence. I'm just theorizing what will happen in a nation frustrated with local politicians and judges who are beholden to the moneyed classes.
This column in the LA Times shows the dismal track record of public projects stemming from these land and property seizures.
I wonder if the MSM will track the ultimate results of the despicable land grab in CT which was the basis of the recent Supreme Court case.
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Mark Steyn on "Yellowcake Joe Wilson"
Mark Steyn. Mandatory reading anytime he posts or authors an article.
As I wrote in this space a year ago, an ambassador, in Sir Henry Wootton's famous dictum, is a good man sent abroad to lie for his country; this ambassador came home to lie to his. What we have here is, in effect, the old standby plot of lame Hollywood conspiracy thrillers: rogue elements within the CIA attempting to destabilize the elected government. If the left's view of the world is now so insanely upside-down that that's the side they want to be on, good for them. But ''leaking'' the name of Wilson's wife and promoter within the CIA didn't ''endanger her life'' or ''compromise her mission.'' Au contraire, exposing the nature of this fraudulent, compromised mission might conceivably prevent the American people having their lives endangered.”
He's even less impressed with Joe Wilson than I.
Steyn thinks the CIA leaked info to influence the 2004 election as indicated in my favorite part of this article:
"As I wrote in this space a year ago, an ambassador, in Sir Henry Wootton's famous dictum, is a good man sent abroad to lie for his country; this ambassador came home to lie to his. What we have here is, in effect, the old standby plot of lame Hollywood conspiracy thrillers: rogue elements within the CIA attempting to destabilize the elected government."
Read on.
"Karl Rove? Please. I couldn't care less. This week finds me thousands of miles from the Beltway in what I believe the ABC World News Tonight map designates as the Rest Of The Planet, an obscure beat the media can't seem to spare a correspondent for. But even if I was with the rest of the navel-gazers inside the Beltway I wouldn't be interested in who ''leaked'' the name of CIA employee Valerie Plame to the press. As her weirdly self-obsesssed husband Joseph C. Wilson IV conceded on CNN the other day, she wasn't a ''clandestine officer'' and, indeed, hadn't been one for six years. So one can only ''leak'' her name in the sense that one can ''leak'' the name of the checkout clerk at Home Depot.”
In other words, Plame wasn’t covert last summer, and Wilson knew it.
“This controversy began, you'll recall, because Wilson objected to a line in the president's State of the Union speech that British intelligence had discovered that Iraq had been trying to acquire ''yellowcake'' -- i.e., weaponized uranium -- from Africa. This assertion made Bush, in Wilson's incisive analysis, a ''liar'' and Cheney a ''lying sonofabitch.''
In fact, the only lying sonafabitch turned out to be Yellowcake Joe. Just about everybody on the face of the earth except Wilson, the White House press corps and the moveon.org crowd accepts that Saddam was indeed trying to acquire uranium from Africa. Don't take my word for it; it's the conclusion of the Senate intelligence report, Lord Butler's report in the United Kingdom, MI6, French intelligence, other European services -- and, come to that, the original CIA report based on Joe Wilson's own briefing to them. Why Yellowcake Joe then wrote an article for the New York Times misrepresenting what he'd been told by senior figures from Major Wanke's regime in Niger is known only to him.
As I wrote in this space a year ago, an ambassador, in Sir Henry Wootton's famous dictum, is a good man sent abroad to lie for his country; this ambassador came home to lie to his. What we have here is, in effect, the old standby plot of lame Hollywood conspiracy thrillers: rogue elements within the CIA attempting to destabilize the elected government. If the left's view of the world is now so insanely upside-down that that's the side they want to be on, good for them. But ''leaking'' the name of Wilson's wife and promoter within the CIA didn't ''endanger her life'' or ''compromise her mission.'' Au contraire, exposing the nature of this fraudulent, compromised mission might conceivably prevent the American people having their lives endangered.”
A possible nightmare for the CIA and the Democrats
Yet another scenario on what the special prosecutor in the Wilson/Plfame case might be looking for in addition to the source of the alleged exposure of a CIA operative. Jack Kelly theorizes that perhaps the prosecutor is looking to see if someone in the CIA leaked classified info to order to influence the 2004 election.
"Why is special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald pursuing so zealously the outing of CIA officer Valerie Plame, since it is all but impossible to prove that the leaker or leakers committed a crime?
The Intelligence Identities Protection Act requires that the leaker have learned the identity of a "covert agent" from authorized sources. And it requires that the leak be deliberate.
The law defines a "covert agent" as someone working undercover overseas, or who has done so in the last five years. Plame had operated under non-official cover, but was outed by CIA traitor Aldrich Ames, and has been manning a desk at CIA headquarters since 1997."
So, if Plame had been “outed” already by a traitor in 1997, how could she have been considered covert by the summer of 2004?
"Liberals want Rove's scalp. But the revelation Friday (if true) that Rove learned of Plame's occupation from a journalist makes it most unlikely that he could prosecuted successfully under the Identities Act.
Maybe Rove -- or someone else -- lied to the grand jury. Or maybe Fitzgerald is investigating a different crime.
What if someone in the CIA was leaking classified information to influence the 2004 election? Uncovering a crime like that would be worthy of Inspector Javert's doggedness.
I suspect the biggest shoe in this case has yet to drop, and liberal journalists won't be happy when it does."
A CIA leak in order to influence the 2004 election. Wow. I thought the CIA was supposed to do that in other countries? If true, this would prompt a massive purge of the CIA and cement the Dems status as a party not to be trusted with national security. Neither of these outcomes benefits America.
The left wing MSM, as indicated by their contemptuous behavior the other day in the press room, want nothing less than Rove's head, and maybe that of the President. The recent Watergate stories have made them nostalgic, and now some of them want to be the next Woodward and Bernstien.
"Why is special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald pursuing so zealously the outing of CIA officer Valerie Plame, since it is all but impossible to prove that the leaker or leakers committed a crime?
The Intelligence Identities Protection Act requires that the leaker have learned the identity of a "covert agent" from authorized sources. And it requires that the leak be deliberate.
The law defines a "covert agent" as someone working undercover overseas, or who has done so in the last five years. Plame had operated under non-official cover, but was outed by CIA traitor Aldrich Ames, and has been manning a desk at CIA headquarters since 1997."
So, if Plame had been “outed” already by a traitor in 1997, how could she have been considered covert by the summer of 2004?
"Liberals want Rove's scalp. But the revelation Friday (if true) that Rove learned of Plame's occupation from a journalist makes it most unlikely that he could prosecuted successfully under the Identities Act.
Maybe Rove -- or someone else -- lied to the grand jury. Or maybe Fitzgerald is investigating a different crime.
What if someone in the CIA was leaking classified information to influence the 2004 election? Uncovering a crime like that would be worthy of Inspector Javert's doggedness.
I suspect the biggest shoe in this case has yet to drop, and liberal journalists won't be happy when it does."
A CIA leak in order to influence the 2004 election. Wow. I thought the CIA was supposed to do that in other countries? If true, this would prompt a massive purge of the CIA and cement the Dems status as a party not to be trusted with national security. Neither of these outcomes benefits America.
The left wing MSM, as indicated by their contemptuous behavior the other day in the press room, want nothing less than Rove's head, and maybe that of the President. The recent Watergate stories have made them nostalgic, and now some of them want to be the next Woodward and Bernstien.
What’s wrong with America’s legal system, chapter 32, 444
This young scholar, Sione Havili, representative of the greatest young men ever to play the game (NOT!), has decided that the University of Utah violated his rights. How? Read below.
"A football player who was convicted of felony arson has sued Utah's athletic director and former president, claiming he was not allowed to play for the Utes because of his criminal record. Sione Havili filed a lawsuit Friday in 3rd District Court against athletic director Chris Hill and former school president Bernie Machen, accusing them of violating his civil rights by not allowing him to walk on to the football team after he served his jail sentence. "
Sione Havili. Convicted Arsonist. Victim. Only in America.
"A football player who was convicted of felony arson has sued Utah's athletic director and former president, claiming he was not allowed to play for the Utes because of his criminal record. Sione Havili filed a lawsuit Friday in 3rd District Court against athletic director Chris Hill and former school president Bernie Machen, accusing them of violating his civil rights by not allowing him to walk on to the football team after he served his jail sentence. "
Sione Havili. Convicted Arsonist. Victim. Only in America.
The hate crimes of animal activists
A chilling account of the extremism of animal rights activists. The author of this column, Mark S. Blumberg, a scientist at the University of Iowa whose lab was destroyed, illustrates the extreme nature of these organizations. Don't their actions seem, um, criminal? Surprisingly (or not so when you consider the party) Senator Lautenberg of New Jersey seems to think this type of action acceptable.
Another look at home grown terrorist groups in America.
Another look at home grown terrorist groups in America.
Left wing suppression of speech in Washington state
Of course, the left wing Seattle Post-Intelligencer fully supports this Democratic political work.
Ryan Sager writes about this issue in TCS.
The situation is this:
In April, Washington's Legislature passed a 9.5-cent-a-gallon gas-tax hike -- which would give the state the nation's highest gasoline tax. Public outcry was followed by the formation of a grass-roots group, No New Gas Tax, intent on overturning the new levy via an initiative -- Initiative 912.
Two talk-radio hosts, Kirby Wilbur and John Carlson of Seattle's KVI-AM (a Fox News affiliate), embraced the signature-gathering drive to put I-912 on the ballot. And that's when the trouble started.
The radio hosts were a bit too effective at getting the word out about the anti-gas tax initiative, so a county prosecutor with ties to the initiative's opponents decided to try to shut them up by making clever use of the state's campaign-finance-regulation machinery. San Juan County Prosecutor Randall Gaylord sued No New Gas Tax, alleging that the group had failed to list KVI-AM's commentaries as contributions to its campaign….
Mr. Gaylord, the prosecutor who apparently doesn’t have any real crimes to investigate, argued that “Advocacy on Wilbur and Carlson's shows…was really just an "in kind" contribution -- no different than a check written to a political committee. And, amazingly enough, a judge agreed with him. Thurston County Superior Court Judge Chris Wickham argued in his opinion that he was merely requiring "disclosure" of the contribution. But when it comes to campaign-finance regulation, disclosure is virtually always a precursor to restrictions."
If you think this is an isolated special case think again. Left wing judges and activists throughout the country are watching this for fallout, just as they are the recent Supreme Court decision on eminent domain. If this crazy judgement in Washington stands, look for more attempts to suppress political commentary on the radio and the print media.
One would think that left wing media like the New York Times and the Seattle P-I would be appalled by this. Hmmmh.
Maybe Sager is correct when he states, “The speech regulators, almost always on the political left, are happy to let you talk all day -- so long as what you say doesn't actually have any effect on anything. But if what you say starts driving fundraising or getting people out of their chairs and on the street collecting signatures, then you may well be an enemy of the state.”
I would love to see some investigative reporters start digging on both the judge and the prosecutor in this case. Follow their money so to speak.
Ryan Sager writes about this issue in TCS.
The situation is this:
In April, Washington's Legislature passed a 9.5-cent-a-gallon gas-tax hike -- which would give the state the nation's highest gasoline tax. Public outcry was followed by the formation of a grass-roots group, No New Gas Tax, intent on overturning the new levy via an initiative -- Initiative 912.
Two talk-radio hosts, Kirby Wilbur and John Carlson of Seattle's KVI-AM (a Fox News affiliate), embraced the signature-gathering drive to put I-912 on the ballot. And that's when the trouble started.
The radio hosts were a bit too effective at getting the word out about the anti-gas tax initiative, so a county prosecutor with ties to the initiative's opponents decided to try to shut them up by making clever use of the state's campaign-finance-regulation machinery. San Juan County Prosecutor Randall Gaylord sued No New Gas Tax, alleging that the group had failed to list KVI-AM's commentaries as contributions to its campaign….
Mr. Gaylord, the prosecutor who apparently doesn’t have any real crimes to investigate, argued that “Advocacy on Wilbur and Carlson's shows…was really just an "in kind" contribution -- no different than a check written to a political committee. And, amazingly enough, a judge agreed with him. Thurston County Superior Court Judge Chris Wickham argued in his opinion that he was merely requiring "disclosure" of the contribution. But when it comes to campaign-finance regulation, disclosure is virtually always a precursor to restrictions."
If you think this is an isolated special case think again. Left wing judges and activists throughout the country are watching this for fallout, just as they are the recent Supreme Court decision on eminent domain. If this crazy judgement in Washington stands, look for more attempts to suppress political commentary on the radio and the print media.
One would think that left wing media like the New York Times and the Seattle P-I would be appalled by this. Hmmmh.
Maybe Sager is correct when he states, “The speech regulators, almost always on the political left, are happy to let you talk all day -- so long as what you say doesn't actually have any effect on anything. But if what you say starts driving fundraising or getting people out of their chairs and on the street collecting signatures, then you may well be an enemy of the state.”
I would love to see some investigative reporters start digging on both the judge and the prosecutor in this case. Follow their money so to speak.
Ebonics – San Bernardino School Districts – left wing insanity
The San Bernardino school districts has decided to include Ebonics in some of the schools.
Another liberal attempt to maintain the “victim” status of their minority voters?
Day by Day illustrates one possible use of Ebonics which I overlooked. Sort of a Navajo Code Talkers scenario right?
Sure, teach your students ebonics, then, rationalize their total inability to function in the world outside the San Bernardino area. I highlighted the social science professor's comments in red. Why are social science professors always in the middle of liberal attempts to dumb down education?
"Incorporating Ebonics into a new school policy that targets black students, the lowest-achieving group in the San Bernardino City Unified School District, may provide students a more well-rounded curriculum, said a local sociologist.
The goal of the district's policy is to improve black students' academic performance by keeping them interested in school. Compared with other racial groups in the district, black students go to college the least and have the most dropouts and suspensions.
Blacks make up the second largest racial group in the district, trailing Latinos.
A pilot of the policy, known as the Students Accumulating New Knowledge Optimizing Future Accomplishment Initiative, has been implemented at two city schools.
Mary Texeira, a sociology professor at Cal State San Bernardino, commended the San Bernardino Board of Education for approving the policy in June.
Texeira suggested that including Ebonics in the program would be beneficial for students. Ebonics, a dialect of American English that is spoken by many blacks throughout the country, was recognized as a separate language in 1996 by the Oakland school board.
"Ebonics is a different language, it's not slang as many believe,' Texeira said. "For many of these students Ebonics is their language, and it should be considered a foreign language. These students should be taught like other students who speak a foreign language.'
Texeira said research has shown that students learn better when they fully comprehend the language they are being taught in.
"There are African Americans who do not agree with me. They say that (black students) are lazy and that they need to learn to talk,' Texeira said.
Len Cooper, who is coordinating the pilot program at the two city schools, said San Bernardino district officials do not plan to incorporate Ebonics into the program.
"Because Ebonics can have a negative stigma, we're not focusing on that,' Cooper said. "We are affirming and recognizing Ebonics through supplemental reading books (for students).'"
Mr. Cooper, may I suggest you may not be “focusing on that” because you realize the sheer long term destructiveness of teaching ebonics to already disadvantaged children. Then again, maybe you just don't like the well deserved negative publicity.
I really have no idea what this district is like, or what the cities and towns within this district are like, but would you, as a businessman or woman, EVER contemplate locating a business in this district knowing what they are teaching their students?
Who is to blame for educators and civic leaders who advocate such idiocy? Such programs pin students in a cycle of failure. Should not schools and educators work to raise the standards? How does teaching Ebonics raise the standards?
What’s next – Math based on “voodoo economics?”
How gullible does Al Gore think people are?
Apparently, very gullible. After all, over 50% of American voters voted for him in 2000, right?
In an AP news article titled, "Gore: New TV Channel Won't Be Partisan," Al Gore discussed his new channel called Current.
"The 2004 Democratic candidate for president was asked if he was concerned the 24-hour news and information channel, called Current, would be perceived as having a political slant. It's scheduled to launch Aug. 1. "I think the reality of the network will speak for itself. It's not intended to be partisan in any way," said Gore, Current's co-founder (with businessman Joel Hyatt) and chairman of the board."
Right Al. I look forward to your non-partisan, evenly balanced blend of news and information.
In an AP news article titled, "Gore: New TV Channel Won't Be Partisan," Al Gore discussed his new channel called Current.
"The 2004 Democratic candidate for president was asked if he was concerned the 24-hour news and information channel, called Current, would be perceived as having a political slant. It's scheduled to launch Aug. 1. "I think the reality of the network will speak for itself. It's not intended to be partisan in any way," said Gore, Current's co-founder (with businessman Joel Hyatt) and chairman of the board."
Right Al. I look forward to your non-partisan, evenly balanced blend of news and information.
The cowards in Spain did exactly what the enemy wanted them to do
Vote Socialist. The Spanish people got scared after the March 11, 2004 attacks and voted for the Socialist candidate, EXACTLY what the terrorists hoped to achieve.
From Barcepundit:
"AS IF THERE WAS still any doubt at this point, the Spanish press reports today on a document found in the computer of one of the key perpetrators of the March 11 terrorist attacks in Madrid (link in Spanish, my translation):
A document found in the personal computer of Jamal Ahmidan, "The Chinese", undersigned by the Abu Hafs al Masri brigades and dated March 15, 2004 declares that the March 11 perpetrators intented to remove [Aznar's] Popular Party from the government.The document was recently found by police, according to the Cope radio network who has seen it. It says: "those who were suprised for our quick claim of responsibility in the battle of Madrid, let them know that there were other circumstances. In the case of Madrid, the time factor was very important in order to put an end to the government of Aznar the ignoble.
ABC (the Madrid newspaper, not the American or Australian TV network) reports further (also in Spanish) and reminds a very telling detail: when he was brought before a judge after the first 72 hours in isolation (permitted by Spanish anti-terror legislation), the first thing asked by Jamal Zougam, another of the key suspects of March 11, was: "Who won the election?"."
My questions:
1) What’s that say about the legitimacy of the current Spanish government?
2) What’s that say about the courage of the Spanish people who voted Socialist?
From Barcepundit:
"AS IF THERE WAS still any doubt at this point, the Spanish press reports today on a document found in the computer of one of the key perpetrators of the March 11 terrorist attacks in Madrid (link in Spanish, my translation):
A document found in the personal computer of Jamal Ahmidan, "The Chinese", undersigned by the Abu Hafs al Masri brigades and dated March 15, 2004 declares that the March 11 perpetrators intented to remove [Aznar's] Popular Party from the government.The document was recently found by police, according to the Cope radio network who has seen it. It says: "those who were suprised for our quick claim of responsibility in the battle of Madrid, let them know that there were other circumstances. In the case of Madrid, the time factor was very important in order to put an end to the government of Aznar the ignoble.
ABC (the Madrid newspaper, not the American or Australian TV network) reports further (also in Spanish) and reminds a very telling detail: when he was brought before a judge after the first 72 hours in isolation (permitted by Spanish anti-terror legislation), the first thing asked by Jamal Zougam, another of the key suspects of March 11, was: "Who won the election?"."
My questions:
1) What’s that say about the legitimacy of the current Spanish government?
2) What’s that say about the courage of the Spanish people who voted Socialist?
Sunday, July 17, 2005
Did Joseph Wilson lie about the Niger issue?
If so, was the leaker of his wife’s status justified?
I'm continuing to track this entire issue via various blogs on both sides of the aisle, but I'm not very sure about any of this. I do, however, think Wilson is a dirtbag and is involved in a partisan attempt by the Democrats to discredit any Bush Administration attempts to rationalize the Iraq campaign based on WMD.
The issue of his wife's status is, I believe, directly linked to his behavior, and it's unfortunate how the MSM gives him a pass on his actions relating to Niger and his partisan work with the Democrats.
If she was indeed a covert agent involved in CIA operations at the time of the discussions between whoever is involved, nothing her husband did would rationalize her exposure. In wartime, or anytime, exposing our covert assets should be a criminal offense.
But here, doesn't that depend on what the definition of "is" is?
Having said that, didn’t a lot of folks in Washington know about Pflames’ status as an agent? If so, how could she be considered "covert?" How could she have been “outed" if she was not covert?
I think we've passed the stage where rational decisions will be made in this case, criminal or otherwise. The politics and hatred of Bush and Rove make that abundantly clear.
This entry from the Volokh Conspiracy provides a good rundown on Wilson and Niger, his truthfulness, his wife's "covert" status, and the MSM treatment of Wilson.
Saturday, July 16, 2005
A tribute to an American killed in London on 7 July
The lone American known to have been killed in London on 7 July has been identified as Minh Matsushita.
The WaPo has a nice story on his interesting life. When you read it, think also of the sense of scale and of the inequity of such an interesting and dynamic person being killed by the one-dimensional fanatic scum suicide bombers, who did this based on some twisted belief in religious fascism.
The enemy hates people like Minh Matsushita. Unlike our enemies, we have lives, we life, and we are not afraid of new ideas. Mr. Matsushita is the antithesis of the scum who killed him, and he is representative of the values we cherish.
We need to win this war.
The WaPo has a nice story on his interesting life. When you read it, think also of the sense of scale and of the inequity of such an interesting and dynamic person being killed by the one-dimensional fanatic scum suicide bombers, who did this based on some twisted belief in religious fascism.
The enemy hates people like Minh Matsushita. Unlike our enemies, we have lives, we life, and we are not afraid of new ideas. Mr. Matsushita is the antithesis of the scum who killed him, and he is representative of the values we cherish.
We need to win this war.
One of the murderers in London
Hasib Hussain. Murderer and Terrorist. No matter what the BBC thinks, that's what this scum turned out to be after living in Britain.
This is what he looked like on the way to his target.
According to Yahoo, "This image taken from closed circuit television at Luton train station on July 7, 2005 released by London's Metropolitan Police Thursday July 14, 2005 shows Hasib Hussain, whom police have identified as the suspected suicide bomber who blew up a double-decker bus in London on July 7."
I’m sure the ACLU will lobby to help the “Arabic Assassin”
This gentleman used to be an airport screener with TSA. Lovely. He was fired on 7 July after his leadership was informed about his other job. He's a rapper known as the Arabic Assassin.
“When Bassam Khalaf raps, he's the Arabic Assassin. His unreleased CD, "Terror Alert," includes rhymes about flying a plane into a building and descriptions of himself as a "crazy, suicidal Arabic ... equipped with bombs."
Until last week, Khalaf also worked as a baggage screener at George Bush Intercontinental Airport.
"I've been screening your bags for the past six months, and you don't even know it," said Khalaf, who also said Thursday that he is not really a terrorist and that his rhymes are exaggerations meant to gain publicity.
Andrea McCauley, a spokeswoman for the regional Transportation Security Administration office in Dallas, said the agency checks criminal records before hiring screeners, but it does not investigate what people do in their spare time.
"We have eyes and ears in the workplace," McCauley said. "Once we discovered these Web sites, we fired him."
Well, that’s a relief. How many more like this guy are out there? How many people with a grudge against Israel who could be used to allow terrorists to infiltrate our security currently work for our government? I think it's good news that someone notified the government and it took action to remove Mr. Khalaf from government service. However, I believe we might just as likely been terrified of violating some EEO directive and that the same manager would have been hesitant to do so.
This case probably seemed pretty straight forward to the managers involved, so they felt comfortable removing Khalaf. I wager, however, that there exist other personnel situations of a similar vein that managers do not act on because of their concern with running afoul of EEO regulations and perceptions.
I have no evidence of this. I'm just theorizing based on my experience working with civilian and military personnel policies and procedures.
“Khalaf, 21, was hired on Jan. 16 and fired July 7, according to a TSA termination letter that cited his "authorship of songs which applaud the efforts of the terrorists on September 11th, encourage and warn of future acts of terrorism by you, discuss at length and in grave and alarming detail various criminal acts you intend to commit, state your belief that the U.S. government should be overthrown, and finally warn that others will die on September 11, 2005."
Khalaf, who was born in Houston and is of Palestinian descent, said working as a baggage screener was the best paying job he's ever had. He said he hoped to use any extra money he earned to produce his CD.”
“When Bassam Khalaf raps, he's the Arabic Assassin. His unreleased CD, "Terror Alert," includes rhymes about flying a plane into a building and descriptions of himself as a "crazy, suicidal Arabic ... equipped with bombs."
Until last week, Khalaf also worked as a baggage screener at George Bush Intercontinental Airport.
"I've been screening your bags for the past six months, and you don't even know it," said Khalaf, who also said Thursday that he is not really a terrorist and that his rhymes are exaggerations meant to gain publicity.
Andrea McCauley, a spokeswoman for the regional Transportation Security Administration office in Dallas, said the agency checks criminal records before hiring screeners, but it does not investigate what people do in their spare time.
"We have eyes and ears in the workplace," McCauley said. "Once we discovered these Web sites, we fired him."
Well, that’s a relief. How many more like this guy are out there? How many people with a grudge against Israel who could be used to allow terrorists to infiltrate our security currently work for our government? I think it's good news that someone notified the government and it took action to remove Mr. Khalaf from government service. However, I believe we might just as likely been terrified of violating some EEO directive and that the same manager would have been hesitant to do so.
This case probably seemed pretty straight forward to the managers involved, so they felt comfortable removing Khalaf. I wager, however, that there exist other personnel situations of a similar vein that managers do not act on because of their concern with running afoul of EEO regulations and perceptions.
I have no evidence of this. I'm just theorizing based on my experience working with civilian and military personnel policies and procedures.
“Khalaf, 21, was hired on Jan. 16 and fired July 7, according to a TSA termination letter that cited his "authorship of songs which applaud the efforts of the terrorists on September 11th, encourage and warn of future acts of terrorism by you, discuss at length and in grave and alarming detail various criminal acts you intend to commit, state your belief that the U.S. government should be overthrown, and finally warn that others will die on September 11, 2005."
Khalaf, who was born in Houston and is of Palestinian descent, said working as a baggage screener was the best paying job he's ever had. He said he hoped to use any extra money he earned to produce his CD.”
Thursday, July 14, 2005
Saudi rich guys are funding our enemies?
Wow, this is shocking? How long has this been going on?
"WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US government has suggested wealthy Saudi individuals remain "a significant source" of funds for Islamic terrorists around the world, despite widely-publicized efforts by the desert kingdom to shut down these channels.
The statement by Treasury Undersecretary Stuart Levey before the US Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, contrasted with earlier upbeat assessments by US officials that Saudi Arabia was making good progress in stemming the flow of private money to terrorist groups.
Levey said challenges posed by terrorist financing from within Saudi Arabia were "among the most daunting" his agency had to face as it tries to persuade Islamic nations to strengthen controls over their banks and charitable organizations.
"Wealthy Saudi financiers and charities have funded terrorist organizations and causes that support terrorism and the ideology that fuels the terrorists' agenda", Levey told lawmakers Wednesday.
"Even today, we believe that Saudi donors may still be a significant source of terrorist financing, including for the insurgency in
Iraq," he added.
US officials expressed particular concern about three Saudi-run charities that operate around the world: the International Islamic Relief Organization, the World Association of Muslim Youth and the Muslim World League.
I wonder if Americans receive a tax deduction if they donate to the American chapter of these charities. Anyone know?
Yes, I was being a bit sarcastic above.
The enemies of our nation and our way of life are being funded by oil money from rich Saudis. Maybe President Bush and Vice President Cheney, along with some of the Bush 41 crowd, need to have a candid conversation with the Saudi leadership.
Freezing assets? Special Ops raids? C'mon, let's be creative. One of our "allies" is a major source of funds for the enemy. Shouldn't we be doing something about this?
"WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US government has suggested wealthy Saudi individuals remain "a significant source" of funds for Islamic terrorists around the world, despite widely-publicized efforts by the desert kingdom to shut down these channels.
The statement by Treasury Undersecretary Stuart Levey before the US Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, contrasted with earlier upbeat assessments by US officials that Saudi Arabia was making good progress in stemming the flow of private money to terrorist groups.
Levey said challenges posed by terrorist financing from within Saudi Arabia were "among the most daunting" his agency had to face as it tries to persuade Islamic nations to strengthen controls over their banks and charitable organizations.
"Wealthy Saudi financiers and charities have funded terrorist organizations and causes that support terrorism and the ideology that fuels the terrorists' agenda", Levey told lawmakers Wednesday.
"Even today, we believe that Saudi donors may still be a significant source of terrorist financing, including for the insurgency in
Iraq," he added.
US officials expressed particular concern about three Saudi-run charities that operate around the world: the International Islamic Relief Organization, the World Association of Muslim Youth and the Muslim World League.
I wonder if Americans receive a tax deduction if they donate to the American chapter of these charities. Anyone know?
Yes, I was being a bit sarcastic above.
The enemies of our nation and our way of life are being funded by oil money from rich Saudis. Maybe President Bush and Vice President Cheney, along with some of the Bush 41 crowd, need to have a candid conversation with the Saudi leadership.
Freezing assets? Special Ops raids? C'mon, let's be creative. One of our "allies" is a major source of funds for the enemy. Shouldn't we be doing something about this?
Happy Bastille Day
From Wikipedia on the origins and meaning of Bastille Day. A lovely quote from Margaret Thatcher at the end of the post.
"Bastille Day is the French national holiday, celebrated on 14 July each year. It is called Fête Nationale (National Holiday) in France. It commemorates the 1790 Fête de la Fédération, held on the first anniversary of the storming of the Bastille on 14 July 1789; the Fête de la Fédération was seen as a symbol of the uprising of the modern French "nation", and of the reconciliation of all the French inside the constitutional monarchy which preceded the First Republic, during the French Revolution.
Margaret Thatcher once said of the French "who can trust a people who celebrate, as their national event, a jailbreak"."
And, who can argue with Margaret Thatcher?
"Bastille Day is the French national holiday, celebrated on 14 July each year. It is called Fête Nationale (National Holiday) in France. It commemorates the 1790 Fête de la Fédération, held on the first anniversary of the storming of the Bastille on 14 July 1789; the Fête de la Fédération was seen as a symbol of the uprising of the modern French "nation", and of the reconciliation of all the French inside the constitutional monarchy which preceded the First Republic, during the French Revolution.
Margaret Thatcher once said of the French "who can trust a people who celebrate, as their national event, a jailbreak"."
And, who can argue with Margaret Thatcher?
Can we sue Frenchmen for having no sense of humor?
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
The stakes for the Supreme Court are enormous
Which means the left wing will stop at nothing.
I hope that whomever the President nominates, that they and their families are ready to be dragged thru the mud by these slimeballs of the left wing which now passes for the Democratic Party and its left wing allies. The left wing extremists mentioned in this article will do just that - drag the nominee and his or her family thru the slime.
I hope the right, once they identify the leaders of this left wing defamation effort, shines the spotlight on the leadership of these organizations and their private lives. If the left thinks its ok to dig into a Supreme Court nominee's personal and family life, then the left wing leadership should have the same scrutiny applied to them. That applies to the Senators on the Judiciary Committee who use information supplied to them from the left wing organizations. Then again, is there anything left derogatory about Ted Kennedy that we don't already know?
I hope that whomever the President nominates, that they and their families are ready to be dragged thru the mud by these slimeballs of the left wing which now passes for the Democratic Party and its left wing allies. The left wing extremists mentioned in this article will do just that - drag the nominee and his or her family thru the slime.
I hope the right, once they identify the leaders of this left wing defamation effort, shines the spotlight on the leadership of these organizations and their private lives. If the left thinks its ok to dig into a Supreme Court nominee's personal and family life, then the left wing leadership should have the same scrutiny applied to them. That applies to the Senators on the Judiciary Committee who use information supplied to them from the left wing organizations. Then again, is there anything left derogatory about Ted Kennedy that we don't already know?
From the Washington Post, an indication that the left wing is failing in this country but will continue to drag the country down to accomplish its agenda.
“If the Coalition for a Fair and Independent Judiciary the lobbyists head is unsuccessful, it will risk not only seeing the courts tilt decidedly more conservative but also seeing the liberal movement lose further credibility as an organizing and advocacy force in Washington. "The stakes are enormous -- they could not be any higher for us," Aron said. "Progressive organizations throughout the country understand how much is at stake with a change on the Supreme Court."
“After losing control of the White House when Bush took office in 2001, Democrats and liberals have largely turned to the courts as a last resort. In recent years, O'Connor -- an appointee of President Ronald Reagan and a conservative by temperament and ideology on many issues -- also cast crucial votes in support of liberal positions on abortion, the role of religion in public life and affirmative action.
"The court is their last bastion," said James Bopp Jr., general counsel to the James Madison Center for Free Speech and the attorney for conservative groups in many high-visibility cases. "That's why the left is so frantic. They can't win democratic elections, they cannot get their agenda through democratic means, so what they are left with is judicial tyranny as a means to get their agenda, and they have been pretty successful."
Despite its recent setbacks, the liberal coalition has some advantages as it spoils for the coming fight, Neas said. One of them is the long years its leaders have spent together in the trenches of judicial and civil rights battles. Neas, Henderson and Aron have been fighting on the same side for the past decades -- with their biggest victory as leaders in the "Block Bork" coalition that successfully pressured the Senate to reject Reagan's nomination of Robert H. Bork for the Supreme Court in 1987.”
Hate speech at MoveOn.org parties?
And how they tried to hide it from the press.
Extremism v. Moderation. That’s very amusing coming from a MoveOn guy. Read Drudge below.
'Over the weekend, the liberal activist group MOVEON.ORG hosted over a 1,000 house parties across the nation to stop President Bush from nominating a “radical right judge” -- and the DRUDGE REPORT obtained an exclusive invite to one of their hottest parties.
Charles Fazio of Alexandria, VA was the host of one of the most widely attended MOVEON parties in the Washington, DC area.
The DRUDGE REPORT has learned because of Fazio’s registration success, his party was chosen to be a finalist on the WASHINGTON POST’s list of house party events it would use in its Monday edition to cover MOVEON’s weekend efforts.
In a desperate bid to sanitize his house party and control how its attendees would be perceived by the POST, the MOVEON host emailed talking points to his guests.
A copy of those talking points was obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT. Fazio warned his guests: “Its very important that if you talk to the reporter, you stay on message. Remember, it is quite possible that our event will be the one the POST uses to represent the entire MoveOnPac effort this weekend.”
The key message for the event: “The momentum is finally shifting away from extremism. We will not accept a extremist nominee. This is not about conservatism vs liberalism or Republicans vs Democrats, this is all about extremism vs moderation and we're on the side of moderation.”
The MOVEON host reminded his guests: “We don't want to come across as leftist, liberal activists. We want to come across as we are- regular folks who are finally saying enough is enough to the extremists; that we're not falling for their extremist rhetoric anymore and we're finally going to expend the effort necessary to get our country back.”
Fazio: “Please stay on message and just know that ANYTHING you say can be taken out of context and used against the effort.”
One last suggestion from Fazio to his liberal MOVEON party-goers: “Oh, because a photographer will be here, might I suggest we put away our ‘Bush is a Liar’ t-shirts. Let's look like they do.”
Extremism v. Moderation. That’s very amusing coming from a MoveOn guy. Read Drudge below.
'Over the weekend, the liberal activist group MOVEON.ORG hosted over a 1,000 house parties across the nation to stop President Bush from nominating a “radical right judge” -- and the DRUDGE REPORT obtained an exclusive invite to one of their hottest parties.
Charles Fazio of Alexandria, VA was the host of one of the most widely attended MOVEON parties in the Washington, DC area.
The DRUDGE REPORT has learned because of Fazio’s registration success, his party was chosen to be a finalist on the WASHINGTON POST’s list of house party events it would use in its Monday edition to cover MOVEON’s weekend efforts.
In a desperate bid to sanitize his house party and control how its attendees would be perceived by the POST, the MOVEON host emailed talking points to his guests.
A copy of those talking points was obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT. Fazio warned his guests: “Its very important that if you talk to the reporter, you stay on message. Remember, it is quite possible that our event will be the one the POST uses to represent the entire MoveOnPac effort this weekend.”
The key message for the event: “The momentum is finally shifting away from extremism. We will not accept a extremist nominee. This is not about conservatism vs liberalism or Republicans vs Democrats, this is all about extremism vs moderation and we're on the side of moderation.”
The MOVEON host reminded his guests: “We don't want to come across as leftist, liberal activists. We want to come across as we are- regular folks who are finally saying enough is enough to the extremists; that we're not falling for their extremist rhetoric anymore and we're finally going to expend the effort necessary to get our country back.”
Fazio: “Please stay on message and just know that ANYTHING you say can be taken out of context and used against the effort.”
One last suggestion from Fazio to his liberal MOVEON party-goers: “Oh, because a photographer will be here, might I suggest we put away our ‘Bush is a Liar’ t-shirts. Let's look like they do.”
The Right has its loonies as well
Good post below from Andrew Sullivan, who on a daily basis does a fine job highlighting extremists on both sides.
"ON THE FAR RIGHT: Not enough attention is paid, I think, to the paleocon attacks on the war against terrorism. The loony left is rightly exposed, but the loony right is more often ignored. This week, they have peddled theories that the Jews knew about the London bombings in advance; and Paul Craig Roberts, writing in the right-wing website, Newsmax, calls Blair "a war criminal under the Nuremberg standard." The religious right leaders, Falwell and Robertson, as well as Watergate criminal, Charles Colson, have also blamed America's alleged depravity for 9/11. Fred Phelps, a religious nutcase, delighted this week in the London massacres. I see little to distinguish these people from the Democratic Underground types. Except that the mainstream right is too squeamish sometimes in condemning them. Ever seen one of these guys ripped up on O'Reilly? Thought not."
I just finished sending a long email to an old colleague who called the Bush Administration "evil ideologues." While I obviously disagree with that, when you read the rap sheets on some of these guys listed above, you can understand the characterization. Anyone Republican should totally disassociate themselves from people like Phelps, who has a sick website and whose group has apparently protested at the funerals of our soldiers who have been killed in action. Extremism is not a virtue on either side, and the conservative movement needs to disown some people and groups.
"ON THE FAR RIGHT: Not enough attention is paid, I think, to the paleocon attacks on the war against terrorism. The loony left is rightly exposed, but the loony right is more often ignored. This week, they have peddled theories that the Jews knew about the London bombings in advance; and Paul Craig Roberts, writing in the right-wing website, Newsmax, calls Blair "a war criminal under the Nuremberg standard." The religious right leaders, Falwell and Robertson, as well as Watergate criminal, Charles Colson, have also blamed America's alleged depravity for 9/11. Fred Phelps, a religious nutcase, delighted this week in the London massacres. I see little to distinguish these people from the Democratic Underground types. Except that the mainstream right is too squeamish sometimes in condemning them. Ever seen one of these guys ripped up on O'Reilly? Thought not."
I just finished sending a long email to an old colleague who called the Bush Administration "evil ideologues." While I obviously disagree with that, when you read the rap sheets on some of these guys listed above, you can understand the characterization. Anyone Republican should totally disassociate themselves from people like Phelps, who has a sick website and whose group has apparently protested at the funerals of our soldiers who have been killed in action. Extremism is not a virtue on either side, and the conservative movement needs to disown some people and groups.
Our trip to Cinque Terre
Favorite Wife and I spent the 4th of July weekend in Italy, on the coast northwest of Pisa, in Cinque Terre. A lovely stretch of Italy with five beautiful coastal villages. We flew to Pisa via RyanAir (the not for grownups airline), then took the train to Monterosso. We spent two great days hiking, getting sun, and eating some superb food.
Some pictures below. I've still not mastered the photo part of blogging, and I do not really like the way in which Picasa inserts photos. More to follow.
In the meantime, please enjoy the photos of our trip. Favorite Wife and I have visited Monterosso three times in the last two years. A very relaxing place to visit and uncouple from the craziness of the world. Relaxing that is, AFTER you complete your fun trip with Ryanair.
Some pictures below. I've still not mastered the photo part of blogging, and I do not really like the way in which Picasa inserts photos. More to follow.
In the meantime, please enjoy the photos of our trip. Favorite Wife and I have visited Monterosso three times in the last two years. A very relaxing place to visit and uncouple from the craziness of the world. Relaxing that is, AFTER you complete your fun trip with Ryanair.
The bluest water I've seen was off Cinque Terre. We took several boat rides. Great sun and some great views. 
Corniglia from the sea. We walk from down below on the right, through the town, then continued to the pathway exiting town on the left.
This cafe/pub, il Casello, advertised email and internet. We went to check our email. It had everything we needed except...you guessed it, COMPUTERS! Sorry, they come in next week. Bait and Switch, Italian style.
That's not the top of a stone fence. That's the hiking trail.
Our objective, Vernazza. First view after 1.25 hours of hiking. Monterosso is in the distance.
On the trail at the solar powered emergency center. Looking back toward Corniglia.
An ambulance chasing lawyers dream. The "good" part of the hiking trail.
The beach in the "new" part of Monterosso looking at Vernazza in the distance. The part of Monterosso in which we stayed is hidden behind the rock and tower on the left.
The view of Corniglia train station from the edge of town, way up there. The hike we made started at the train station, then meandered up the steps to the point where I took this photo, then continued for another 1+ hours. A great hike.
The train arriving at Vernazza. Always late, frequently crowded, but always interesting.
Vernazza. A short train ride from Monterosso. We catch the sun here.
The last day. The view from Montepulciano, in Tuscany. Home of Favorite Wife's favorite wine.
Sunday, July 10, 2005
The face of the enemy in Britain
Hopefully the Brits will act accordingly after 7 July. The time has come for them to take on the home grown enemy identified in these two articles, in the WaPo and The Times.
The answer is not more touchy feeling “hate” legislation which will criminalize any commentary on a religion.
The answer is direct infiltration and observation of extremist religious groups, apprehension of the leaders, and destruction of their means of info and intel distribution.
Mark Steyn tells us that if the Brits continue with “business as usual” they can expect more of what happened on 7 July.
We know where the enemy is. Let's deal with these realities on win this war.
The answer is not more touchy feeling “hate” legislation which will criminalize any commentary on a religion.
The answer is direct infiltration and observation of extremist religious groups, apprehension of the leaders, and destruction of their means of info and intel distribution.
Mark Steyn tells us that if the Brits continue with “business as usual” they can expect more of what happened on 7 July.
We know where the enemy is. Let's deal with these realities on win this war.
I agree, Mr. Dionne. Let’s have this fight.
Over the Supreme Court nominees.
E.J. Dionne, left wing columnist for the WaPo. “Should a temporary majority of 50.7 percent have control over the entire United States government? Should 49.3 percent of Americans have no influence over the nation's trajectory for the next generation?
Those are the stakes in the coming fight over the next Supreme Court justice. The much-maligned "outside groups" preparing for battle over President Bush's choice deserve credit for openly acknowledging this struggle for power.”
But as Powerline writes, guys like you didn’t seem to concerned about this issue when a Democratic President makes the choices. Wonder why?
“This argument fails at several levels. First, the confirmation of one, two, or even three Supreme Court Justices by a president whose majority is temporary is most unlikely to confer control of the Court for a generation. The Court is like an archeological dig. Most (but not all) presidents leave one or two judges of their choosing on top of the prior layers, and together these layers comprise the Court for a while. The real question is whether President Bush will become the first twice-elected president (in my memory, anyway) not to leave Justices of his choosing on the Court.
Second, Dionne's argument fails the same test that trips up nearly all Democratic arguments on this subject -- it was never applied when Democrats were in power. Did anyone suggest that President Clinton could not appoint liberals to the Court because he had failed to obtain a majority of the votes (I guess Dionne should call Clinton's margins "temporary pluralities")? Did anyone say that Kennedy should not be permitted to appoint liberal Justices? Not that I recall; and if someone did, that person was ignored as Dionne should be. As always, the Democrats want to change the rules for no other reason than that the shoe is on the other foot.”
Ed Whelan at National Review Online asks Dionne some hard questions.
“The basic question Dionne ought to be asking, of course, is of a very different nature: Should five justices be free to invent “rights” that have no legitimate basis in the text or structure of the Constitution and to deprive 300 million Americans of their constitutional power to set policy on those invented rights?
The Left seeks to entrench its agenda in the guise of the “living Constitution.” It wants justices to make up rights that aren’t in the real Constitution and to ignore rights that are. So-called “conservative extremists,” by contrast, recognize that the Constitution leaves the vast bulk of important issues to be decided by American citizens through their representatives. And, although the Left often asserts that “conservative” justices are as “activist” as “liberals,” it cannot even allege instances of judicial imposition of substantively conservative results that are remotely comparable to the Court’s broad-ranging — and patently illegitimate — imposition of the Left’s agenda over the last several decades.
In short, anyone concerned (as Dionne claims to be) about the ability of Americans to have “influence over the nation’s trajectory for the next generation” ought to be an ardent advocate of Supreme Court nominees like Scalia and Thomas who respect the proper realm of the democratic processes.”
Now, Mr. Dionne, go to your Constitution. You do have one at the Post, don’t you? Please tell me where it discusses the relevancy of your issue?
We do not have a ministerial government in America where a Prime Minister needs to bring other parties into the cabinet, do we Mr. Dionne?
The America people reelected a Republican President and installed a Republican House and Senate. Percentages are irrelevant, just as they were to you when the same situation existed for the Democrats.
So, by all means, “Let’s have this fight.” Show the American people what the Democrats really stand for. Some of us already know, which is why we are Republicans.
E.J. Dionne, left wing columnist for the WaPo. “Should a temporary majority of 50.7 percent have control over the entire United States government? Should 49.3 percent of Americans have no influence over the nation's trajectory for the next generation?
Those are the stakes in the coming fight over the next Supreme Court justice. The much-maligned "outside groups" preparing for battle over President Bush's choice deserve credit for openly acknowledging this struggle for power.”
But as Powerline writes, guys like you didn’t seem to concerned about this issue when a Democratic President makes the choices. Wonder why?
“This argument fails at several levels. First, the confirmation of one, two, or even three Supreme Court Justices by a president whose majority is temporary is most unlikely to confer control of the Court for a generation. The Court is like an archeological dig. Most (but not all) presidents leave one or two judges of their choosing on top of the prior layers, and together these layers comprise the Court for a while. The real question is whether President Bush will become the first twice-elected president (in my memory, anyway) not to leave Justices of his choosing on the Court.
Second, Dionne's argument fails the same test that trips up nearly all Democratic arguments on this subject -- it was never applied when Democrats were in power. Did anyone suggest that President Clinton could not appoint liberals to the Court because he had failed to obtain a majority of the votes (I guess Dionne should call Clinton's margins "temporary pluralities")? Did anyone say that Kennedy should not be permitted to appoint liberal Justices? Not that I recall; and if someone did, that person was ignored as Dionne should be. As always, the Democrats want to change the rules for no other reason than that the shoe is on the other foot.”
Ed Whelan at National Review Online asks Dionne some hard questions.
“The basic question Dionne ought to be asking, of course, is of a very different nature: Should five justices be free to invent “rights” that have no legitimate basis in the text or structure of the Constitution and to deprive 300 million Americans of their constitutional power to set policy on those invented rights?
The Left seeks to entrench its agenda in the guise of the “living Constitution.” It wants justices to make up rights that aren’t in the real Constitution and to ignore rights that are. So-called “conservative extremists,” by contrast, recognize that the Constitution leaves the vast bulk of important issues to be decided by American citizens through their representatives. And, although the Left often asserts that “conservative” justices are as “activist” as “liberals,” it cannot even allege instances of judicial imposition of substantively conservative results that are remotely comparable to the Court’s broad-ranging — and patently illegitimate — imposition of the Left’s agenda over the last several decades.
In short, anyone concerned (as Dionne claims to be) about the ability of Americans to have “influence over the nation’s trajectory for the next generation” ought to be an ardent advocate of Supreme Court nominees like Scalia and Thomas who respect the proper realm of the democratic processes.”
Now, Mr. Dionne, go to your Constitution. You do have one at the Post, don’t you? Please tell me where it discusses the relevancy of your issue?
We do not have a ministerial government in America where a Prime Minister needs to bring other parties into the cabinet, do we Mr. Dionne?
The America people reelected a Republican President and installed a Republican House and Senate. Percentages are irrelevant, just as they were to you when the same situation existed for the Democrats.
So, by all means, “Let’s have this fight.” Show the American people what the Democrats really stand for. Some of us already know, which is why we are Republicans.
Where is their Ghandi?
Left wing American hate speech
No shame or common sense.
Read it here.
On a personal note, I’m sick of these guys. Sick of all of them. Sick of the apologists in government, the media, and among the chattering classes. Sick of these people not giving a damn about dead civilians. Sick of the Republicans crapping on the American people. Sick of George Bush appeasing terrorists and doing nothing — nothing — to prevent terror attacks. Sick of having to wonder if the subway train I’m on is going to blow up, or if some yahoo will smash a plane into the White House a block and a half away from where I work, yet the President, his party and his apologists don’t give a damn because they’ve got a “mandate”. A mandate for immorality."
I always love it when a Democrat mentions morality. Mr. Willis seems to be upset at the wrong people because he is scared.
Read it here.
What a lovely title for his essay, "The right hates freedom and America."
"It is time for the Bush administration to cease its high crimes, to stop leaving America vulnerable to these attacks, to finally once again do the right thing and attack and eliminate the forces who wish to destroy us and our way of life. It is time, at long last, for the administration’s supporters to do the moral thing and use their positions and their influence to get the right thing done.On a personal note, I’m sick of these guys. Sick of all of them. Sick of the apologists in government, the media, and among the chattering classes. Sick of these people not giving a damn about dead civilians. Sick of the Republicans crapping on the American people. Sick of George Bush appeasing terrorists and doing nothing — nothing — to prevent terror attacks. Sick of having to wonder if the subway train I’m on is going to blow up, or if some yahoo will smash a plane into the White House a block and a half away from where I work, yet the President, his party and his apologists don’t give a damn because they’ve got a “mandate”. A mandate for immorality."
I always love it when a Democrat mentions morality. Mr. Willis seems to be upset at the wrong people because he is scared.
Saturday, July 09, 2005
My own personal "Che Guevara" shirt
Finally, now I too can wear a shirt with Che Guevera's face on it.
After years of seeing this commie mass murderer's face plastered on shirts around here, I just had to have one of these to wear while running.
You know I'll wear it when I go running. This is a college town. Think of all the interesting conversations I might have.
We just came back from Italy last Tuesday. Saw same balding, pale faced, out of shape northern european type wearing a Che shirt. Amazing.
Anyway, I have to go now. Favorite Wife and I have about 40 people coming over for a 4th of July party tonight. Yes, I know its the 9th, but we were in Italy on the 4th, and my home town is having fireworks tonight. So...we are celebrating the 4th of July tonight.
God Bless America, and God Bless the American Army.
Keep on reading below. Thanks.
Go ahead Hollywood. Let Oliver Stone tell us the truth about 9/11
If you ever needed an indicator that Hollywood and the left wing extremists in charge of that looney bin are deeply immersed in their own idiocy, read this from Mickey Kaus at Slate.
"Keep Oliver Stone Away from 9/11! Is Oliver Stone really the person to direct a big-budget film about the rescue of Officers McLoughlin and Jimeno from the rubble of the World Trade Center? Stone has shown he has trouble leaving history alone (most famously in JFK); he'll probably have some wacky, conspiratorial left-wing theory to add into the script. ... The McLoughlin rescue is a surprising. moving and patriotic story if you just tell it as it happened. Do you trust Stone to do that? I don't. ... Is Hollywood so out of touch it thinks Stone's version of 9/11 is what America is clamoring for? After Alexander, at that? ... Stone should be free to say what he wants. But it might be useful for Paramount's Brad Grey to hear that many Americans--including, say, a mob of salivating bloggers--are not eager to provide Stone with a paying audience. ... Sharon Waxman Angle: Is this Grey's first big misstep? ... 3:34 P.M. link"
Maybe Mr. Brad Grey at Paramount needs to know just how much we will appreciate Paramount's efforts at free speech, so much so that we won't go to a Paramount show after Stone is allowed to tell us the truth.
Man, these guys just don't get it.
"Keep Oliver Stone Away from 9/11! Is Oliver Stone really the person to direct a big-budget film about the rescue of Officers McLoughlin and Jimeno from the rubble of the World Trade Center? Stone has shown he has trouble leaving history alone (most famously in JFK); he'll probably have some wacky, conspiratorial left-wing theory to add into the script. ... The McLoughlin rescue is a surprising. moving and patriotic story if you just tell it as it happened. Do you trust Stone to do that? I don't. ... Is Hollywood so out of touch it thinks Stone's version of 9/11 is what America is clamoring for? After Alexander, at that? ... Stone should be free to say what he wants. But it might be useful for Paramount's Brad Grey to hear that many Americans--including, say, a mob of salivating bloggers--are not eager to provide Stone with a paying audience. ... Sharon Waxman Angle: Is this Grey's first big misstep? ... 3:34 P.M. link"
Maybe Mr. Brad Grey at Paramount needs to know just how much we will appreciate Paramount's efforts at free speech, so much so that we won't go to a Paramount show after Stone is allowed to tell us the truth.
Man, these guys just don't get it.
Just go here and laugh at the non-PC wisdom of it all
What James Bond types will have to tolerate to accomplish the mission once Hillary Clinton and the left wingers put their people in at the CIA.
Red China's hero - Chairman Mao – mass murderer and tryant
“So to demolish the Chairman would be catastrophic for the present leadership. These leaders, after all, continue to emphasize that "the Communist Party makes mistakes but only the Communist Party can correct them."
But what if the Party itself is a mistake and Mao a yet greater one? China's leaders are determined to prevent that thought from getting loose in the minds of hundreds of millions of Chinese.”
Hattip to Powerline which also provides a very interesting description of Mr. Mirsky, the author of this article in the IHT.
But what if the Party itself is a mistake and Mao a yet greater one? China's leaders are determined to prevent that thought from getting loose in the minds of hundreds of millions of Chinese.”
Hattip to Powerline which also provides a very interesting description of Mr. Mirsky, the author of this article in the IHT.
Friday, July 08, 2005
A list of their crimes against humanity
Islamic fascists.
Norm Geras lists the various crimes of the Islamic fascists, crimes which illustrate the inhumane and barbaric nature of these scum.
Incidentally, he is a self avowed Marxist and a Professor of Government at the University of Manchester. Fascinating. When even the Marxists are against your movement, shouldn’t one question the rationality and justice of one’s cause?
2. They murder people working for the UN.
3. They kidnap and kill care workers.
4. They bomb holiday-makers, in nightclubs.
5. They blow up people travelling on trains - civilians.
6. They target people on buses - civilians.
7. They take civilian hostages.
8. They decapitate them.
9. They murder trade unionists.
10. They kidnap diplomats.
11. They kill people for being... barbers.
12. They fly aircraft full of civilians into skyscrapers where people are at work.
13. They take schoolchildren hostage and murder them.
14. They bomb synagogues.
15. They kill people shopping in a market.
16. They kill people queuing at a medical clinic.
17. They murder children in Baghdad.
18. They murder people on their way to work in London.
Norm Geras lists the various crimes of the Islamic fascists, crimes which illustrate the inhumane and barbaric nature of these scum.
Incidentally, he is a self avowed Marxist and a Professor of Government at the University of Manchester. Fascinating. When even the Marxists are against your movement, shouldn’t one question the rationality and justice of one’s cause?
Incidentally, I've read more than a few posts today from true liberals and left wingers that understand the nature of this war and that the enemy wants to kill us, not bargain with us. Maybe there is hope for left wingers yet.
"Across the globe, the enemies of democracy have shown themselves ready to commit any crime, to use any means, violating every human norm, every civilized code of warfare, one way and another killing people at random: the innocent, the old, the young, people of any class, any faith, any colour, with only the common feature of being in the wrong place when the appointed time comes, and of being human beings - with their lives, with their hopes, with the people they love and who will grieve for them. The murderers strike regardless. Count the ways...
1. They attack
2. They murder people working for the UN.
3. They kidnap and kill care workers.
4. They bomb holiday-makers, in nightclubs.
5. They blow up people travelling on trains - civilians.
6. They target people on buses - civilians.
7. They take civilian hostages.
8. They decapitate them.
9. They murder trade unionists.
10. They kidnap diplomats.
11. They kill people for being... barbers.
12. They fly aircraft full of civilians into skyscrapers where people are at work.
13. They take schoolchildren hostage and murder them.
14. They bomb synagogues.
15. They kill people shopping in a market.
16. They kill people queuing at a medical clinic.
17. They murder children in Baghdad.
18. They murder people on their way to work in London.
I’ll bet the ACLU is so proud of itself – attacking the Boy Scouts (again)
A federal judge has ruled that the government, specifically the Army, cannot use federal funds in support of Boy Scout activities.
“The Rev. Eugene Winkler, a Methodist minister who is one of the plaintiffs in the case, said he got involved because he did not agree with the use of taxpayer money to support the Scouts.
"We're not attacking the Scouts and neither is the ACLU," Winkler said. "This issue is not about the Boy Scouts at all. It's about government funding for religious purposes. It's about separation" of church and state.”
Winkler is either a fool or a willing accomplice of the ACLU and its left wing fanatics.
“We’re not attacking the Scouts and neither is the ACLU.” Really, what do you call this? Is your group of plaintiffs and the ACLU willing to make up the difference in funding for the Boy Scouts? Is there no other organization with which you have concerns?
Government funding for religious purposes? OK, Winker, since you are so concerned about this, please ensure your ministry pays taxes on its property and assets and that you claim no tax deductions for anything related to your ministry.
Left wingers and the ACLU have been after the Boy Scouts for years on a variety of issues and found judges willing to do their bidding.
It’s shameful that we have organizations which help develop young people and that they are hampered in their efforts by the Winklers of the world and their lawyers.
Now, the ACLU will turn around and sue the government somewhere because it doesn’t provide funding to support young adult development programs.
I'm surprised the ACLU had time for this considering all the work they are doing in support of the terrorists in GITMO.
“The Rev. Eugene Winkler, a Methodist minister who is one of the plaintiffs in the case, said he got involved because he did not agree with the use of taxpayer money to support the Scouts.
"We're not attacking the Scouts and neither is the ACLU," Winkler said. "This issue is not about the Boy Scouts at all. It's about government funding for religious purposes. It's about separation" of church and state.”
Winkler is either a fool or a willing accomplice of the ACLU and its left wing fanatics.
“We’re not attacking the Scouts and neither is the ACLU.” Really, what do you call this? Is your group of plaintiffs and the ACLU willing to make up the difference in funding for the Boy Scouts? Is there no other organization with which you have concerns?
Government funding for religious purposes? OK, Winker, since you are so concerned about this, please ensure your ministry pays taxes on its property and assets and that you claim no tax deductions for anything related to your ministry.
Left wingers and the ACLU have been after the Boy Scouts for years on a variety of issues and found judges willing to do their bidding.
It’s shameful that we have organizations which help develop young people and that they are hampered in their efforts by the Winklers of the world and their lawyers.
Now, the ACLU will turn around and sue the government somewhere because it doesn’t provide funding to support young adult development programs.
I'm surprised the ACLU had time for this considering all the work they are doing in support of the terrorists in GITMO.
Sort it out at GITMO – then try them
Five “Americans” arrested in Iraq.
The Jawa Report has a good rundown on the details in addition to the WaPo article linked above and this great quote about the ACLU’s actions in this case.
"I don't know if Kar is guilty of treason, but surely the ACLU is not trying to argue that a man captured in a war zone in a foreign country ought to have the legal protection of U.S. courts? Oh, wait, that's exactly what they are saying."
The Volokh Report has some comments on the use of the word “treason” as it may apply in this case.
The ACLU - busy, busy, busy in support of anything bad for America.
The Jawa Report has a good rundown on the details in addition to the WaPo article linked above and this great quote about the ACLU’s actions in this case.
"I don't know if Kar is guilty of treason, but surely the ACLU is not trying to argue that a man captured in a war zone in a foreign country ought to have the legal protection of U.S. courts? Oh, wait, that's exactly what they are saying."
The Volokh Report has some comments on the use of the word “treason” as it may apply in this case.
The ACLU - busy, busy, busy in support of anything bad for America.
Think the BBC will start calling them “terrorists?”
Some time ago, the BEEB (also known as the Baghdad Broadcasting Corporation) decided to call the enemy “insurgents.”
I wonder if that will change?
I wonder if that will change?
Cowardly Italian ministers
The day after the London attacks, this Italian minister says Italy needs to take care of itself:
"Reforms Minister Roberto Calderoli of the right-wing Northern League party said Friday the time had come for the United Nations to begin discussing "the progressive withdrawal of troops, beginning with our contingent, perhaps by September."
"It's evident that after New York, Madrid and London, Italy represents the most probable next objective of the terrorists," he said. "The time has come to begin to think also about our house, and to use the same resources currently committed in Iraq to prevent and combat possible attacks on our territory.""
"Reforms Minister Roberto Calderoli of the right-wing Northern League party said Friday the time had come for the United Nations to begin discussing "the progressive withdrawal of troops, beginning with our contingent, perhaps by September."
"It's evident that after New York, Madrid and London, Italy represents the most probable next objective of the terrorists," he said. "The time has come to begin to think also about our house, and to use the same resources currently committed in Iraq to prevent and combat possible attacks on our territory.""
Thursday, July 07, 2005
London, 7 July 2005
My favorite city, anywhere. No other city compares to London with its energy, history, and culture.
Favorite Family and I have been to most of these subway stations. We've walked thru Russell Square numerous times enroute to the British Museum.
My condolences to the British people for their sorrow on this day.
Britain won’t fold the way those socialist cowards in Spain did in March 2004.
Today, while following events on the web, the more I read, the angrier I became. I'm saddened, of course, by the death and maiming of so many people simply going about their day, trying to make their lives work. But I'm angry, and more convinced than ever, that anyone or any culture who supports this must be crushed, beaten, and thrown away without remorse. How do you do something like this in the middle of a city?
The bad guys proved today that our reasons for fighting against the scum of Islamic fascism are solid in their logic and accuracy. This evil hates liberal Western values, freedom, and tolerance. This evil willingly kills women and children to advance its twisted, medieval tryanny. This evil has to be fought and defeated.
The Wikipedia article, frequently updated, is here.
Quotes of the day (warning: some strong language)
Andrew Sullivan
"How dumb are these fascists to take on the Brits and the Americans?"
From the London News Review.
"A Letter to the Terrorists, from London"
"What the fuck do you think you're doing?
This is London. We've dealt with your sort before. You don't try and pull this on us.
Do you have any idea how many times our city has been attacked? Whatever you're trying to do, it's not going to work.
All you've done is end some of our lives, and ruin some more. How is that going to help you? You don't get rewarded for this kind of crap.
And if, as your MO indicates, you're an al-Qaeda group, then you're out of your tiny minds.
Because if this is a message to Tony Blair, we've got news for you. We don't much like our government ourselves, or what they do in our name. But, listen very clearly. We'll deal with that ourselves. We're London, and we've got our own way of doing things, and it doesn't involve tossing bombs around where innocent people are going about their lives.
And that's because we're better than you. Everyone is better than you. Our city works. We rather like it. And we're going to go about our lives. We're going to take care of the lives you ruined. And then we're going to work. And we're going down the pub.
So you can pack up your bombs, put them in your arseholes, and get the fuck out of our city."
Ken Livingstone, Mayor of London
"This was not a terrorist attack against the mighty and the powerful; it is not aimed at presidents or prime ministers; it was aimed at ordinary working class Londoners, black and white, Muslim and Christians, Hindu and Jew, young and old, indiscriminate attempt at slaughter irrespective of any considerations, of age, of class, of religion, whatever, that isn't an ideology, it isn't even a perverted faith, it's just indiscriminate attempt at mass murder, and we know what the objective is, they seek to divide London.
They seek to turn Londoners against each other and Londoners will not be divided by this cowardly attack... I wish to speak through you directly, to those who came to London to claim lives, nothing you do, how many of us you kill will stop that flight to our cities where freedom is strong and where people can live in harmony with one another, whatever you do, how many you kill, you will fail."
Nosemonkey
"God, us Brits are great. Hardly any panic -- more just getting pissed off that it's going to be a bugger getting home. I love this country sometimes."
"How dumb are these fascists to take on the Brits and the Americans?"
From the London News Review.
"A Letter to the Terrorists, from London"
"What the fuck do you think you're doing?
This is London. We've dealt with your sort before. You don't try and pull this on us.
Do you have any idea how many times our city has been attacked? Whatever you're trying to do, it's not going to work.
All you've done is end some of our lives, and ruin some more. How is that going to help you? You don't get rewarded for this kind of crap.
And if, as your MO indicates, you're an al-Qaeda group, then you're out of your tiny minds.
Because if this is a message to Tony Blair, we've got news for you. We don't much like our government ourselves, or what they do in our name. But, listen very clearly. We'll deal with that ourselves. We're London, and we've got our own way of doing things, and it doesn't involve tossing bombs around where innocent people are going about their lives.
And that's because we're better than you. Everyone is better than you. Our city works. We rather like it. And we're going to go about our lives. We're going to take care of the lives you ruined. And then we're going to work. And we're going down the pub.
So you can pack up your bombs, put them in your arseholes, and get the fuck out of our city."
Ken Livingstone, Mayor of London
"This was not a terrorist attack against the mighty and the powerful; it is not aimed at presidents or prime ministers; it was aimed at ordinary working class Londoners, black and white, Muslim and Christians, Hindu and Jew, young and old, indiscriminate attempt at slaughter irrespective of any considerations, of age, of class, of religion, whatever, that isn't an ideology, it isn't even a perverted faith, it's just indiscriminate attempt at mass murder, and we know what the objective is, they seek to divide London.
They seek to turn Londoners against each other and Londoners will not be divided by this cowardly attack... I wish to speak through you directly, to those who came to London to claim lives, nothing you do, how many of us you kill will stop that flight to our cities where freedom is strong and where people can live in harmony with one another, whatever you do, how many you kill, you will fail."
Nosemonkey
"God, us Brits are great. Hardly any panic -- more just getting pissed off that it's going to be a bugger getting home. I love this country sometimes."
Saturday, July 02, 2005
Iran's new president a hostage taker?
A lot of traffic and reports the last few days that the newly elected president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmandinejad, was one of the leaders of the terrorist group which siezed the American Embassy in 1979.
A few of the former American hostages claim that the man in this photo to the left of the American hostage, with the briefcase, is Ahmandinejad and even worse, was one of the interrogators during their imprisonment.
Iran of course denies this but this issue will continue to linger until Iran does one very simple thing: produce the guy in the photograph whom everyone thinks is Ahmandinejad but Iran claims is not.
Seems like a pretty simple solution. Bet the Iranians won't do it.
Now, we have to deal with a country that elected a terrorist to be President (note to my Democratic left wing friends - I did not mean Bush).
Oh, and Brian Williams of NBC News, you really screwed up comparing the founding fathers to terrorists. But I'll bet you know that by now.
No blogging until 7 July
Have a great 4th of July weekend. I won't be able to blog again until 7 July.
